[NSRCA-discussion] Futaba FASST System

[Jay Marshall]

Right on John. Futaba ought to recall the suspect units and either replace
them or reprogram them. I have 5 Futaba TX around the house but they may be
my last.

BTW, I am playing with the idea of "short power up" cycles just to see what
will happen. If it is disastrous then Futaba will fix it. Otherwise I will
have some confidence and not worry about it.

Jay Marshall

-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of John Ferrell
Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2008 9:23 PM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Futaba FASST System

I feel that any device that can be damaged by turning it off too quickly 
after turning it on is defective as shipped.
We, the customers and the users are entitled to a product that works as 
advertised.
I still love my 9Z after all these years but how Futaba handles this 
disaster will determine my future choice of equipment.

I feel betrayed that they let it happen to begin with.

John Ferrell    W8CCW
"Life is easier if you learn to plow
       around the stumps"
http://DixieNC.US

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chad Northeast" <chad at f3acanada.org>
To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2008 12:32 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Futaba FASST System


>I think the possibility exists to reset the code in the module if you
> cycle power too fast.  If you lose the code the binding is gone.  The
> problem is if your module resets to 00000000, and you re-bind your rx,
> now your rx will see any 00000000 module around it, and can be shot down
> until its re-bound to a unique code.
>
> This is why you are being told not to re-bind the rx, and send in your
> module (in the case of a TM-7) or your radio to be checked.
>
> Chad
>
> Jay Marshall wrote:
>>
>> Reading the Futaba FASST advisory, it is not clear to me what are the
>> results of turning the TX on and off quickly. Does it loose its code,
>> or just the binding which would have to be repeated?
>>
>> http://2.4gigahertz.com/techsupport/service-advisory-tm7-7c-6ex.html
>>
>> */Jay /**/Marshall/*
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> *From:* nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] *On Behalf Of
>> *vicenterc at comcast.net
>> *Sent:* Sunday, January 27, 2008 11:39 AM
>> *To:* NSRCA Mailing List; NSRCA Mailing List
>> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Futaba FASST System
>>
>>
>>
>> Question:  Could the JR has the same problem?  Please don't start a
>> war around brands.  I just want to know if the JR could eventually
>> have the same issue.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Vicente "Vince" Bortone
>>
>>
>>
>>     -------------- Original message --------------
>>     From: "John Pavlick" <jpavlick at idseng.com>
>>
>>     > That makes sense. The only problem is you can't assign this code
>>     yourself
>>     > even if you could see what it is and you DID find that it was
>>     re-set to
>>     > 0000. Not a good thing. Kinda defeats the whole purpose of using
>>     2.4GHz in
>>     > the first place. Another brilliant accomplishment for "Dr. Murphy"!
>>     >
>>     > John Pavlick
>>     > http://www.idseng.com
>>     >
>>     > ----- Original Message -----
>>     > From: "Chad Northeast"
>>     > To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
>>     > Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2008 11:11 AM
>>     > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Futaba FASST System
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > > On the 14 (and I think the 12) the code is in the TX not the
>>     module, and
>>     > > is I think vis! ible to the user, but I am not sure where.
>>     > >
>>     > > On the TM-7 (and probably TM-8) the code is in the module which
>>     is where
>>     > > the problems occur as you have no way of identifying you have a
>>     default
>>     > > code. Then you re-bind your rx and now its default as
>>     well....so anyone
>>     > > that has a default code can now shoot you down.
>>     > >
>>     > > I don't believe there is a guarantee that you will reset the
>>     code by
>>     > > re-booting your tx within 5 seconds...but the fact you cannot
>>     see if a
>>     > > problem was caused is the reason for the precaution. I think
>>     anyone who
>>     > > has to re-bind a rx that has already been bound, should have a
>>     few ??
>>     > > dancing through their head and send the system in to ensure its
>>     > > operating properly.
>>     > >
>>     > > Chad
>>     > >
>>     > > John Pavlick wrote:
>>     > >> Ron,
>>     > >> Great question. One way to find ! out wou ld be to find
>>     someone who has
>>     > >> screwed up their FASST system Tx (re-initialized the ID to
>>     0000) and see
>>     > >> if
>>     > >> your Tx controls their Rx too. I'm thinking that the ID that
>>     we're
>>     > >> concerned
>>     > >> about is stored in the FASST module NOT the Tx itself though.
>>     Think about
>>     > >> it. You can put a FASST module in a 9Z. When the 9Z came out,
>>     2.4GHz was
>>     > >> only popular in car radios. It's very unlikely that the 9Z has
>>     a unique
>>     > >> ID
>>     > >> assigned to each Tx. I could be wrong but I bet the ID is
>>     embedded in the
>>     > >> module NOT the Tx itself. One way to verify this would be to
>>     take 2
>>     > >> identical FASST systems that are working correctly (i.e. each 
>> one
>>     > >> controls
>>     > >> it's own Rx) and swap Tx modules. If they now control the
>>     "other" Rx then
>>     > >> the ID is embedded in the module.
>>     >! ; >& gt;
>>     > >> Unfortunately you still can't verify that your module / Tx /
>>     whatever has
>>     > >> not been re-set to ID 0000 unless you have a known "bad"
>>     system. What a
>>     > >> bummer. The ID should be completely non-volatile, not stored
>>     in EEPROM or
>>     > >> Flash. I guess Futaba doesn't use Maxim / Dallas ID chips.
>>     > >>
>>     > >> John Pavlick
>>     > >> http://www.idseng.com
>>     > >>
>>     > >> ----- Original Message -----
>>     > >> From: "Ron Van Putte"
>>     > >> To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
>>     > >> Cc: "Mel Duval"
>>     > >> Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2008 10:29 AM
>>     > >> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Futaba FASST System
>>     > >>
>>     > >>
>>     > >>
>>     > >>> I've been thinking about the problem that occurs with the 
>> Futaba
>>     > >>> FASST sy! stem wh en the owner turns on the transmitter and
>>     turns it off
>>     > >>> within the 5 second "boot up" period. Namely, that the
>>     transmitter's
>>     > >>> code defaults to 0000 and the owner must rebind the receiver
>>     to the
>>     > >>> new transmitter code. However, EVERYONE who does this now has
>>     a 0000
>>     > >>> "unique" code in their FASST system and can control other
>>     airplanes
>>     > >>> with the same code.
>>     > >>>
>>     > >>> I wonder what happens to the ordinary transmitters with a new
>>     FASST
>>     > >>> system module plugged in. Do non-FASST transmitters also have
>>     this
>>     > >>> code and, if I've turned on my transmitter and turned it off
>>     within
>>     > >>> the 5 second "boot up" period, has my transmitter gone to the
>>     default
>>     > >>> code? I know I've done this with my transmitter and I'm sure
>>     I'm not
>>     > >>> the only one. For example, I decid! e to do some transmitter
>>     > >>> programming and turn on my transmitter. Then I decide to go
>>     to the
>>     > >>> mode in which my transmitter's RF section is not
>>     transmitting, so I
>>     > >>> shut it off and go to the "no RF" mode, all within 5 seconds.
>>     Did I
>>     > >>> just make my transmitter's code default to 0000?
>>     > >>>
>>     > >>> This could be really bad if the situation I described is true.
>>     > >>> Please tell me it isn't like this.
>>     > >>>
>>     > >>> BTW, check out this url: http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/
>>     > >>> showthread.php?t=807785#post9017413
>>     > >>> The thread involves modeler's experiences of testing their 
>> FASST
>>     > >>> systems at local hobby shops with Futaba's "FASST test 
>> station".
>>     > >>>
>>     > >>> Ron Van Putte
>>     > >>> _______________________________________________
>>     &g! t; > >> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>     > >>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>     > >>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>     > >>>
>>     > >>
>>     > >> _______________________________________________
>>     > >> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>     > >> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>     > >> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>     > >>
>>     > >>
>>     > > _______________________________________________
>>     > > NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>     > > NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>     > > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>     >
>>     > _______________________________________________
>>     > NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>     > NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>     > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
> 


_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion