[NSRCA-discussion] Futaba FASST System
Matthew Frederick
mjfrederick at cox.net
Mon Jan 28 14:32:47 AKST 2008
Notice I didn't put 98SE on that list. That was the only FAT-based windows environment that worked halfway decently.
Matt
----- Original Message -----
From: Del Rykert
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 8:52 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Futaba FASST System
Can't speak for others but I went from Dos to windows '98 SE and never gave me grief. Granted I did do a reinstall of the OS ever 2 years but I see that as routine maintenance. Similar to sending your radio in for a tune-up.
Del
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matthew Frederick" <mjfrederick at cox.net>
To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2008 9:36 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Futaba FASST System
> By that rationale everyone who bought a computer with windows 95, 98, or Me
> should have returned it immediately.
>
> I just realized that although my intent was sarcasm, that statement was
> pretty much right-on.
>
> Matt
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Ferrell" <johnferrell at earthlink.net>
> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2008 8:23 PM
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20080128/09f86223/attachment-0001.html
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list