[NSRCA-discussion] Futaba FASST System

Del Rykert drykert2 at rochester.rr.com
Mon Jan 28 15:32:14 AKST 2008


Could be  ~~ had no personal experience and seldom believed the hype the puter rags put out.. Learned half of them are hyping a product that advertised in their mag but don't work as claimed ~~ lol  Still prefer the simplicity and honest effectiveness of DOS. But such is progress.. Well according to Gates.. and some others.. ~~ <tic> 
 
        Del 
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Matthew Frederick 
  To: NSRCA Mailing List 
  Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 6:31 PM
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Futaba FASST System


  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


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  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/20080129/cec149d8/attachment.html 


More information about the NSRCA-discussion mailing list