[NSRCA-discussion] curious

[Bill's Email]

I was trying to make the point that the Futaba FASST modules used in a 
Futaba radio do not increase the latency for any particular transmitter. 
Also, that within the Futaba line the concept of module based versus 
"native", or built in does not mean much. At least that is what I have 
been told by the tech folks in Champaign. The 12FG and 12Z with a module 
both have the same overall latency for instance.

And I have been told the same thing that the FASST module using the PPM 
stream in the older transmitters is faster than when those transmitters 
were using PCM mode. 

Bob Richards wrote:
>
>     --- On *Sun, 3/21/10, Bill's Email /<wemodels at cox.net>/* wrote:
>     If you are using a Futaba FASST module and receives there is
>     absolutely no difference between module based systems and built-in
>     non-module. If you are using another after market module then you
>     may very well be seeing an effect of latency. All other non-Futaba
>     modules will not be as fast as the Futaba module in a Futaba radio.
>
>  
> Actually, there are two different type of FASST modules.
>  
> 1) The TM-7 and TM-8 modules fit the older radios (9C included) and 
> must use the PPM pulse train that the older 72MHz modules used.  As 
> such, the transmitter MUST be in PPM transmission mode, so the latency 
> can't be any better than a PPM system. (Which is actually faster than 
> the 72MHz PCM systems from what I understand).
>  
> 2) The 10 and 14 channel modules (10C, 12Z and 14MZ systems). These 
> have a different means of communicating with the modules in native 
> FASST mode, and should be no different than the non-module native 2.4g 
> systems. The latency should be faster than the PPM pulse train used 
> above.
>  
> The link previously posted to the latency testing did not show any 
> TM-7 or TM-8 information. I believe these are the only FASST modules 
> that will work in the 9C under question. However, my experience with 
> both in my 8UAPS has been positive.
>
> Bob R.
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20100322/ad0b6366/attachment.html>