crhammond

My Feedback: (21)

My initial testing looks okay. The pulse is definately different than a normal PPM/PCM but not way out.
I used my new 7C FASST with 617FS Rx.
First I Linked the Rx and and Tx (they were alreayd done from the factory.)
Next I set my end points on channel 1 to 140%
Next I set up programmer up on channel 1 and measured the pulse:
945 - 1520 - 2096
Most of my Rx's normally measure something like: 902 - 1502 - 2097

I was feeling okay so I plugged in a 6635HB, it seemed to travel just fine.
Feeling extra brave I tried a 5955TG, it seems fine too.

One thing is for sure - if you have programmed your ATV in the programmer and just swap RX's you are in trouble. The end pulses are clearly different and will require correction to your progammer settings as HiTec servos expect pulse widths of 900 - 1500 - 2100. I have a spreadsheet I use for the calculations and Aeroperfect also have one on your website. They allow you to set the travel with the programmer, measure the actual pulse fromt he radio and then go back and correct you programmed settings to the right values.

KC, my guess is your friends Yak had 3D rates set up and the servos were being over-driven. My servos certainly didn't go poof when plugged in. If you have ganged servos that is another issue too as the center-point signal on this Rx/Tx combo is far out from any I have seen... so your servos could end up fighting each other and your digitals will burn out VERY fast.

I have also had the pleasure of blowing servos on a Weatronic like Bob mentioned... all my fault You over drive them for long and whamo. Thats why the new HiTec's coming out have overdrive protection on them.

Oh - I also did this testing setting next to 2 2.4GHz wireless LAN's, a phone on Bluetooth and a Bluetooth mouse and keyboard - all on 2.4GHz. It seemed to work just fine - no devices complained.

MaJ. Woody

My Feedback: (28)

Thanks for the help everyone!!
Dom

Richard D Bahmann aka/Wrongway

My Feedback: (42)

I have been following along and just picked up a Futaba 7 Fasst. That is great info about ATV's in the programmer.

Question, since the 7 does not have fail safe for anything but the throttle do you see any dificulties using the Hitec programmer on the digitals to set fail safe on the other flight controls? My guess is not but want to ask the question before I switch over some of my 30 to 35% planes. I have the 35% on a power expander.

I am hoping to have full fail safe ability when I fly.

Richard

rhklenke

My Feedback: (24)

Richard,

Unfortunately, I don't think what you want to do will work. The FASST RX has failsafe on the throttle, but the other channels go to "hold" when the link is lost. I think the falisafe setting on the HiTech servos is to tell them where to go when the get NO pulses. Hanging off of a FASST RX, they will still be getting pulses on "non-failsafe" channels, it will just be the last good position that the RX got from the TX.

I am seriously hoping that the new 8-channel RX/module from Futaba has failsafes on all channels. I believe it might because on the 12FG at least, the 8-channel and 12-channel RX's use the same "mode" in the TX and it allows failsafe settings on all channels. BTW, according to the 12FG manual, in 7-channel mode, you can actually set the failsafe position on the throttle channel from the TX - aleviating the requirement to do it in the RX when binding. I haven't tested it yet, but if it does, that would be nice...

Bob

Richard D Bahmann aka/Wrongway

My Feedback: (42)

Thanks Bob. I didn't think of it that way. I wonder if the newer 8 channel, if it indeed has more fs settings, will be able to plug and play into the 7 FAAST or even the 9C which would be better for me.

Just a thought....I have read countless threads about what failsafe settings folks should use and some say cross control and bring it right down, others say gentle turns, and others say last input. Nobody has said anything other than idle or off for the engine (throttle servo) I wonder if that played into why they only set failsafe on the throttle?

Well I have some thinking to do on my 7 FAAST and 30% bird.[&o]

rhklenke

My Feedback: (24)

Richard,

On my normal 4-channel prop planes and helicopters, I use cut-off on the throttle and hold for everything else. That's what most people do. You can debate whether you should do something else, but it comes down to a statistical argument as to what the plane is doing when it hits a failsafe. One method might be safest in one scenario, and snap the aircraft right into the crowd or other pilots in another...

On the jets, I like to have the gear come down on failsafe and also have flaps and any airbrakes deploy. This DOES put the aircraft in the minimum-energy state in almost every circumstance, and it obviously requires failsafe on all channels. Also in our UAV's at work, we have an RC-controlled switch that allows the safety pilot to take control back from the autopilot should there be a problem. We usually failsafe this back to manual control in normal line-of-sight tesing because it allows the safety pilot to bring an errant UAV to the ground (to keep if from flying off to who know where...) if necessary by simply turning the TX off...

Bob

crhammond

My Feedback: (21)

Richard, Bob is right On anything with gear I have the gear, flaps, brakes down. Throttle failsafe seems like a good choice on the majority of my Aerobatic models.

I once had a PCM lockout - I hope never to have to go through that again! I was able to just barely make a semi-controlled crash... At least with SS I think you have a better chance of getting control back so I would opt just to go to idle and have a chance of recovering the plane. With PCM lockout is normally caused by someone on your channel or bad RF issues - at best you'll get just enough control to make a few corrections. On SS it would likely be due to a momentary fade and you should (at least with FASST) get control back right away once it gets a good signal. I really like how fast the Rx and Tx link. I tested turning the Tx on and off and the re-aquisition is very fast.

No issues with servos yet... I'm setting up a QQ Pythin right now and will do some ground testing with FASST. I thas tons of servos and a fairly complicated setup so if there are any issues they should show up. I'm using a Smart-fly power expander, HiTec servos, Wolverine switch and A123 batteries on this project.

KC36330

my sincerest apologies for trying to offer a heads up for those who may have the 14ch RX and might be using Hi-Tech digitals with it. i will kindly un-subscribe from the conversation as it's apparent that any comment made that isn't positive is taken as He's A Futaba Basher.

We've got numerous 7ch Futaba FASST systems flying at our field with absolutely no problems at all what so ever, i had much better hops with the Futaba then the JR or Spektrum systems (which we had a Spektrum fly away Sunday) but with the attitudes of most people when you try to get the Whole Truth about either system is enough that I'll just take my chances and stick with 72 MHz, after all with everyone switching to 2.4, it lessens my chances of interference.

good day all.

Richard D Bahmann aka/Wrongway

My Feedback: (42)

Thanks Guys!

felker14

My Feedback: (50)

Bob according to module instructions the 8-channel FASST RX with have failsafe on all 8 channels and will also have 2048 just like the 14 channel RX.

GrayUK

KC 36330
I do not think anyone is saying you are Futaba Bashing! What you say, in the way you are saying it, just does not make sense, that is all.

It is HIGHLY unlikely that just plugging in HiTec Servos would blow them, the question comes to mind....why?
What could blow them?
As has been said, if they drive hard to one end for some reason, (don’t understand why) then you would immediately switch off wouldn’t you,........wouldn't you?

It just seems very strange, that is all.

Paul

GrayUK

This post is one that I hoped I would not have to post.

On its own, it was a local anomaly that was restricted to 3 units, I felt that there was no reason to ring alarm bells until we had got to the bottom of the problem.

I am posting it now for safety reasons as I have just found out from the thread below
That there has been another occurrence.

[link]http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_6857282/mpage_1/key_/tm.htm[/link]

Also rumours and false truths are out in the UK, so here is the truth, please act on it sensibly.


Below is a copy of an email I sent to Ripmax in the UK around 1 week ago.
Ripmax are the UK distributors for Futaba and I know they have taken immediate action. I will list actions and recommendations after the email copy.


I have to report to you a very serious problem with the Futaba FASST 6 channel system.
As you know I am a great supporter of Futaba, always have been.
I also believe that the FASST system is far better than any of the competition systems.
I have been flying the FASST for some months now and have been totally satisfied until now.
In our club there is maybe 6 sets in operation, all of which have worked perfectly on their own or with each other.
No interference issues at all.
Today I had a new member to teach to fly; he has 2 Futaba FASST 6 TXs and a trainer with 1 RX in it.
We were using the 2 TXs together on a buddy lead.
All seemed fine, I taxied the model to the take off area and was waiting for someone to land, and he was also on Futaba 6 FASST. I was standing next to him; the model was in front of me to the left, so my TX was between the model and his TX.
Suddenly the throttle opened on the trainer and it was off, I had no control, it swung around to the left and shot off into long grass (luckily), this stopped the motor.
When we returned to the bench we did a test.
On the trainer we turned off the matching TX and then the TX of the guy next to me on the flight line (we will call him man A) was switched on, and guess what? It had control of the model! We then turned on the models TX, it failed to operate or interfere with the model. We then turned off man A’s TX, the RX went to failsafe, and then 4 seconds later locked on to its own TX! We then switched on man A’s TX, it again failed to interfere with the signal. We switched off the trainers own TX and the RX went to failsafe, 4 seconds later it reconnected with man A’s TX.
The RX would connect to 2 TX’s! We then tried the second TX (belonging to the man with the trainer) the one that was used on buddy lead. Well guess what! The RX worked with this one as well! We repeated the above test with switching on the other TX’s and every time we switched off the controlling TX, 4 seconds later it would bond with one of the other TX’s
So to sum up; at this point we had a RX that would work with 3 TX’s
Next we tried other TX’s on the field (mine included) and these would NOT operate the RX, it was just the 3 (2 belonging to the trainer and man A’s TX.)
We then rebound the RX in the trainer to one of the 3 TX’s that would operate it, well, nothing changed, and all three could operate it.
Man A had 2 models, both with 6 FASST RX’ in them.
We turned on one of the original trainer TX’s and, well you have guessed it, it could control BOTH of his models.
We tried other TX’s (including mine) none of them would do the same.
So in summary at this point we now have 3 TX’s and 3 RX’ that will work any or all of the others!
To further complicate things we tried the following.
I took my TX (no problem with it and no interference on my RX from the other TX’s). We bound the RX in the trainer to my TX and ….no problem, it would only work on my TX!
We were very lucky today, someone could have been badly hurt or worse, this is a very serious issue.
We now have a ban on any 2.4 systems flying with any other, so, just like superegen.
This needs urgent attention as many sets are out there.

This news will have to be made public soon for safety reasons.

Paul Gray

Ripmax immediately responded to by asking for the return of the sets TX’s involved for checking, this has been done.

My understanding is that has tested all of the 6 channel units in stock and discovered at least 2 more with the problem.
The problem has been identified as the TX having the same code…namely 0000000. As if they have not been blown/programmed.
Ripmax are obviously in constant communication with Futaba and I am sure a solution/announcement is imminent.

I would make the following recommendations.

Get all 2.4 FASST systems in your club together and carry out the following test.

Switch on your TX and all other RX’s, see if any other system will respond, if not then repeat with all other TX’s one at a time. Remember, only 1 TX at a time.
What this will do will show that all the TX’s in your club are not interfering with each others rx, therefore you do not have more than ONE faulty TX present. However if a new TX or module turns up then you MUST repeat the test, because one of your TX’s may have been faulty but it would not show unless 2 or more are present. Bit of a pain but you can at least continue with safety until Futaba give a heads up on this and resolve/replace the faulty TX’s.
We have done this in our club now and are back flying as normal.

Sorry to be the bearer of this news but for safety’s sake you should know, and with a little checking (as indicated) you can still fly non-faulty units with each other perfectly safely.

Paul

swissflyer

[:@]

good that the problems seems at least to be discovered!!!

just surprised that this "happens"...

but there is a way, that we can check if the TX code is 485879437 (or whatever) and not 000000???
or worse that my is 586595 and a flying buddy not also 586595???

Tony abw60

Hi Paul
For information it would appear the they have had a similar problem in the USA where the code on 2 tx's were the same todifferent radio's one a 7c and the a 6?? an extra was totalled. this has been reported on rcgroups I believe..
There is a fear there might be many out there the same. I do hope not.
Tony

Tony abw60

Hi Paul
For information it would appear the they have had a similar problem in the USA where the code on 2 tx's were the same todifferent radio's one a 7c and the a 6?? an extra was totalled. this has been reported on rcgroups I believe..
There is a fear there might be many out there the same. I do hope not.
Tony

GrayUK

My understanding is that if they are programmed then the chances of a problem a millions to one, as originally quoted by Futaba.
The trouble is that if not programmed, they all have the same number....00000000!
This is not a design problem, but somehow a production process problem, Futaba will nail it and quickly.
It is still possible it may only be a ‘batch’ that slipped through. In which case serial numbers could be recalled.

This is a pain without a doubt, I know Ripmax have a device that was sent from Futaba to allow checking of the codes, which is how they have discovered the issue.

If all is working correctly then we should not need to worry.

Paul

GrayUK

Tony

Yep, i put the link in my post.

Paul

Eddie P

My Feedback: (4)

I'm not a true Star Trek fan but I have to defer to Dr. Spock on this one.

"Fascinating..."

I do have a FAAST 8 channel set on backorder. I'll have to forward this to our club.

GrayUK

Eddie
I still believe it is the best system out there, but this problem is real and luckily limited.

Properly managed in the short term, the problem can be handled, giving Futaba a chance to track the error and take whatever action required.
But yes, for safeties sake please pass it on to your club.

I am sure that now Futaba is aware, all stock (backorders etc.) will be fully checked before release.

I am a Star Trek fan, so I will just 'Make it so!'

Paul

squirt!

Wonder if this is limited to the 6 channel system?? How do you check the code on a 12FG??

GrayUK

I have only heard of it on the Systems, ie 6 and 7.
At this time there is no news on the Modules etc.
I know that they are being checked at ripmax and as soon as i have any news i will pass it on.


Paul

GrayUK

I have just recieved info .

Firstly, tha sale of the 6 ch sets on 2.4ghz has been suspended by Ripmax in the UK until Futaba fix the problem.

The modules and rx's for the 12 & 14 channels sets are in stock at Ripmax, but in very limited numbers.

They are initially to be supplied as combo packs of both the module and the 14ch rx.

No spare 14 channel rx's as yet.

The 8 channel module and rx's are due end of January/ early February.

The 8 channel set-up will be full 2048 and full failsafe, just like the 12/14 variants.

When being used in Multi Channel mode (2048 - 8ch & 14ch) the channel outputs are re-allocated to a new layout.

The modules and rx's will not be released until the official software update for Europe is released from Futaba this weekend.

JetflyerJ

My Feedback: (67)

Here you go Mitchell.

For the Record I'm a huge fan of Graupner MC-24 for 9 years and it took a lot for me to jump that ship. Out of the three 2.4 systems available out there this is the safest system in my mind, ROCK SOLID.

I ordered 6 more receivers to drop them in the rest of my fleet.

GrayUK

Very, very nice.
Love the shot with the flyover!
Paul

ww2birds

My Feedback: (14)

So, just to be clear .. is the problem that all the "00000" code sets step on one another, and other, properly programmed systems are safe? Or that a "00000" code system is like a "master key" that can step on any other properly coded system. I fear the latter..

Dave