Interesting New Transmitter
01-23-2014, 02:31 PM
#251
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 4,786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Info on how to identify the B model is here on the frsky site.
http://www.frsky-rc.com/BBS/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=132
Last edited by Rob2160; 01-23-2014 at 03:13 PM.
01-23-2014, 05:12 PM
#252
Its a very simple job to change from Mode 1 to Mode 2 so don't be put of buying because they don't have the Mode you want.
uliui1970
Try programming a 16 servo airframe from scratch with the Taranis, I have been trying to get the interaction out of the canard since I started also the elevons are a particular problem especially as there are four of them and need to split in butterfly, the elevator and yaw have to be switchable from the vectored thrust as well, when you get it sorted let me know.
Mike
uliui1970
Try programming a 16 servo airframe from scratch with the Taranis, I have been trying to get the interaction out of the canard since I started also the elevons are a particular problem especially as there are four of them and need to split in butterfly, the elevator and yaw have to be switchable from the vectored thrust as well, when you get it sorted let me know.
Mike
01-24-2014, 12:53 AM
#254
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: private, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,672
Likes: 0
Received 26 Likes
on
16 Posts
Try programming a 16 servo airframe from scratch with the Taranis, I have been trying to get the interaction out of the canard since I started also the elevons are a particular problem especially as there are four of them and need to split in butterfly, the elevator and yaw have to be switchable from the vectored thrust as well, when you get it sorted let me know.
Mike
Mike
Send me your eepe file and I can take a look at it if you like. You could change its extension to something like jpg and attach it to a post here.
01-24-2014, 08:58 AM
#255
I'm not a jet flyer so I probably don't know what I'm talking about. That said however, I find it difficult to imagine myself spending several thousand dollars on an airplane of anykind and then buy a cheap transmitter to fly it with. I can't really imagine why anyone would.
01-24-2014, 10:27 AM
#256
My Feedback: (30)
I'm not a jet flyer so I probably don't know what I'm talking about. That said however, I find it difficult to imagine myself spending several thousand dollars on an airplane of anykind and then buy a cheap transmitter to fly it with. I can't really imagine why anyone would.
I was young and bought a car that cost as much as a nice sized house where I lived... the car was crap... no really, quality issues you would not believe... and then to learn it wasn't just my car and then to learn this car maker was were trying to keep it on the under as if people didn't notice their US fueled (not made... hint...hint) cars loping in cold weather!!!!
The maker here could easily charge 100% more but why?
So some people will feel comfortable?
Or some people can brag?
I wouldn't, stack em deep and sell them...... inexpensive
01-24-2014, 10:27 AM
#257
Am I being irresponsible if I drive my family around in a Toyota when I have the money to buy a Lexus? Likewise, my cell phone may one day save my life with a call to 911. Am I being crazy if I buy a HTC One for $25 (plus contract) rather than an iPhone 5 for $200 (plus contract)?
01-24-2014, 11:06 AM
#259
True enough.
But I am very curious to know what percentage of Futaba's (or JR/Spektrum) revenue is invested in R&D vs. marketing.
And frankly, aside perhaps
from the mechanical part of gimbals, all the hardware in a modern radio is 100% off-the-shelf (CPU, RF decks), so the industry piggybacks on computer and cell phone technology.
The basic layout of a radio has been around for 40 years. So not much R&D in that either.
The software is the only "specialized" thing, and the people behind OpenTx has proven that you can make a superb product with a Open Source model. Kudos for FrSky (and
thank goodness for us end users) to understand that they can bring to market a Lexus with the price tag of a Toyota and make a profit too!! If this means that the name brand have to
start reducing their margin so be it.
But I am very curious to know what percentage of Futaba's (or JR/Spektrum) revenue is invested in R&D vs. marketing.
And frankly, aside perhaps
from the mechanical part of gimbals, all the hardware in a modern radio is 100% off-the-shelf (CPU, RF decks), so the industry piggybacks on computer and cell phone technology.
The basic layout of a radio has been around for 40 years. So not much R&D in that either.
The software is the only "specialized" thing, and the people behind OpenTx has proven that you can make a superb product with a Open Source model. Kudos for FrSky (and
thank goodness for us end users) to understand that they can bring to market a Lexus with the price tag of a Toyota and make a profit too!! If this means that the name brand have to
start reducing their margin so be it.
01-24-2014, 11:49 AM
#260
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 540
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sure the basic r/c transmitter/receiver principals have been around for decades. As you mentioned, the software is one of the biggest advancements with radios these days. Not only the software itself, but also r & d goes into how user friendly the software is made for the end user. I'd have to guess that Futaba spends lots on R & D since so much of what they do is based on new ideas that have not been done before. R & D cost is greatest for companies that pioneer new and never done before ideas/technology. For this reason the latest and greatest will always be priced accordingly. And just as true is how competitors will then duplicate this newest technology for pennies on the dollar because the r & d portion/cost associated with this technology had already been spent by the pioneering company which first successfully accomplished turning those never done before ideas into reality.
01-24-2014, 12:39 PM
#261
My Feedback: (30)
Sure the basic r/c transmitter/receiver principals have been around for decades. As you mentioned, the software is one of the biggest advancements with radios these days. Not only the software itself, but also r & d goes into how user friendly the software is made for the end user. I'd have to guess that Futaba spends lots on R & D since so much of what they do is based on new ideas that have not been done before. R & D cost is greatest for companies that pioneer new and never done before ideas/technology. For this reason the latest and greatest will always be priced accordingly. And just as true is how competitors will then duplicate this newest technology for pennies on the dollar because the r & d portion/cost associated with this technology had already been spent by the pioneering company which first successfully accomplished turning those never done before ideas into reality.
The software is already R&D'd... tried and true ... and many hands to make it more stable than paid for software
OpenTx is the linux of radio software IMHO... Fast, Free, Easy to get and Easy to use... and.... FREE!!!!
Hardware.... off the shelf stuff.... this is where they're making a killing
This is a decent business plan; Take around 100usd of parts and labor and double the price then get the software for free...
Nice
01-24-2014, 12:44 PM
#262
Sure the basic r/c transmitter/receiver principals have been around for decades. As you mentioned, the software is one of the biggest advancements with radios these days. Not only the software itself, but also r & d goes into how user friendly the software is made for the end user. I'd have to guess that Futaba spends lots on R & D since so much of what they do is based on new ideas that have not been done before. R & D cost is greatest for companies that pioneer new and never done before ideas/technology. For this reason the latest and greatest will always be priced accordingly. And just as true is how competitors will then duplicate this newest technology for pennies on the dollar because the r & d portion/cost associated with this technology had already been spent by the pioneering company which first successfully accomplished turning those never done before ideas into reality.
1) OpenTx is not a copy of Futaba/JR/Spektrum. It is an original development inspired by the Multiplex approach.
As for user friendliness, it is different than the "pre-canned" approach of Futaba, and so
it requires a learning period if you're coming from that side. However, IMMO the learning curve is no steeper than for Futaba (my previous radios where a Futaba 9CAP and a Futaba TG8S). Add to that the ability
to use Companion9X on my PC to do most if not all of the programming, rather than fumbling across the menus on the (relatively speaking) tiny screen on the radio itself is a big plus. So in terms of user friendliness Companion9X alone pushes OpenTx above the competition. DO not take my words for it. You can download it for yourself and check it out. No need to have the radio.
2) The FrSky RF link is an original implementation of Frequency Hopping Spread Spectrum. They did not invent FHSS, but neither did Futaba/JR nor Spektrum. The idea goes back to WWII and it
is basically implemented in various guises in any WiFi router and cell phone out there. Kudos to Spectrum to adapt it to RC needs, but I doubt that broadcasting a few hundred bytes every 20 ms or so requires much R&D effort.
3) Taranis is a very flexible platform. I can stick any number of RF modules in the back and have it to talk to virtually any modern receiver out there. I can have a discussion with the programmers of OpenTx to report bugs and request/suggest improvements.
4) Is Taranis perfect: Heck no! There are quirks such as the (in)famous buzz on the loudspeaker, the battery provided could be better, and the plastic case (at least for my radio) could have
used some better QC, but I can leave with these things.
Bottom line, stop treating the big radios as if they were the saviours of the hobby. If anything, in technology more often than not real innovation comes from the little guys, before they become big guys as Spektrum did. In fact, I wonder how many people raised an eyebrow or two when this thing called Spektrum with their tiny antennas came to the field....
01-24-2014, 08:43 PM
#263
My Feedback: (24)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: muskegon,
MI
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A few comments:
1) OpenTx is not a copy of Futaba/JR/Spektrum. It is an original development inspired by the Multiplex approach.
As for user friendliness, it is different than the "pre-canned" approach of Futaba, and so
it requires a learning period if you're coming from that side. However, IMMO the learning curve is no steeper than for Futaba (my previous radios where a Futaba 9CAP and a Futaba TG8S). Add to that the ability
to use Companion9X on my PC to do most if not all of the programming, rather than fumbling across the menus on the (relatively speaking) tiny screen on the radio itself is a big plus. So in terms of user friendliness Companion9X alone pushes OpenTx above the competition. DO not take my words for it. You can download it for yourself and check it out. No need to have the radio.
2) The FrSky RF link is an original implementation of Frequency Hopping Spread Spectrum. They did not invent FHSS, but neither did Futaba/JR nor Spektrum. The idea goes back to WWII and it
is basically implemented in various guises in any WiFi router and cell phone out there. Kudos to Spectrum to adapt it to RC needs, but I doubt that broadcasting a few hundred bytes every 20 ms or so requires much R&D effort.
3) Taranis is a very flexible platform. I can stick any number of RF modules in the back and have it to talk to virtually any modern receiver out there. I can have a discussion with the programmers of OpenTx to report bugs and request/suggest improvements.
4) Is Taranis perfect: Heck no! There are quirks such as the (in)famous buzz on the loudspeaker, the battery provided could be better, and the plastic case (at least for my radio) could have
used some better QC, but I can leave with these things.
Bottom line, stop treating the big radios as if they were the saviours of the hobby. If anything, in technology more often than not real innovation comes from the little guys, before they become big guys as Spektrum did. In fact, I wonder how many people raised an eyebrow or two when this thing called Spektrum with their tiny antennas came to the field....
1) OpenTx is not a copy of Futaba/JR/Spektrum. It is an original development inspired by the Multiplex approach.
As for user friendliness, it is different than the "pre-canned" approach of Futaba, and so
it requires a learning period if you're coming from that side. However, IMMO the learning curve is no steeper than for Futaba (my previous radios where a Futaba 9CAP and a Futaba TG8S). Add to that the ability
to use Companion9X on my PC to do most if not all of the programming, rather than fumbling across the menus on the (relatively speaking) tiny screen on the radio itself is a big plus. So in terms of user friendliness Companion9X alone pushes OpenTx above the competition. DO not take my words for it. You can download it for yourself and check it out. No need to have the radio.
2) The FrSky RF link is an original implementation of Frequency Hopping Spread Spectrum. They did not invent FHSS, but neither did Futaba/JR nor Spektrum. The idea goes back to WWII and it
is basically implemented in various guises in any WiFi router and cell phone out there. Kudos to Spectrum to adapt it to RC needs, but I doubt that broadcasting a few hundred bytes every 20 ms or so requires much R&D effort.
3) Taranis is a very flexible platform. I can stick any number of RF modules in the back and have it to talk to virtually any modern receiver out there. I can have a discussion with the programmers of OpenTx to report bugs and request/suggest improvements.
4) Is Taranis perfect: Heck no! There are quirks such as the (in)famous buzz on the loudspeaker, the battery provided could be better, and the plastic case (at least for my radio) could have
used some better QC, but I can leave with these things.
Bottom line, stop treating the big radios as if they were the saviours of the hobby. If anything, in technology more often than not real innovation comes from the little guys, before they become big guys as Spektrum did. In fact, I wonder how many people raised an eyebrow or two when this thing called Spektrum with their tiny antennas came to the field....
01-25-2014, 01:50 AM
#264
Just a few comments to clear up incorrect statements in the above, Spektrum did not adapt FHSS for RC, their system lock's onto two channels on the 2.4Ghz band and stays there, Futaba on the other hand used and are continue to use FHSS to control remote vehicles in the nuclear and construction industry since the 70's.
Would be very interested to see the WWII system of FHSS.
Can't remember the model type, but think it was a seven channel Futaba radio that could be upgraded to 14 channels with a free software download, so not all can be tarred with the same brush.
MIke
Would be very interested to see the WWII system of FHSS.
Can't remember the model type, but think it was a seven channel Futaba radio that could be upgraded to 14 channels with a free software download, so not all can be tarred with the same brush.
MIke
01-25-2014, 05:14 AM
#265
Just a few comments to clear up incorrect statements in the above, Spektrum did not adapt FHSS for RC, their system lock's onto two channels on the 2.4Ghz band and stays there, Futaba on the other hand used and are continue to use FHSS to control remote vehicles in the nuclear and construction industry since the 70's.
Would be very interested to see the WWII system of FHSS.
Can't remember the model type, but think it was a seven channel Futaba radio that could be upgraded to 14 channels with a free software download, so not all can be tarred with the same brush.
MIke
Would be very interested to see the WWII system of FHSS.
Can't remember the model type, but think it was a seven channel Futaba radio that could be upgraded to 14 channels with a free software download, so not all can be tarred with the same brush.
MIke
for a long time (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_spectrum). I was aware that Futaba (their industrial side) was involved with SS since the '70s.
It is telling that they were not the ones that brought SS to RC, even though they had been sitting on the technology for years. Evidently, big brother did not think that we kids should meddle with the tools used by the "grown ups". Don't get me wrong, FASST is a good solid link, by all account more robust than DSM2, but ask yourself if Futaba would have ever brought it to RC if Spektrum had not come up with DMS2 and people bought it in droves?
Again, I like Futaba, I was a Futaba guy, but I do not think Futaba having necessarily the good of the hobby at the core of its mission. Making money with proven techniques - heavy marketing, slicing and splicing the offering as BTH9318 remarked, coming up with slightly different but incompatible protocols (FASST, SHFSS or whatever) to further fragment the market, this is what they do best.
01-25-2014, 06:34 AM
#266
My Feedback: (24)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: muskegon,
MI
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a few comments to clear up incorrect statements in the above, Spektrum did not adapt FHSS for RC, their system lock's onto two channels on the 2.4Ghz band and stays there, Futaba on the other hand used and are continue to use FHSS to control remote vehicles in the nuclear and construction industry since the 70's.
Would be very interested to see the WWII system of FHSS.
Can't remember the model type, but think it was a seven channel Futaba radio that could be upgraded to 14 channels with a free software download, so not all can be tarred with the same brush.
MIke
Would be very interested to see the WWII system of FHSS.
Can't remember the model type, but think it was a seven channel Futaba radio that could be upgraded to 14 channels with a free software download, so not all can be tarred with the same brush.
MIke
Last edited by bth9318; 01-25-2014 at 06:39 AM.
01-27-2014, 01:25 PM
#267
How did the government get in on this? and you are wrong and right on the 14 channel upgrade it was 12 proportional channels and 2 switched channels all free for a 7 channel TX by download.
Still waiting to see the WWII FHSS system.
Mike
Still waiting to see the WWII FHSS system.
Mike
01-28-2014, 01:00 AM
#268
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Talamanca de JaramaMadrid, SPAIN
Posts: 583
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
MULTIPLEX has always been a quality brand and even I started RC flying with a MULTIPLEX Profi in 1980!.
Aside from this and related to MULTIPLEX software connection to OpenTx it has to be said that MULTIPLEX software has been arround for quite a time and think we all will agree that never got the popularity of FUTABA nor JR. Why now it will be different for FrSky?.
Probably, the RC software future should be a combination of both ideas: preprogrammed setups and mixes for general use and a Companion9X type PC software for advenced users making their own personal setups, mixes and configurations.
Best Regards,
Jesus Cardin
Aside from this and related to MULTIPLEX software connection to OpenTx it has to be said that MULTIPLEX software has been arround for quite a time and think we all will agree that never got the popularity of FUTABA nor JR. Why now it will be different for FrSky?.
Probably, the RC software future should be a combination of both ideas: preprogrammed setups and mixes for general use and a Companion9X type PC software for advenced users making their own personal setups, mixes and configurations.
Best Regards,
Jesus Cardin
01-28-2014, 04:06 AM
#269
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NewentGloucestershire, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aside from this and related to MULTIPLEX software connection to OpenTx it has to be said that MULTIPLEX software has been arround for quite a time and think we all will agree that never got the popularity of FUTABA nor JR. Why now it will be different for FrSky?.
Jesus Cardin
Was a sound marketing move by FrSky, attract them with the price and provide an operating system developed and supported by others, so you don't have to have that capability.
01-28-2014, 10:34 PM
#270
My Feedback: (41)
Last edited by 4*60; 01-28-2014 at 10:38 PM.
01-29-2014, 02:24 AM
#271
My Feedback: (33)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Still waiting to see the WWII FHSS system.
http://www.women-inventors.com/Hedy-Lammar.asp patent awarded 1941
01-29-2014, 03:55 AM
#272
Well that is the Spread Spektrum taken care of, not to detract from Hedy Lammar's invention, but ululi1970 when during the second world war did Frequency Hopping Spread Spektrum come in?
Mike
Mike
01-29-2014, 06:51 AM
#273
In fact FHSS is even older! From the wikipedia page on Spread Spectrum
"On March 17, 1903, Nicola Tesla was granted a patent for a system of frequency hopping between two or more channels to prevent communications being blocked. In 1908 Jonathan Zenneck wrote Wireless Telegraphy, which expanded on this concept. Starting in 1915, Zenneck's system was used by Germany to secure battle field communications."
Ironically, Tesla was interested in using radio waves for remote control. He built the first remote controlled model ship (http://www.teslasociety.com/radio.htm)
The bottom line is that techniques to share a portion of the spectrum between different users without the need of a centralized control system to assign channels (the old impound board) have been around for a long, long time. So accusing brand X of stealing ideas from brand Y in this field is untenable.
BTW, there are Open source/ Open Hardware implementations of SS for long range transmission as well
https://code.google.com/p/openlrs/
People may debate if having LR stuff is good or bad, but it cannot be denied that innovation once again comes from the little guys....
"On March 17, 1903, Nicola Tesla was granted a patent for a system of frequency hopping between two or more channels to prevent communications being blocked. In 1908 Jonathan Zenneck wrote Wireless Telegraphy, which expanded on this concept. Starting in 1915, Zenneck's system was used by Germany to secure battle field communications."
Ironically, Tesla was interested in using radio waves for remote control. He built the first remote controlled model ship (http://www.teslasociety.com/radio.htm)
The bottom line is that techniques to share a portion of the spectrum between different users without the need of a centralized control system to assign channels (the old impound board) have been around for a long, long time. So accusing brand X of stealing ideas from brand Y in this field is untenable.
BTW, there are Open source/ Open Hardware implementations of SS for long range transmission as well
https://code.google.com/p/openlrs/
People may debate if having LR stuff is good or bad, but it cannot be denied that innovation once again comes from the little guys....
01-29-2014, 07:40 AM
#274
Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Shreveport, LA
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anything you can find in any technology is built on the previous work of many others. The patents awarded today are all covering work done by others. All consumer goods advertising is guilty of Hyperbole.
Some exageration must be expected. Color film photography was "invented" at least three times. Frequency Agility is another way to say the same thing and was used on allied radar in WW2.
Some exageration must be expected. Color film photography was "invented" at least three times. Frequency Agility is another way to say the same thing and was used on allied radar in WW2.
01-29-2014, 08:25 AM
#275
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: private, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,672
Likes: 0
Received 26 Likes
on
16 Posts
I've just completed programming my Schweighofer Curare onto the Taranis, using Hanno Prettner's set-up. Triple rates on elevator and aileron each with a different expo and different differential on aileron and assymmetric up/down travel on the ele, dual rates rudder, snap-flap both up and down, flap to ele trim offset etc etc. Very easy to do, the best bit is the voice announcements, each time I flick the spring loaded switch the Taranis calls out the next manoeuvre in the schedule for me.