edgeflyer

My Feedback: (15)

BUS systems have been used widespread on cars since the early 90's. They make manufacturing cheaper and the cars lighter and cheaper to sell also. There is much better diagnostic capabilities and functionality with them also. The myth of the "black box" causing people to scrap cars is false. A modern computer costs on average $400.00. People are just rejecting the idea cause its change, and they don't understand it fully, just like electric planes, 2.4 ghz, AR15's etc.. it is the future. I welcome it and plan to set my F18 up with the system. It will make setup much easier. Pending JR prices it where I would like them to. I'm excited about this radio!

Jetflyer3000

Yes it seems to me that you simply have far more hardware rather than a few longer wires. More hardware means more weight and more space needed to locate all the stuff. If you like bling though and want to look like you are the main kid on the block I am sure you will love it. For me I prefer the keep it simple principal

Jetflyer3000

Well said life needs fewer complications rather than more and in my view the world needs to stop wasting time and money on features people never use and certainly don't need

dubd

Then you have the option not to use xbus. For those who want to use xbus, they have a solution that addresses power concerns. This whole hobby is a waste of time and money for 99.999% of the world.

Craig B.

At this stage it looks to me like the xbus accessories have been hurriedly cobbled together. For example the 4 port converter is not something you would want to run 4 high power servos off. The supply lead is only normal gauge servo wire. The robbe pss2018 leaves jr' s solution for dead as far as I can see so far. Hopefully that will change with time as I like the new Tx but without the right on board gear it's use is limited.

Another question...the length of the converter leads are quite short. Does this still mean you will have to run long servo leads down the back of large models or is there a heavy duty backbone cable like the pss 2018 solution? I might be missing something?

jzuniga

My Feedback: (7)

Excellent Dub...

I might be missing something, but I believe the only reason the converter issue is a player here (video) is because there are no Xbus servos available as of yet? For me the Futaba Sbus system is awesome and has simplified my set ups… my .02

Z

Jetflyer3000

So as I see it with SBus you save probably 4 - 8 servo wires on say a large jet total cost in the region of $24 and weight say 120 grams and add I dare not think how much cost and I would guess about 400 grams in weight. If my estimates are anything like accurate I simply cant see the point apart from choice of course. Mind you there are many choices in life. Burning your money being one of them

Jetflyer3000

Indeed there are many choices in life, Not every one makes the wise choice

Quite how sending the power for several servos down one wire addresses power concerns is a little beyond me but never mind

dubd

Jetflyer, IMO xbus and sbus is an answer to a problem no one has. However, as with any new technology, as it matures we may see practical applications that we can all benefit from. I personally won't be using it until that happens.

dubd

You're a real **** head.

keithtsr

My Feedback: (3)

Thank you dubd.

We should change the title of this forum to "Come one come all lets bash the new JR 28X'' before it reaches the market.

Four Stroker

For Nerds Only:

https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/index.cfm

The Authorization Search will allow you to download the actual test data for any system sold in the USA. Futaba, Horizon Hobbies, Sanwa, Japan Remote Control, etc. The spectrum analyzer graphs tell the tale much better than the marketing departments. The width of the top flat part of the spectrum is the only important part. The 99% or -20dB bandwidth is not important unless it spills over into another band and voids the authorization.


DSMX, FASST, DMSS are essentially all the same idea. Transmit a narrow DSSS signal for one packet and then hop.


The -9 dB in Spektrum sensitivity relative to others is mainly due to soldering antennas on the satellites. The Beast X receivers with micro coax antennas do not have this problem.

Jeti is under Esprit Model

Andy Aldridge

I want to be a tree !!!!!!!

Jetflyer3000

If you look back I thought better of that post and edited soon after I wrote it. You must have been very quick off the mark to have 'quoted' it

SigMan

My Feedback: (21)

nice. http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/club...e-website.html

invertmast

My Feedback: (23)

If you dont like how its run, you could always leave... Just sayin

rcguy59

My Feedback: (8)

Which is precisely why so many people HAVE left. Just sayin'

edgeflyer

My Feedback: (15)

Its like anything new. Most people reject the new kid on the block until the get to know him. The only reason I am buying this radio and selling my 12X is for simplifying the setup in my Yellow twin. All of the sequencers I need are built in, and the XBUS may help clean my install. Like it has been said, I don't think this radio is for everyone. There are some that could utilize it though. If I was only flying sport jets I would not get rid of my 12X.

invertmast

My Feedback: (23)

only true advantage I see is getting rid of Matchbox's, but then all you are doing is replacing it with a hub/decoder.

Doug Cronkhite

My Feedback: (34)

It's much more than that. Matchboxes only allowed you to set reversing, centering, but all were controlled via a single channel's signal. With XBus, each channel (servo) gets ALL of the adjustment capability. Like any new tech, I think it'll take awhile for people to really get up to speed with it, but once adopted, it's going to be incredibly useful. I'm still learning about all of it honestly. It's one of those things that the more I read, but more layers I find. Pretty cool. The Dean's Ultra based power delivery is nice too.

Mark Vandervelden

Hi guys, here is my resent experiences with JR equipment over the last year or two and its relevance to my decision not get too excited about the new 28X
​I had long awaited this replacement for my 12x, in fact years and years and years. As I am impatient and despite my 12X having proven 100% reliable I was finally tempted away by the extra 6ch and finally access to DMSX (unavailable to 12X users out side the USA) with the "then" new shiny offering in 2012 from Spectrum. Unfortunately that ended up in tears and a few very large bills in replacement airframes. I was then forced to considered all the options from other manufactures but decided to return to the JR fold with my tail between my legs and embraced the new DMSS protocol. To that end for Xmas 2012-13 I treated my self to a nice new 11ch DMSS Cylon faced Tx and once again had the comfort of quality and well made equipment that turned out to have a 100% reliable RF link that I can now vouch for "JRs DMSS protocol works and works well".

The change over from DMS2-DMSX to DMSS was initially a fairly expensive exercise but by selling my old RXs it helped offset this cost by about 40-50% . Of course now I was down 1 channel compared to my old 12X and 7 channels over my disasters' Specy Tx but for the most part a little lateral thinking had all my airframes kitted out and fully functional, this 11ch set up was used for several months and is a highly recommended Tx.

My attention was drawn in August last year to the long awaited 14ch offering from JR that was then finally realised into the wild "late of course" but worth the wait none the less. This was a brilliant and comparatively inexpensive TX and I highly recommend it, plus it finally gave me the extra channels I craved, or so I thought?
As only 11ch RXs were/are available from JR to get more or all the 14ch I was forced to consider the new X-Bus. I bought two of the new 7ch X-Bus RXs, these were "then" and for the most part are still the only access to enable us to use the X-bus feature. I then found I had to buy a 4 way X-bus to PWM converter to bring the 7ch up to 11ch which amounted to much the same cost as an 11ch rx but with more component's to fail and a more complicated setup, which at that point no one at JR could explain how to achieve!. To bring it up to a full 14ch I needed 2x X-bus to PWM converters and would also need a hub, much more expense and more complications, I alokked at it on the bench thought what a mess and abandoned this approach as a bad ideal, expensive and considered it a waste of time and effort.

Of course with out a higher ch RX being available this is going to be even worse if you need or want to exploit more than 11ch or all indeed all 28chanels of the new 28X Tx. Evan in a standard size airframe and there new dedicated "unlimited" X-Bus Rx its going to get messy and expensive. I thought it through and we would need the new X-Bus Rx, its 3 sats, one or more hubs then X-Bus to PWM converters 1 for every 4 servos. I count 8 "Rx or Rx type" separate components for a 12ch set-up plus one component more for every 4 servos added and you still don't have a power supply.

The other option and the one I opted to use is with twin 7ch X-Bus RXs and a SRS unit from Powerbox, more expense but very neat and with a track record of reliabilaty. This offers 15+ch and full redundancy with only one extra component, the Powerbox itself that of course has its own built in power regulated supply. Unfortunately this set-up bought up two issues. First it turned out no one including PB and JR at that time "August -September 2013" had ever actually flown with this setup, I was amazed that a major manufacturers would offer a system that had never been tested in the real world! The second was a major flaw in JRs telemetry protocol that would also be relevant to JRs own multi sat hubs and RXs.

This was and still is because JRs software has no way of deciding when multi telemetry sats are used, which one to listen to and simply jumps to which ever sat is closet or has a better RF path. This is only an issue if you actually try to use telemetry, if you plug a telemetry input into one RX as soon as the other RXs sat is picked up by the TX it will assume the information has ceased and give a false warning confusing? Bad JR :-( I was given several options by JR to over come this, all unsuitable and frankly poor and wild guesses, clearly they had not considered it and had not actually tried it them self's before realise.

This is why I believe the recall of the JR Power Safe RXs was made shortly after its realise last year.

The only consolation is I have been told by JR that no matter what the telemetry iside of things is doing it will have no impact on the RF up link and control will be maintained, This has proven to be the case but should never have been allowed to come in to question. I do not believe this issue has been fully resolved, perhaps the new 28x has some thing up its sleeve?

As it happens, telemetry aside I reluctantly became JRs guinepig last year and flew the twin 7ch X-Bus RXs hooked up to the SRS Competition and went for it. I'm happy to report it worked faultlessly and I have had many dozens of successful flights over the next few mouths but it left a bad taste being sold untested equipment.

One other point I consider a shortfall with the new JR protocol and one I seriously think JR should address is the use of multi RXs. I was promised that the use of multi RXs would be part of the new DMSS protocol. This has been meet in part but in a disappointing and unsatisfactory way. You can infract bind and use two or more RXs to one Tx (still with the telemetry clash issue though) but twin RXs can only duplicate the same channels of those RXs as no channel mapping is available, IE with two 7ch RXs you get 2x channels 1-7 not 14ch as I was promised ie 1-7 on Rx 1 and 8-14 on the other. How convenient and straight forward would that be and for the most part the hubs and converters would be redundant.
This feature is available on other manufactures systems and with the new high count TXs available a real bonus, just imagine the possibility's and how simple the install would be for the 98% of JR users that don't have monster size airframes but do need more than 11chs.

siclick33

Why would JR test their RX's with a PowerBox? Should they test it with Futaba servos too? If you're going to add 'aftermarket' equipment to a manufacturers setup then you are likely to be on your own (quite rightly IMO),

As for Bus systems they may have many more benefits in the future that haven't been realised yet. It seems that the issue with JR is that there are no X-Bus servos and therefore you need additional decoders. When (if) they release X-Bus servos then you may not need all those decoders and things become much more simple.

As an example of what a Bus system could do, you could have a gyro integral with the RX (or plugged after the RX with one digital lead) and the single lead from here could run through the model to all the servos. If using Bus servos all you would need were hubs (effectively just Y leads) and you could then tell each individual servo whether you want it to be affected by the gyro or not. You could therefore have gyro functions on all surfaces with no additional wiring if you wanted to. Add some telemetry sensors around the model (e.g. an airspeed monitor on the wing LE) and this could all potentially be connected into the same circuit. You could have one servo plug per wing that connects flaps, ailerons (multiple servos if necessary), slats, telemetry sensors , electric gear, electric brakes etc all in the safe knowledge that you can't plug the wrong function (e.g. flap servo into aileron lead) in by mistake.

There is some way to go yet. The leads need to be able to cope with the power demands but decoders and hubs need to be small and simple, and there will always be a quest for more redundancy but, IMO, this will all come with time. I don't think any manufacturer has a perfect solution to this yet but Futaba seems to be leading the way (out of the 'big' manufacturers) so far. In a few years time I am sure we will look back at our current wiring methods and laugh about how complicated it was.

invertmast

My Feedback: (23)

You can still adjust servo endpointw with a matchbox.

With the high power hubs, you either have to run long high power leads to the hub that is located at the servos (if you want to keep servo extension wires short), or you have to keep the hub close to the supply battery in order to keep the high power supply wires short and run long servo extensions. Then if you need to use this in a wing panel...
Not much advantage to what we already have IMO, but i do have more research to do as i have not looked in depth into the system

Mark Vandervelden

Fair point, it is beyond JRs remit to test all aftermarket equipment "but"
As they realised the DMSS/X-Bus protocol to Powerbox quit some time before its general realise it should not fall to the end user to see if it works or not!

I would like to see at the very least a JR DMSS 14ch Rx available as at the moment the XG14 has 14 true non X-Bus channels, that would cover most of us.

To be able to gang up RXs to give effectively more PWM servo ports as promised seems a no brainer too as it kills many birds with a very small "software" stone.

Simple wiring?
Each std servo lead is good for about 3amps and that should cover even the more powerful of servos.
If you have 4 servos on a single "long" lead you will need that lead to be able to carry the extra currant that will be 4x as heavy.
Not only is it 4x as heavy its single "soldered" connections becomes another single failer point for all its connected servos.
Are you sure you would want the whole tail end of your jet, bothe elevator servos and rudder relying any one of just two single power wires.

Connections
Its no big deal to connect say a wing with 2 or even 3 servo plugs but if you have more, multi connectors work well and at a fraction of the cost of a whole X-Bus setup.
I you were to use a heavy duty X-Bus to PWM converter in a wing to save a plug, you will be disappointed.
You will now find you still have two plugs to connect up, that's one servo type plus a lumpy old Deans connector on a much heaver soldered lead.

Im sure there will be new options with X-Bus, S-Bus etc in the future but it should be developed along side and an option not instead of current needs.

rmh

Not bashing JR! however all the servos on a string setups -I don't care if they are JR or Futaba or whoever chooses to do em - don't make sense to me -unless the servos take only a little power .
I think, if you took a set of gram scales and started piling on each of the setups - -you would find that once you needed a full supply of power to say a number of 300 inch ounce servos - you would be better off with one rx and perhaps a heavy duty power strip- easy to do and simple to trouble shoot.
Two rxs splitting the load is another simple setup which is easy to do and easy to trouble shoot.
Now if the new JR can feed 28 full resolution servos - then that's another story