RC Jets Discuss RC jets in this forum plus rc turbines and ducted fan power systems

New Powerbox radio...

Reply
Old 09-19-2017, 04:30 AM
  #51
rhklenke
 
rhklenke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 5,505
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by siclick33 View Post
Jeti is also able to do this.

IMO the support for Weatronics was there at the end but it was too late. Weatronics was around before the BAT60 and I (and presumably many others) had already given up on them by the time that came out. Powerbox has a strong brand and excellent support so this shouldn't be an issue; the only question is whether the CORE is enough of a step up over the Jeti for people who have changed radios in the meantime to swap again. I might have swapped my Futaba for Powerbox but I'm currently happy with my Jeti so there is no need for me to change.

I am sure many of those still using Futaba and JR will make the jump as both of those seem to be lagging behind at the moment.
Bingo! My experience as well...

Bob
rhklenke is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2017, 06:52 AM
  #52
RemoteJets
 
RemoteJets's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Huizen, NETHERLANDS
Posts: 544
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

And yes, the given price € 2490,-- is with VAT.
Expected delivery if I recall it correctle somewhere mid 2018.

Grtz,
Berto.
RemoteJets is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2017, 05:56 PM
  #53
olnico
 
olnico's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston, Texas.
Posts: 3,814
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by c_makhija View Post
love all powerbox products, Emmerich and Richard have been great to deal with over the years. On the other hand heard great things about Jeti too.
My ageing 12x will be due for and upgrade soon, big question is CORE or DS24.

Guys who have held both Txs and preferences? Ergonomics, screen clarity, user friendly programming?

No war please, sure both Txs will be top notch.

Chatty.
It's too early to say in terms of software.
The Core transmitter shown at JP was a prototype and only had a few pages on its OS.
The screen is bigger than the DS/DC 24 system and is touch. However, I found brightness/ readability to be the same.

I have started playing with the triple redundancy in 900 mhz of the 24 and I must say that I am very impressed. This is a significant safety upgrade from the few dual band rc systems available on the market ( Weatronic, Multiplex m-link DR ). Not even talking about the single band systems like Futaba or JR.
On UAVs with large carbon fiber structures, the signal penetration is much better than any other system. Range is more than double than any other system.

To me, the safety offered by the 900 Mhz backup channel is worth the investment in itself.
olnico is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2017, 06:24 PM
  #54
ww2birds
 
ww2birds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Katonah, NY
Posts: 1,245
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

It's also notable that they are committing to open sourcing drivers for telemetry and some extensions, so we won't depend on the manufacturer to enable a great third party ecosystem on peripherals and telemetry sensors. The "big" manufacturers can't be bothered to listen to users .. Jeti seems to, and I am sure PB will given their excellent support track record.

Dave
ww2birds is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2017, 09:22 PM
  #55
c_makhija
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: , INDIA
Posts: 578
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by olnico View Post
It's too early to say in terms of software.
The Core transmitter shown at JP was a prototype and only had a few pages on its OS.
The screen is bigger than the DS/DC 24 system and is touch. However, I found brightness/ readability to be the same.

I have started playing with the triple redundancy in 900 mhz of the 24 and I must say that I am very impressed. This is a significant safety upgrade from the few dual band rc systems available on the market ( Weatronic, Multiplex m-link DR ). Not even talking about the single band systems like Futaba or JR.
On UAVs with large carbon fiber structures, the signal penetration is much better than any other system. Range is more than double than any other system.

To me, the safety offered by the 900 Mhz backup channel is worth the investment in itself.
Thanks Oli.
c_makhija is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2017, 03:35 AM
  #56
jescardin
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Talamanca de JaramaMadrid, SPAIN
Posts: 438
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

-Triple redundacy.
-Satellite receivers.

Are those for greater security or simply due they not get an enough robust link in just the 2.4Ghz band as several other brands got many years ago?.

There are always at least 2 ways of understanding such "improvements", arenīt they?.


Best Regards.
jescardin is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2017, 04:41 PM
  #57
hmjets
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: ovr, PORTUGAL
Posts: 530
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

spot on Jesus cardin,lol!!
hmjets is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2017, 05:26 PM
  #58
Viper1GJ
 
Viper1GJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Saint George , SC
Posts: 589
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by olnico View Post
It's too early to say in terms of software.
The Core transmitter shown at JP was a prototype and only had a few pages on its OS.
The screen is bigger than the DS/DC 24 system and is touch. However, I found brightness/ readability to be the same.

I have started playing with the triple redundancy in 900 mhz of the 24 and I must say that I am very impressed. This is a significant safety upgrade from the few dual band rc systems available on the market ( Weatronic, Multiplex m-link DR ). Not even talking about the single band systems like Futaba or JR.
On UAVs with large carbon fiber structures, the signal penetration is much better than any other system. Range is more than double than any other system.

To me, the safety offered by the 900 Mhz backup channel is worth the investment in itself.


Thanks for this info Oli. This is the exact reason that I pre-ordered a DS-24. My 18MZ has been left in the dust by Futaba who seem to have no interest in the safety improvements available. I had no way to verify the information but it seemed to make sense to my non engineering brain based on what I read. Thanks again.

Gary

Last edited by Viper1GJ; 09-20-2017 at 05:30 PM.
Viper1GJ is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2017, 06:42 PM
  #59
Springbok Flyer
 
Springbok Flyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Gold Coast, Queensland, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,079
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jescardin View Post
-Triple redundacy.
-Satellite receivers.

Are those for greater security or simply due they not get an enough robust link in just the 2.4Ghz band as several other brands got many years ago?.

There are always at least 2 ways of understanding such "improvements", arenīt they?.


Best Regards.
Must admit, I get your point. I have never (since 2009) had a problem with lost signal or range on my Futaba 18MZ. But I have witnessed mates of mine have those problems, using radio systems with satellite receivers and/or dual Tx antennas. Perhaps that is exactly why these manufacturers are trying to impress us with all this redundancy - only to improve their own system inadequacies.

However, having said that. I will also admit that my patience with Futaba and it's complete disregard for what it's loyal modellers are requiring is pushing me slowly but surely towards one of the latest systems. I doubt that it will be Jeti (simply don't like the look and feel if it), but the PB Core could be it. I will wait and watch (while I continue to pray for the next new top-of-the-range Futaba miracle).

Cheers,

Jan
Springbok Flyer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2017, 05:23 AM
  #60
rhklenke
 
rhklenke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 5,505
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Springbok Flyer View Post
Must admit, I get your point. I have never (since 2009) had a problem with lost signal or range on my Futaba 18MZ. But I have witnessed mates of mine have those problems, using radio systems with satellite receivers and/or dual Tx antennas. Perhaps that is exactly why these manufacturers are trying to impress us with all this redundancy - only to improve their own system inadequacies.

However, having said that. I will also admit that my patience with Futaba and it's complete disregard for what it's loyal modellers are requiring is pushing me slowly but surely towards one of the latest systems. I doubt that it will be Jeti (simply don't like the look and feel if it), but the PB Core could be it. I will wait and watch (while I continue to pray for the next new top-of-the-range Futaba miracle).

Cheers,

Jan
I saw the new Futaba 16SZ last weekend. It looks really nice and the $700 price tag is hard to beat...

Bob
rhklenke is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2017, 06:18 AM
  #61
Esprit
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Wiltshire, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 208
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Also unless I am mistaken it has the 18SZ software so a full 18 channels.
Esprit is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2017, 07:30 AM
  #62
jescardin
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Talamanca de JaramaMadrid, SPAIN
Posts: 438
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Springbok Flyer View Post
Must admit, I get your point. I have never (since 2009) had a problem with lost signal or range on my Futaba 18MZ. But I have witnessed mates of mine have those problems, using radio systems with satellite receivers and/or dual Tx antennas. Perhaps that is exactly why these manufacturers are trying to impress us with all this redundancy - only to improve their own system inadequacies.

However, having said that. I will also admit that my patience with Futaba and it's complete disregard for what it's loyal modellers are requiring is pushing me slowly but surely towards one of the latest systems. I doubt that it will be Jeti (simply don't like the look and feel if it), but the PB Core could be it. I will wait and watch (while I continue to pray for the next new top-of-the-range Futaba miracle).

Cheers,

Jan
Just curious, Jan:

What are you requiring from a modern up to date radio? This question is simply due I hear it very frequently and I am afraid perhaps it is me who is becoming oldminded about radios and the hobby.

Thanks and Best Regards!
jescardin is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2017, 07:54 AM
  #63
ZB
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: , FL
Posts: 97
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jescardin View Post
Just curious, Jan:

What are you requiring from a modern up to date radio? This question is simply due I hear it very frequently and I am afraid perhaps it is me who is becoming oldminded about radios and the hobby.

Thanks and Best Regards!
Example:
Automated Telemetry Functions
Wireless Sensor and Receiver Programming
Full Data Logging
Data Analytics
Full Third Party Integration (ECU Wireless Link)
Telemetry Alarms
Full Line of Sensors (Air Pressure, Fuel Flow, Speed, V/A/mAh Capacity....)
ZB is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2017, 08:21 AM
  #64
Jack Diaz
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Caracas, VENEZUELA
Posts: 518
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Jan, my friend ..
You don't realize what darkness is until you see the light !!!
Jack Diaz is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2017, 01:44 PM
  #65
RC_MAN
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: LaSalle, ON, CANADA
Posts: 610
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

How about wireless servos that communicate with the on board receiver. Or better yet a servo receiver as one unit. No messy wires
RC_MAN is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2017, 01:46 PM
  #66
Springbok Flyer
 
Springbok Flyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Gold Coast, Queensland, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,079
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Diaz View Post
Jan, my friend ..
You don't realize what darkness is until you see the light !!!
Jack,

As always, I value your opinion - but in this case I recognise the light, just want Futaba to give It to me....LOL.

Cheers,

Jan
Springbok Flyer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2017, 11:07 PM
  #67
jescardin
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Talamanca de JaramaMadrid, SPAIN
Posts: 438
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZB View Post
Example:
Automated Telemetry Functions
Wireless Sensor and Receiver Programming
Full Data Logging
Data Analytics
Full Third Party Integration (ECU Wireless Link)
Telemetry Alarms
Full Line of Sensors (Air Pressure, Fuel Flow, Speed, V/A/mAh Capacity....)
Automated Telemetry Functions. OK, I see it and agree!
Wireless Sensor and Receiver Programming What do you need to program on a sensor and, mainly, in a receiver?
Full Data Logging Already exists on many transmitter brands, even chinese radios.
Data Analytics Already exists with data from point above.
Full Third Party Integration (ECU Wireless Link) Very dangerous. I know of a very respected company which advertises top line articles as compatible with a main brand receiver and that is totally untrue.
Telemetry Alarms Already exists on most telemetry radios
Full Line of Sensors (Air Pressure, Fuel Flow, Speed, V/A/mAh Capacity....) Except Fuel Flow sensor I know all other already exist on most radio brands.


"ZB" from all your sugestions I only buy to connect telemetry data with functions, something I know "Open Tx" radio may do but as I do not like harware on those transmitters nor I feel the software robust enough I do not mind them.

Regarding sensor and receiver programming, as per today I have not needed it but I should agree if may find a reason for such operations.

Finally Full Third Party Integration should be great but think it interferes with companies marketing policies as if radio manufacturer also produces sensor, why are they going to disclose data comunication details for other companies producing the same sensors and making them losing sales?

Also from my experience ALL companies which offer accessories -from receivers to sensors and power units- fully compatibles with major brands not always are saying the true, as not for all brands they get the genuine comunication protocol details and just a little change from the main brand make the article unsafe, as I personally know happened with FUTABA when there was a legal 2.4GHz change in Europe and when they started selling S.BUS/S.BUS2 receivers.

In that type of situation who might be considered culprit, the liar company or the main brand?

Thanks and Best Regards for your opinion.

Last edited by jescardin; 09-21-2017 at 11:12 PM.
jescardin is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2017, 04:20 AM
  #68
gapellegrini
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: SP, BRAZIL
Posts: 186
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Springbok Flyer View Post
Must admit, I get your point. I have never (since 2009) had a problem with lost signal or range on my Futaba 18MZ. But I have witnessed mates of mine have those problems, using radio systems with satellite receivers and/or dual Tx antennas. Perhaps that is exactly why these manufacturers are trying to impress us with all this redundancy - only to improve their own system inadequacies.

However, having said that. I will also admit that my patience with Futaba and it's complete disregard for what it's loyal modellers are requiring is pushing me slowly but surely towards one of the latest systems. I doubt that it will be Jeti (simply don't like the look and feel if it), but the PB Core could be it. I will wait and watch (while I continue to pray for the next new top-of-the-range Futaba miracle).

Cheers,

Jan
I flew Futaba 18MZ for many years. I had 2 very painful lockouts in one year. The least expensive and painful was an Ultra Bandit one year ago. After the UB I said to myself from now on will fly only dual rx with Powerbox and antennas outside of plane. I did that for one year and lockout again. The second one had setup above antennas outside was very close like 250 meters. Crashed. Powerbox survived, batteries were ok. Everything were ok. So very much likely a RF problem. About the UB lockout could be many other things other than RF problem but some guys with other brands had lockouts on same side and same day and made it back to field. So probably was a 2.4 polluted environment.

After the UB crash I got paranoid reading lost frames and antenna fades on Powerbox. If you fly futaba and put antennas outside of the plane these will be drastically lower. I recommend to everyone to do that. Emmerich from Powerbox usually recommends to at the field when he sees high antenna fades.

I would be considering the Core if were on the market when I gave up Futaba. Although I think the Core is a good competition for the Ds-16. Not the Ds-24. I value RF more than anything else on a radio and I really like the 900 mhz feature.

I'm flying Jeti for 3 months with Powerbox on a plane and I have yet to see a antenna fade or lost frame on Powerbox. Zero in all flights. With my 18mz antennas outside was 10-100 antenna fades. Spektrum flying on same field has 100-200 on each satellite. Not sure if this is a good measure of RF link quality. Maybe someone that knows about it can join the conversation.

More and more stuff is using 2.4. Just search on ebay 2.4 antennas and see for yourself. Don't wait until you lose your best plane until you get a safer technology.
gapellegrini is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2017, 04:49 AM
  #69
David Gladwin
 
David Gladwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: CookhamBerkshire, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,283
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

The RF system of the Powerbox Core is based on the Weatronics system. Hundreds of flights with this kit, on my jets and no doubt thousands world wide, and analysis of the down-linked data shows it to be incredibly robust. No frame losses, failsafe, holds etc., nothing but a rock solid link.

Those of my jets with Gizmo receivers, all have high gain patch antennae, which even further enhances received RF signal strength.

2.4 Ghz patch antennae are cheap, and very effective, don't know why more manufacturers, inc Jeti, don't use them !


David G.

Last edited by David Gladwin; 09-22-2017 at 04:51 AM.
David Gladwin is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2017, 05:23 AM
  #70
philjac94
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sydney, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 229
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Because they (Jeti) use something better, it's called an Rsat2, the cheapness of a patch antenna but better flexibility being able to connect telemetry and or any of the Power Bus systems Jeti use (CB100, 200, 400)together and throughout the airframe as needed, each one is full range equivalent to any of the full size rx's in their lineup. The USA, while not able to use Rsat2 use the R3 (also full range) instead and get the benefit of channels in remote places...well anywhere they may place the R3.
philjac94 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2017, 07:09 AM
  #71
Carsten Groen
 
Carsten Groen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denmark
Posts: 1,634
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Gladwin View Post
The RF system of the Powerbox Core is based on the Weatronics system. Hundreds of flights with this kit, on my jets and no doubt thousands world wide, and analysis of the down-linked data shows it to be incredibly robust. No frame losses, failsafe, holds etc., nothing but a rock solid link.

Those of my jets with Gizmo receivers, all have high gain patch antennae, which even further enhances received RF signal strength.

2.4 Ghz patch antennae are cheap, and very effective, don't know why more manufacturers, inc Jeti, don't use them !


David G.
Same can be said about Futaba ?
In this case, 100% link quality for the whole flight...
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	1.JPG
Views:	41
Size:	118.1 KB
ID:	2233086  
Carsten Groen is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2017, 07:12 AM
  #72
ZB
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: , FL
Posts: 97
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jescardin View Post
Automated Telemetry Functions. OK, I see it and agree!
Wireless Sensor and Receiver Programming What do you need to program on a sensor and, mainly, in a receiver?
Full Data Logging Already exists on many transmitter brands, even chinese radios.
Data Analytics Already exists with data from point above.
Full Third Party Integration (ECU Wireless Link) Very dangerous. I know of a very respected company which advertises top line articles as compatible with a main brand receiver and that is totally untrue.
Telemetry Alarms Already exists on most telemetry radios
Full Line of Sensors (Air Pressure, Fuel Flow, Speed, V/A/mAh Capacity....) Except Fuel Flow sensor I know all other already exist on most radio brands.

Thanks and Best Regards for your opinion.
This video will shop you where the development is heading, if you do not have in 21st. century integrated system you are BlackBerry. I hope you still remember how the company ended up.

This also explains why the PowerBox has to move to they own system. My prediction is that they do just fine as long as they keep innovating. Unfortunately it looks like that the big guys have no chance in high end market.

If you have more question about Jeti system, I would suggest go the any of the other forums.

Zb

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SasMFRRl6rU&t=15s

Last edited by ZB; 09-22-2017 at 07:31 AM.
ZB is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2017, 07:52 AM
  #73
David Gladwin
 
David Gladwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: CookhamBerkshire, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,283
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by philjac94 View Post
Because they (Jeti) use something better, it's called an Rsat2, the cheapness of a patch antenna but better flexibility being able to connect telemetry and or any of the Power Bus systems Jeti use (CB100, 200, 400)together and throughout the airframe as needed, each one is full range equivalent to any of the full size rx's in their lineup. The USA, while not able to use Rsat2 use the R3 (also full range) instead and get the benefit of channels in remote places...well anywhere they may place the R3.
Thanks for that Phil, but I thought the Jeti Rsat was an complete remote receiver still using mini whip antennae. Cost is 60 pounds in UK.

Need to to talk more about this with Harry C, a converted Jeti user !

The patch antennae I use are just that, patch aerials coupled plugged directly into the dual receiver unit, replacing the "whips".

David G.
David Gladwin is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2017, 07:53 AM
  #74
gapellegrini
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: SP, BRAZIL
Posts: 186
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Gladwin View Post
The RF system of the Powerbox Core is based on the Weatronics system. Hundreds of flights with this kit, on my jets and no doubt thousands world wide, and analysis of the down-linked data shows it to be incredibly robust. No frame losses, failsafe, holds etc., nothing but a rock solid link.

Those of my jets with Gizmo receivers, all have high gain patch antennae, which even further enhances received RF signal strength.

2.4 Ghz patch antennae are cheap, and very effective, don't know why more manufacturers, inc Jeti, don't use them !


David G.
I'm pretty sure that Weatronics RF is very reliable. I have read tons of posts about it. I'm also pretty sure that Core RF will be great too.

Jeti uses patch antennas on 900 mhz.
gapellegrini is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2017, 07:55 AM
  #75
gapellegrini
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: SP, BRAZIL
Posts: 186
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carsten Groen View Post
Same can be said about Futaba ?
In this case, 100% link quality for the whole flight...

Carsten,

I never had a flight with Futaba and 0 antenna fades and 0 lost frames on my powerbox. I did check at least 100 times since I started to have lockouts.
gapellegrini is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:56 PM.