fireblade5437

When I changed two of my micro Rx's to different cables with SMA connectors so I could install patch antennas I have had no issues..

olnico

What a class act. That tells a lot about the person.

Remco45

Well...its a bit more complex according to the Administrator of the WEA LOUNGE Website [FLUGASS]:
He issued the following statement 2 hours ago.

A summarised translation (full text in German below):

After along meeting with Powerbox Systems I [FLUGASS] can provide the following information:

· Initially,PB wanted to proceed with the business.
· After thorough analysis of both Hardware and Software, PB is convinced that the problems cannot be solved by software updates alone. The internal hardware design and its communication (with various processors) is a source for failures.
· Furthermore,Displays are no longer available; new ones would require totally revised software.
· The battery controller needs re-design as it is prone to failures.
· So the present state of the hardware does not allow further development and as PB cannot stand for this product, discontinuation is required.
· We’ve discussed the wish of many customers to enable a group-paid software update,but this is not feasible as legal issues could have a detrimental effect.

So how do we proceed from here?

· PB wants to develop a new transmitter based on the WEA transmission features [which PB consideres the best there is – other source].
· Main priority is to enable compatibility with present receivers.
· However,this cannot be achieved in just a few weeks’ time. [ 1 – 2 years – other source]
· PB understands the emotions of the WEA customers and we [wea lounge] are trying to arrange an substitution program in which we could buy a new transmitter for e.g. 50% of the recommended sale price, but nothing has been decided yet.


Don't shoot the Messenger: I've transitioned to WEA just 3 weeks agoo which costed a lot of money

Remco45

Nach einer sehr langen aufschlußreichen Besprechung mitPowerbox Systems kann ich folgende sinngemäße Zusammenfassung zur Thematikaufzeigen:
Die Firma Powerbox Systems war an einer komplettenWeiterführung der Firma bis zum oben genannten Zeitpunkt interessiert. Nachjedoch tiefgründiger Analyse der Hard & Software gerade des Senders und derdazu befindlichen Strukturen musste festgestellt werden das der Sender indieser Form in keinster Weise mehr produziert werden kann. Die immer wiederauftretenden Fehler in den einzelnen Updates sind nicht durch Softwareanpassungallein zu beheben! Allein die Kommunikation der Hardware intern mit einfach zuvielen Prozessoren bringt hier die Fehlerquellen. Zum weiteren sind die derzeitverbauten Displays nicht mehr lieferbar beim Hersteller. Es müssten also auchhier komplett neue eingesetzt werden, welche wiederum eine komplett neueSoftware erfordern würden. Der komplette Akkucontroller müßte dringend gegenetwas anderes getauscht werden da dieser zahlreiche Fehlerquellen bildet.Kurzum die derzeitige Hardware des Senders steht vorrangig einerWeiterentwicklung im Wege. Um demzufolge weiteren immer durch diese Problematikwieder auftretenden Fehlern aus dem Wege zu gehen ist eine kompletteEinstellung des bisherigen Senders mit dieser Hard & Software unumgänglich.
Zur Thematik "bezahltes Update" kann daher auchnur auf das zuvor aufgezählte eingegangen werden. Eine Weiterentwicklung alsauch ein gewünschtes Update zu bisherigen Problemen ist nicht machbar. Eswürden immer wieder andere Fehler auftreten im Zusammenspiel, da die Hardwareeinfach nicht stimmig miteinander arbeitet. Weiterführend wäre auch hier eineHaftung und Gewährleistung eine waghalsige Sache.

Wie geht es alsoweiter?
Powerbox Systems wird auf Basis des WeatronicÜbertragungsverfahren einen "neuen" Sender entwickeln. AllerhöchstePriorität hat dabei die Kompatibilität mit bisherigen Empfängern! Das dieserWeg nicht in 2 Wochen zu realisieren ist sollte klar sein.
Ebenfalls wollte und möchte Powerbox Systems keinen derbisherigen Weatronic Kunden verärgern. Die Entscheidung kam auch erst die Tageals man tiefgründiger in der Thematik Einblick hatte.
Powerbox Systems stellt seit Jahren sehr zuverlässigeProdukte am Markt zur Verfügung. Die Philosophie war und ist dabei immer demModellbauer nur das zu verkaufen was man auch selbst mit besten Wissen undGewissen vertreten kann. Das wäre aber mit den bisherigen Sender nicht derFall. Man weiß nachweisslich das es viele Fehler gibt sowohl Hard als auchSoftware. Daher könnte die Fa. Powerbox nicht mit voller Überzeugung dieProdukte am Markt anbieten.
Im Gespräch dazu wurden auch etwaige Vorschläge gebracht wiedann auch bei einer Erscheinung eines eigenen Senders mit bestehenden WeatronicSender Kunden verfahren werden könnte. So war als erster Ansatz die Möglichkeitdas man eine Art Austausch-Aktion angehen könnte, bei der der neue Sender dannzu ggf. 1/2 Preis erworben werden könnte.
Jedenfalls sind dem Team die Verärgerungen zurThematik bewußt was auch die zahlreichen einzelnen Gespräche mit Kundenzeigten. Jedoch muß aus oben aufgezeigten Gründen so verfahren werden, um auchseiner Philisophie treu zu bleiben.

Edgar Perez

My Feedback: (13)

It will be easier if we could continue to rely on the BAT Tx during the time PB needs to develop the new Transmitter. My goggle translator when reading the German forum mentions the possibility of a "bug" in the current software release. Any insights if it is indeed true?

fireblade5437

Edgar

No reason not to believe these guys, after all the guys at Weatronics believed me when I told them of the problem which led to the 6.089 being developed. I take it that you have read all the responses and PB explanation as to why they are discontinuing the Bat as it is?

Me personally will spend this season flying the Bat in my gliders/foam jets etc but my jets/gas I am going back for now to my JR/Graupner MX24 and DV4 (at least I know my patch cable won't fail)

Totally disappointed and feel sorry for all the dealers plus Oli who has put mega hours into Weatronic. The programming features, black box facility and Tx protocol are one of the best imo and I think PB were obviously going to put their name on any Tx Rx that they sell but they feel that it would be easier to redesign the hard ware themselves

Alan

Edgar Perez

My Feedback: (13)

Alan,
Thanks for your perspective. I have been using Weatronics DV3/DV4 in a Futaba transmitter since they came out with them. I already wear down one Futaba Tx, and can probably use my current one for about two more years. This will give me time to evaluate what to do, which could hopefully include a new version from PB that maintains the same RF systems and programming philosophy.
I have been using a BAT 60 for about one year in non-jets. Never have any issue. I do have a 10 foot span, B17 that I setup using the BAT 60 that I need to maiden. Due to the facilities of the BAT i'm using 20 channels (functions) in two separate Micro 12 receivers, plus a significant amount of mixers. Moving it to the the DV4 will require some trade offs...

captainjacobs

Hello, it's very surprising that beta testers didn't notice any safety related problem before sales began.
On my side, in a few months of flying, I crashed 2 big models and near missed a third one...
To acknoledge a problem now is a bit appalling..
My 1/2.5 Nimbus and my AD Rafale will not reappear themselves.
Very sad story...

roger.alli

Thanks for translating this for us Remco.

On the bright side, I am very pleased to see this statement from PB.

[QUOTE · PB wants to develop a new transmitter based on the WEA transmission features [which PB consideres the best there is – other source].
· Main priority is to enable compatibility with present receivers. .[/QUOTE]

It means that my existing 6 Rxs will be not be next to worthless, as some have speculated.

My 12X/DV4 with Giga is still a very powerful system and exceptionally reliable. For the foreseeable future I will continue to use this and await further development from PB..

David Gladwin

Me too, Roger, I have a gut feeling that this will all turn out for the best, although it may take some time.
I have always been convinced that the dual Rf "channels" makes Weatronic an exceptionally robust system, arguably the very best, proven with my data from almost 1000 flights with Wea 2.4.

In in the meantime my two JR. 12X s with Alan's patch cables connecting the module continue to give perfect service, and easily handle all systems in my complex FC Mig 29.

Ready to to test fly, (at last) my Skygate. Hawk, 12-22 gyro 111 with GPS and dual patch RX antennae.

sidgates

My Feedback: (2)

i thought I remembered reading it is possible to program a Weatronic Micro 12 receiver to perform the function of a simple gear/door sequencer. I have tried to do this but failed so far. Anyone have an answer? I need to retract the gear on air valve controlled by a servo then close the gear doors on a separate servo. Open the doors first before extending the gear, leave the doors open.

roger.alli

Hi Sid

Yes that is pretty simple, with Gigacontrol at least.. You need the air valve on one Rx slot, and the door servo on another.


Use the servo slow function ON YOUR TRANSMITTER to slow the gear channel down to approx 5 sec per 60 deg.

Using Giga control, have both air valve and door servos assigned to the Gear channel.

Now in Servo mapping make the air valve curve look like this.




And each of the door servos look like this.. Actually this curve closes doors after gear deployment, but you will get the picture..


Job done. (It might take a bit of fine tuning of the curves and servo speeds.)




I luv Giga control.

sidgates

My Feedback: (2)

Roger,
Thanks for the reply. You have outlined the curves I have tried. I tried to use the servo "slow" function in Giga Control. I don't think i have that feature in the Futaba 9C I am using but will check again.
Sid

roger.alli

That's the trick.. .You need to use the servo slow function built into your Tx. The Gigia control servo speed is set to off
..

sidgates

My Feedback: (2)

I rechecked the 9C and the throttle channel is the only one that has the slow function. I don't like that solution so I am ordering a gear sequencer in the morning.
SidGates

fireblade5437

For Weatronic users of Bat 60/64

Type: critical

1. Sometimes the situation can occur, that a model change is not carried out correctly. With this happening, it can be the case that not all functions are completely transferred to the flight-controller. The impact can be, that all functions work correctly but for example the rudder and maybe the retraction gear don´t work at all or not as expected. This is just an example. The exact reason for this behavior isn´t known at the moment, so the only way to overcome this situation is to do a complete pre-flight check - which should be made in every case, regardless of which system you use; as there can be many other errors with servos, cables and so on. As a rule of thumb, you can change to another model and after that, do a change back to the previous, desired one. This triggers a new transfer of the model data to the flight controller, which in many cases leads to success.

Type: critical

2. Under rare, but re-occurring circumstances, the situation can occur, that the data of a just made (stick)calibration is only stored in RAM (instead of storing into RAM AND writing it to the flash memory) and thus gets lost when the BAT6x is turned off. If you turn back on the BAT6x in this situation, some of the calibration data may be lost or are undefined, which in turn can lead to malfunction of one or more calibratable controls.
In most of these cases, only the preset values (+100%, 0, - 100%) are not properly reached, i.e. for the maximum control positions. This can easily be checked by having a look at every function setup. There you can see the assigned control and the value it is delivering when moving it.

If all controls give correct values after you restart the BAT6x, there is nothing left to do.

If you noticed some or more bad values of some or more controls after you did the calibration and afterwards turned the BAT6x off and then back on, there is only one chance to work around this problem (a kind of dead lock): You than have to do the complete calibration process TWO TIMES WITHOUT SWITCHING THE BAT6x OFF IN BETWEEN them. Also ALL CONTROLS WHICH CAN BE CALIBRATED HAVE TO BE CALIBRATED in each of the two processes. By doing so, the BAT6x is forced to store the calibration data at a different place in the flash memory. Note that this behavior can only be triggered, if the BAT6x is in the situation that the calibration data was not stored correctly before. You cannot do this procedure in order to prevent a further occurrence of this problem when re-calibrating for some reason!

Keep in mind, that this "double calibration" process should only be done, if your BAT 6x really is in this calibration error situation as described above. Only in this situation it can help, this relies on the systematic this bug is based on. The occurrence of this bug is of statistic type: If you do calibration often, this bug situation will in turn occur that often...

Rule of thumb:

- when calibrating controls, ALWAYS calibrate ALL controls which a calibratable (even if it possible to calibrate just only one or a few) . Thus creating a complete set of calibration data, not only parts of it.

- only calibrate the controls, when a real indication exists and therefore you are required to do so. If you have control values as expected (see above), there is no need to recalibrate. You will have no additional benefit from that, but see next:

- recalibrating the controls when not needed/indicated, MAY lead to the bug situation described above. Then you have to follow the above given procedure.

- keep in mind that calibration data is model independent. So again: If you have correct calibrated controls, they remain calibrated. Don´t re-calibrate them when not indicated!

Alan

Edgar Perez

My Feedback: (13)

Alan,
Thanks so much for the heads-ups. I know there are a lot of detailed discussion in the Wea lounge, but can't quite keep up with google translator.
As far as you know, are these the only identified bugs in the BAT 60? As you indicates, these can be identified in the pre-flight.

Thanks again.

fireblade5437

As we confirm any issues I will post as soon as I can but including the bug fix for the problem I have already reported and these two I have posted here as far as I know that is where we are atm
Please confirm your settings in the radio before you fly as described in my above post also please follow the requested route when changing memories. Even when not changing memories after switch on please confirm all proper travel is available by checking display etc

Alan

fireblade5437

Also guys I am working on my DV4 (non BT) module and designing version where the patch cable is incorporated inside the mounting post on my 12ch Graupner/JR MX24 Tx, cable will be soldered both ends so no plugs etc main reason to get rid of external cable altogether...
I will post results when done

Alan

fireblade5437

All finished apart from a little black silicon in the holes where the plugs used to go, fixed two very small self tapping screws in the top of Tx module to stop any rotating and used loctite to fix the mounting pole onto the M4 screw in the Tx.
The counter sunk stainless M4 I drilled out the center to 2mm which excepts the four cables just nice. This was also done up tight with 243 loctite. I used a little hot glue over both ends of cable to add mechanical support. The current consumption of the DV4 is 200mA so size of cables are fine 0.055mm2 0.250A


Alan

HarryC

My Feedback: (1)

latest info from Wea's website-



[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD="align: left"]


Dear weatronic customer,

in our statement to weatronic insolvency from 13.4. 2016, we announced that we will seek an external partner for the distribution of the remaining original weatronic products.

We have succeeded Nico Quint from Super Wings in the Netherlands, also weatronic Netherlands to win it.

We handed him transmitters, receivers, accessories and spare parts. He will take over the further distribution of weatronic products, while supplies last.

Please contact Nico Quint in conjunction, it is many years active weatronic distributors and will also be happy to advise on technical issues.

Super Wings Modelvliegsport
Nico Quint
Nieuwe Kazernelaan 57
6711 JB Ede
Tel .: +31 0318 619807
e-mail: [email protected]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

CRye

My Feedback: (15)

Thanks to Nico putting the firmware updates back up, I upgraded my BAT 60 to 6.089 inclusive of the bug fix.
I left the power on till it shut itself down. Probably from the battery levels, .11 to .40 Ahr and Volts 3.74 to 3.80.

Upon powering back up I got the following message:
"Your Model Date is inconsistent on Target: Transever
Do you want to send data on Target" with the check mark and X as choices.
Housekeeping now shows as 6.09.

I think I first hit the check mark.
When I power up I still get the message.
Is this telling me that the TX needs to update the RX to continue use?
I have not actually operated the RX, I will do that next.
Thank you
Charles

fireblade5437

Charles

Its ok to tick when you see that message but only when model is on the ground and engine/motor not running etc
Good you managed to get it updated...did you manage to get Nico's email as I must admit I forgot to email Thomas, unfortunately my kitchen revamp has taken over everything atm

Alan

CRye

My Feedback: (15)

Hey Alan,
Thank you for your help. Nico's contact info is above in HarryC last post. Nico had a friend who is more conversant in English contact me and was very helpful. We also have a kitchen to revamp from a fire. Have been camping out on counter tops for too many months.
I am finally going to actually use the RX that was previously bound to the TX I got used so I can verify operation.
Charles
PS I gathered several battery strength vs time off and time on and may publish. Before update it seems to consume 17mili amp hours avg from the main batteries even when turned off. I looked for a way to disconnect the power batteries while not in use but have not figured how to do it. First time I turned on after a few weeks one bat was at 0 ampHr and either very low v or 0.

ufoDziner

Is there a place to report bugs? I was working with the dRonin developers to add Weatronic 16, as well as Multiplex 12 & 16 support to their software, and they found a bug.

"Ah, just noticed the issue. Your Rx is sending the sync byte of 0xA1, that means 12 channels, should be 0xA2 for 16 channels."

Thanks

frankie

Hello all,

I've recently aquired a BAT60 which has the original firmware V6.01 (V1.09 for the charge control). Can anybody advsie what version i should update to?

Which versions conatain bugs?

One thing I can say is that I am impressed by the quality and the overall feel.

Thanks guys