RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros Discussion all about rc radios, transmitters, receivers, servos, etc.

New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum

Reply

Old 02-14-2007, 09:31 AM
  #1  
bobzilla
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (63)
 
bobzilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Henderson, NV
Posts: 948
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum

Futaba finally pulls the trigger on their spektrum entry into long distance RC aircraft radio...the 6EX 6-channel 2.4ghz tx/rx

http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...?&I=LXPZT8&P=3

shows shipping in March..but Futaba website still does not offer up any additional information.

Bobzilla

bobzilla is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2007, 09:38 AM
  #2  
bobzilla
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (63)
 
bobzilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Henderson, NV
Posts: 948
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum

Here is additional info on system.


6EX 2.4GHz FASST™ Radio System Futaba Advanced Spread Spectrum Technology It’s here...and it’s everything modelers want in a full-range 2.4GHz system! Futaba has been using Spread Spectrum technology for nearly 15 years in industrial R/C applications, so they have the dedicated engineering staff with 2.4GHz expertise. Unlike other manufacturers who started offering 2.4GHz for hobby R/C models using off-the-shelf IC chips, Futaba invested in extra research and development - resulting in a system that uses a custom IC chip that’s ideally suited for the unique demands of R/C modeling. When you discover all the advantages of Futaba’s 2.4GHz FASST system, you’ll see that it was worth the wait!

The 2.4GHz FASST system: offering the highest levels of performance, convenience and “peace of mind” for airplane AND heli flyers!

What amazes me..is that Futaba in their own words, have had the technology and expertise to bring this spectrum to us RC modelers for 15 years!!! What took them so long?
bobz

bobzilla is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2007, 12:24 PM
  #3  
rcguy!
My Feedback: (69)
 
rcguy!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Chesterland , OH
Posts: 2,840
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum

I thought "Spektrum" was a brand of radio???? Has Futaba licensed the use of it?

Dave
rcguy! is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2007, 02:10 PM
  #4  
ALbert.S
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Roseville, MN
Posts: 263
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum

Check the spelling speKtrum speCtrum
ALbert.S is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2007, 02:16 PM
  #5  
bobzilla
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (63)
 
bobzilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Henderson, NV
Posts: 948
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum

Here is a statement about the difference that Futaba and Spektrum utilize:

FHSS VS. DSSS
There are two primary types of Spread Spectrum technology- Frequency Hopping (FHSS)[FUTABA] and Direct Sequencing (DSSS). FHSS systems transmit a narrow band signal and rapidly jump from one frequency to the next spending a few milliseconds on each frequency. DSSS systems transmit on a single selected frequency but on a very wide band. Only a small portion of that band is used for specially encoded information. Originally, Spektrum engineers started their development with FHSS-based systems because they were relatively easy and inexpensive to develop. However, it was soon discovered that FHSS had several limitations that would prevent it from being the optimal solution for RC.

While more difficult and costly to develop, Spektrum engineers began experimenting with Direct Sequencing Spread Spectrum and optimized the modulation scheme to overcome critical response and re-link issues. In addition, DSSS offered 18dB increase of processing gain for significant improvements in range. With years of development and testing the DSSS modulation scheme was optimized for RC car use and Spektrum's DSM 2.4GHz Spread Spectrum Technology was born.


Looks like the FUTABA engineers did not reach the same conclusion that SPEKTRUM reached concerning pro-con's of each.

I really could care less which to buy..only I want the system to WORK and be relatively in-expensive.

Bobz
bobzilla is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2007, 04:41 PM
  #6  
Silent-AV8R
 
Silent-AV8R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 5,308
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum

Here is a Futaba website with more info on their SS system:


http://2.4gigahertz.com/
Silent-AV8R is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2007, 04:59 PM
  #7  
bobzilla
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (63)
 
bobzilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Henderson, NV
Posts: 948
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum

thanks for link..interesting how Futaba markets their product.

The small, but powerful one-piece R606FS can easily control giant-scale models,
I barely got my giant-scale models up on 7 channels, as follows:
1. Throttle
2. Aileron (right)
3. Elevator (right)
4. Rudder
5. Elevator (left)
6. Aileron (left)
7. Choke/Shutoff

I am thinking that Fubaba believes a y-cord and or y-reverser is something Giant-scale pilots use! (I personally know of none using it). It is manatory to have a choke/cutoff where I fly and I think in many Giant Scale meets it is the rule. This 1 channel omission is one reason I would not even consider a Futaba 6ch system for any of my Giant Scale models.
bobzilla is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2007, 05:03 PM
  #8  
Silent-AV8R
 
Silent-AV8R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 5,308
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum

Actually the use of servo matching devices is very common in giant scale. Futaba, JR, Smart-Fly all make such devices. You can easily set up a plane using 6 channels and a Futaba MSA-10, JR Matchbox, or Smart-Fly Equalizer.
Silent-AV8R is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2007, 09:08 PM
  #9  
NJRCFLYER2
My Feedback: (42)
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Randolph, NJ
Posts: 876
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum

From the Tower site:

Futaba's FASST (Futaba Advanced Spread Spectrum Technology) shifts every two milliseconds virtually eliminating signal conficts and interruptions unlike other 2.4 GHz systems that only stay on one or two frequencies.

Terrific. I hope they've done really extensive testing, because this may mean that the Spektrum and FASST radios can interfere with each other, at least a little bit. As wonderful as the marketing hype tries to make this sound, what it may mean is that from time-to-time, when both Spektrum and FASST are operating simultaneously, the FASST will splash onto a channel that the Spektrum is trying to use. Why? Because these SS transmitters are off most of the time, then they turn on briefly to transmit a few packets of data. And they do it at times that aren't synchronized with each other. So most of the time, collisions won't happen, but from time-to-time, they probably will. Will it mean a shoot-down? Probably not, most of the time, but it's perhaps possible. More likely, some data packets get lost here and there and you get a bumpy or sluggish response. BTW, the opposite scenario may be true, i.e., the Spektrum is going to send when it wants to send and if it's a split milli-second after a FASST packet started, guess what? Your FASST receiver may miss a packet. Depending on their error correction and re-try protocols, the effects may vary.

NJRCFLYER2 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2007, 09:25 PM
  #10  
bobzilla
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (63)
 
bobzilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Henderson, NV
Posts: 948
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum

If I have a matchbox between the 2 ailerons..then what happens when I want to trim the plane while flying?
Same with elevator? Does it trim both sides correctly?

You still have to use a y-cord according to smart-fly manual.

bobz
bobzilla is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2007, 12:56 AM
  #11  
RaceCity
Senior Member
 
RaceCity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: NotUpNorth
Posts: 1,839
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum

I don't believe there will be ANY conflicts between systems operating on the ISM band because of the certfication requirements which dictates an "anti-collision" technology be used to prevent two systems from operating on the same frequency(s) simulataneously.

Without this requirement, wireless computers, etc would be stepping all over each other and nothing would work.

Therefore, it stands to reason that the Futaba FHSS system will not be able to "hop" to an occupied channel. It would seem then that in a crowded S/S environment, the Futaba system would have a greatly reduced number of open frequencies upon which to hop around, thus negating whatever virtues are claimed for it.

Perhaps this is the reason Spektrum opted for a DSSS system.



RaceCity is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2007, 01:31 AM
  #12  
Silent-AV8R
 
Silent-AV8R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 5,308
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum

ORIGINAL: bobzilla

If I have a matchbox between the 2 ailerons..then what happens when I want to trim the plane while flying?
Same with elevator? Does it trim both sides correctly?

You still have to use a y-cord according to smart-fly manual.

bobz
Matchbox, etc is used to put multiple servos on a single sruface.

6 channels is still enough to do even a 40% plane:

1. Throttle
2. Aileron (right) + matchbox for multiple servos
3. Elevator - Both
4. Rudder
5. Aileron (left) + matchbox for multiple servos
6. Choke/Shutoff

But most people flying the bigger planes will have higher end radios due to the need for multiple mixes to trim the plane. Same with gliders. We use 6 servo set ups and LOTS of mixing, so a base feature radio is not the best choice.
Silent-AV8R is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2007, 02:39 AM
  #13  
AndersDK
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Copenhagen, DENMARK
Posts: 31
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum


ORIGINAL: Phaedrus-MMVI

ORIGINAL: bobzilla

If I have a matchbox between the 2 ailerons..then what happens when I want to trim the plane while flying?
Same with elevator? Does it trim both sides correctly?

You still have to use a y-cord according to smart-fly manual.

bobz
Matchbox, etc is used to put multiple servos on a single sruface.

6 channels is still enough to do even a 40% plane:

1. Throttle
2. Aileron (right) + matchbox for multiple servos
3. Elevator - Both
4. Rudder
5. Aileron (left) + matchbox for multiple servos
6. Choke/Shutoff

But most people flying the bigger planes will have higher end radios due to the need for multiple mixes to trim the plane. Same with gliders. We use 6 servo set ups and LOTS of mixing, so a base feature radio is not the best choice.

If 6 channels are enough to fly even giant scale planes, can we then conclude that T12 and T14MZ basically are obsolete? What we actually need is a 6 or 7 channel radio with some more mixers?

Anders

AndersDK is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2007, 04:01 AM
  #14  
bobzilla
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (63)
 
bobzilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Henderson, NV
Posts: 948
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum

good one Anders..hehe

14 channels..hmmmm

1. Throttle
2. Ailerons
3. Rudder
4. Elevator
5. Ailerons 2
6. Elevator 2
7. Smoke
8. Brakes
9. Flaps
10. LIghts
11. Siren
12. Chute
13. Ejection seat
14. ???

Maybe FUTABA could offer up a more complete list for 14 channels? hehe

bobz
bobzilla is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2007, 06:30 AM
  #15  
BillS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Greensboro, NC
Posts: 3,312
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum


ORIGINAL: bobzilla

thanks for link..interesting how Futaba markets their product.

The small, but powerful one-piece R606FS can easily control giant-scale models,
I barely got my giant-scale models up on 7 channels, as follows:
1. Throttle
2. Aileron (right)
3. Elevator (right)
4. Rudder
5. Elevator (left)
6. Aileron (left)
7. Choke/Shutoff

I am thinking that Fubaba believes a y-cord and or y-reverser is something Giant-scale pilots use! (I personally know of none using it). It is manatory to have a choke/cutoff where I fly and I think in many Giant Scale meets it is the rule. This 1 channel omission is one reason I would not even consider a Futaba 6ch system for any of my Giant Scale models.
Six channels are simply inadequate for giant scale. It is unimaginable how Futaba marketing could think differently.

It simply seems stupid to believe any reason exists to reduce the channel count to a beginner radio.

Bill
BillS is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2007, 06:57 AM
  #16  
R/C Foolish
My Feedback: (6)
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: BILLERICA, MA
Posts: 1,323
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum

You also forgot one of the most used channels - RETRACTS. Futaba has not only missed the boat but they are heading in the wrong direction. Whoever is doing the thinking for them obviously does not fly R/C.

JMO,

R/C Foolish
R/C Foolish is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2007, 07:32 AM
  #17  
Capt Jim
My Feedback: (168)
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Lehigh Acres, FL
Posts: 1,150
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum

I think that the RC segment of Futabas business is so small, that they just do not give the RC radio business any significant recognition from an engineering and/or marketing standpoint.
That would seems to justify them apparently ignoring the technological upheaval now occurring in the RC world. With that as a given, it is fairly obvious that the flyers have gone to the new Spektrum 2.4 ghz system in overwhelming numbers, and largely abandoning the old 72 mhz band. I say that not only in the great numbers of Spektrums already in place at my club field, but also in the numbers of RCU ads selling off the old 72 mhz gear.
It is also true that an entry level radio satisfies the great majority of casual flyers. So..Futaba and JR etc, lay back and snooze...perhaps unaware that they are allowing their market share to errode significantly.
It reminds me of IBM inventing the personal computer...and then watching as the small quick thinking and quick acting companies made it better, faster, and cheaper....and ran away with the whole market. IBM isn't in the PC business anymore...and hasn't been for quite some time.
Spektrum has established itself and enjoys a growing share of the RC market. Futabas operating system is not compatible with the Spektrum 2.4 ghz system, so it seems unlikely that folks like myself, with multiple Spektrum receivers, will ever sell them off just to go back to the old big "F" brand.
For the minority of us flyers who are absolutely needing the higher channel count for our scale warbirds, and IMAC and pattern types....we are kinda stuck with our old 72mhz gear....for now.
I would be willing to bet that Spektrum will address the channel count soon.
Till then, at least 72mhz is much less crowded.
Capt Jim is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2007, 07:52 AM
  #18  
NJRCFLYER2
My Feedback: (42)
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Randolph, NJ
Posts: 876
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum

ORIGINAL: RaceCity

I don't believe there will be ANY conflicts between systems operating on the ISM band because of the certfication requirements which dictates an "anti-collision" technology be used to prevent two systems from operating on the same frequency(s) simulataneously.

Without this requirement, wireless computers, etc would be stepping all over each other and nothing would work.
Unless a frequency hopping transmitter totally avoids the channels being used by a Spektrum, it can still not avoid stomping on a packet here and then. You must consider the time domain. Spektrum is not transmitting most of the time and neither is FASST. Neither transmitter has any way to know when the other is about to transmit a packet. Now assume that a FASST Tx is following the protocol and sees that channel X is clear and starts to transmit. Meanwhile, a Spektrum "owning" channel X starts to transmit a microsecond after FASST got finished checking channel X, but well before it is finished transmitting on it. Bammo. A collision.

Collisions happen in wireless networks all the time. There is a retry mechanism built into the protocol to allow re-sending data when a collision happens. That's OK for sending pictures to Grandma, but not so great when sending up elevator to your Extra 300 pointed straight down. You see, a short delay when trying to send the JPEG data that represents the area from the first freckle on your kids forehead to the last one on his chin, will not be noticed in the overall transmission of 100 pictures from the birthday party. The data that represent the next frame of servo position data is obviously much more time critical. Lose one frame, not so bad. Lose many consecutive frames through multiple collisions, not so good. Will a Spektrum re-try? I'm not sure, but I think maybe not. Will a FASST retry? Maybe, probably not, who knows? They haven't published anything technical yet that I'm aware of. Anyway, retries take time to accomplish, time that you may not always want to spend.

These manufacturers need to cooperate. This probably isn't a really big problem when there's just a few radios operating. Most likely, collisions will be rare and uneventful. Most likely. That's an educated guess, which has to be proven by manufacturers testing and proving it. Now consider a Joe Nall scenario, or even a Nats at Muncie scenario. Not so appealing IMO.
NJRCFLYER2 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2007, 08:17 AM
  #19  
NJRCFLYER2
My Feedback: (42)
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Randolph, NJ
Posts: 876
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum

BTW, the entire concept of re-tries after a collision requires the knowledge by the sending device that a packet did not get through. Obviously, this would require that your receiver "raise it's hand" and tell the transmitter "hey Bubba, I was expecting a packet and it was all messed up, how about another try?" In other words, your receiver has to also be a transmitter and vice-versa, in order for collision retries to actually work. Don't think for a minute that either brand F or brand S has that working in a real-time environment such as what we require.
NJRCFLYER2 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2007, 09:05 AM
  #20  
Silent-AV8R
 
Silent-AV8R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 5,308
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum

ORIGINAL: AndersDK
If 6 channels are enough to fly even giant scale planes, can we then conclude that T12 and T14MZ basically are obsolete? What we actually need is a 6 or 7 channel radio with some more mixers?
Anders
The point I was making is that you can set up even a giant scale aerobatic plane using just 6 channels. However, it is FAR easier using the more powerful radio. And as I said, many pilots desire the powerful mixing capabilities of the higher end radios like the 12Z, 14MZ, 9303, or 10X.

What the higher end radios also give you is the ability to plug more servos directly into the RX and thereby eliminate all other devices. I have two large planes with 12 servos each and no other devices. All 12 servos go directly into my G3 RX on my 14MZ.

So while you can fly the bigger planes with a simple radio, it is far easier to set and mix using a higher end radio.
Silent-AV8R is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2007, 09:09 AM
  #21  
Silent-AV8R
 
Silent-AV8R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 5,308
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum

ORIGINAL: Capt Jim
I think that the RC segment of Futabas business is so small, that they just do not give the RC radio business any significant recognition from an engineering and/or marketing standpoint.
Futaba worldwide does about $800,000,000 USD per year. Hobby RC is about 10% to 15% ($80,000,00 to $120,000,000) per year. Peanuts to be sure. I am unclear how you came to the conclusion that Futaba ignores hobby RC. Look at the 14MZ and 2048PCM.
Silent-AV8R is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2007, 09:10 AM
  #22  
rmh
Senior Member
 
rmh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: , UT
Posts: 12,630
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum

Now we are back to the requirement that ""operation does not interfere"-
In this situation - I would strongly suspect that field data says the problem does not exist - in a practical application.
I have gotten some feedback from actual use of both DX7's and the Futaba -but until there is more real time info -I will just watch--
rmh is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2007, 09:23 AM
  #23  
R/C Foolish
My Feedback: (6)
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: BILLERICA, MA
Posts: 1,323
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum

How many novice to intermediate pilots are going to by a $2-3000 radio. Especially when you can buy a Specktrum for $349.00, even JR's 9303 doesn't cost over $600. I just feel that Futaba is not looking at things realisticly but the is JMO.

R/C Foolish
R/C Foolish is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2007, 09:38 AM
  #24  
Silent-AV8R
 
Silent-AV8R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 5,308
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum

ORIGINAL: R/C Foolish

How many novice to intermediate pilots are going to by a $2-3000 radio. Especially when you can buy a Specktrum for $349.00, even JR's 9303 doesn't cost over $600. I just feel that Futaba is not looking at things realisticly but the is JMO.

R/C Foolish
Not many, which is why Futaba came to the market first with a 6 channel radio at $219. The other question is how many novices are flying $5,000 giant scale aerobatic planes, or turbines, or other complex aircraft that benefit from the higher end radio features?? Again, not many.

We each tend to focus in on our little end of the hobby and think that this is the way the world is. Kind of like the blind men describing an elephant. Each "sees" only the part he touches.
Silent-AV8R is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2007, 09:53 AM
  #25  
RaceCity
Senior Member
 
RaceCity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: NotUpNorth
Posts: 1,839
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New Futaba 2.4ghz 6ch spektrum

I think this "conflict" thing is a lot of debate over a problem that has not been proven to exist. Hard to believe that the international bodies that defined the requirements for ISM band operation would have been so short sighted. I'd wager that they thought this thing through pretty good from a scientific angle, and not a rhetorical one.

If you REALLY want to "lose some packets" let some kid throw the switch on his uncle's 72mhz rig while you're flying.

You'll lose packets....airplanes...engines....

The day rapidly aproaches however when feature count on the S/S radios will relegate the 9303's, 10X's, 14MZ's and the like to the "Junior Squad" and then none of the 'BIG BOYS" will be caught dead with those. The opinions will change markedly at that point.

Go S/S!!!

RaceCity is offline  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service