nonstoprc

My Feedback: (90)

I want to make two points regarding 10c.

1. It comes with a 14 channel receiver. This seems strange because the radio has 10 channel. Why not allow a different configuration of 8-channel receiver?
2. It is backward compartible to 72mhz. For those who already own futaba radios (like 9c), move to 2.4 is the main reason to purchase 10c. Why pay extra $$ for a capability that is not needed? The 2.4 antenna at the end of transmission module gives an impression that 10c is something like 9c with a 2.4 module, not a dedicate 2.4 radio.

I am really confused by 10c's feature list.

airstik2003

all i want to know is if the 1024 tx will work on the 2048 rec?

Eddie P

My Feedback: (4)

I'm in the same boat. The reason I may be interested in the 10C is I will have 2 whole more channels at the end of the day with a 10C than I will have with the 9C on 2.4. The 9C loses the 9th channel when moved to 2.4 as you probably know. Sinc I fly turbines I really would like at least 9 channels, I can live on 8 in a pinch but 10 is better and easier on setup and real world application.

The thing I do not like is the 1024 resolution. I almost am tempted to waste 600 dollars and go with the 12 channel with current technoligy than a backward looking 'new' radio. But that is probably Futaba's marketing plan with the 10C for guys like me [:@] With that in mind maybe not.

bruce88123

You (or someone else) keep asking that question in several threads now. Do you really think Futaba would sell the 10C TX with a 2048 Rx (like in the package) if it won't work? Get real. I can't promise it will work with all 2048 RX's.

wind junkie

My Feedback: (1)

I just realized that the Futaba high end radios (14 and 12 channel) sold as FASST systems are really just (removeable) module based radios that also offer 72Mhz compatibility (like the upcoming 10c)

In the Futaba catalog and Tower pictures the swivel mounts for the (removed) 72Mhz antenna sort of line up with the module's antenna which protrudes out the back, so it seems to be coming out of the top.

The only FASST dedicated TX's seem to be the 6 and 7 channel EX models. This is not a huge issue (it may be attractive for long time Futaba users with lots of equipment), but to me it detracts from the look and feel of the whole "experience". If I'm gonna pay that much for a TX, it's really got to haul the mail in all respects, and part of that is aesthetics. If I bought one, I'd feel like the guy who got a BMW but really wanted a vette.

jtsails

My Feedback: (2)

Nonstoprc,
you asked:
"1. It comes with a 14 channel receiver. This seems strange because the radio has 10 channel. Why not allow a different configuration of 8-channel receiver?"

Why would you want an 8 channel receiver with a 10 channel radio?

"2. It is backward compartible to 72mhz. For those who already own futaba radios (like 9c), move to 2.4 is the main reason to purchase 10c. Why pay extra $$ for a capability that is not needed? The 2.4 antenna at the end of transmission module gives an impression that 10c is something like 9c with a 2.4 module, not a dedicate 2.4 radio."

I would think that it would be cheaper to make one radio that would do both rather than make two different radios. I also think that the price has very little to do with the cost of making the radio.
james

nonstoprc

My Feedback: (90)

James,

1. Equipping a 10-channel radio with 14-channel is an overkill. Right? For me, 8-channel is enough. But I do want a tx better than 7C.
2. I figure adding 72mhz incurs extra cost. It can not be zero. My main point, though, is a dedicated 2.4 radio is better than the dual-one, at least to current 72mhz tx owners. JR 9303 is a popular radio and outfitting it with 2.4 makes it even better, and it is a dedicated system.


I would think if Futaba could release a dedicated 2.4 10c or 9c system, it will be very popular.

The only thing I hope my 9c can do better (or improved in the 2.4 version): sync of dual elevators. Otherwise, it is a perfect 72mhz radio.

pilotpete2

If the 10C ever ships with the 14 channel receiver depends on whether or not the 10 channel receiver is ready for delivery at the time the transmitters are ready .
That is what I was told at the WRAM show by the Futaba guys. Does anyone really think that a year from now folks will be whining about the lack of choices in FASST receivers[:-], OK I didn't say anything about price Our LHS (new owners) just became a Hobbico dealer, it'll be interesting to see how he does price wise when the pipeline is filled up and the goods are readily available.
As to whether the 10C will eventually be made in a 2.4Ghz model only, time will tell.
Notice that the JR 12X is going to be available in a modular version, Personally I wouldn't consider an over killobuck transmitter that was not module based as a good long term investment.
I feel any one who doesn't like the antenna placement on the back of the transmitter should keep an open mind until they actually use one. With the 10C and the FASST module you have a very solid foot (the antenna itself doesn't touch the ground) that hold the transmitter at a better angle than the handle does when working on the bench. When the antenna is turned to the side at 90dg. it almost disappears[8D], yet in this position it arguably is in the ideal orientation for flying (you'll never be pointing the tip at your plane) and for storage in a carrying case after cutting the foam.
As far as the speed/latency issues of the 9C (I'm a 'planker", what's a swash plate[&o] according to the Futaba team those issues are history. Of course most will want to see what independent reviewers have to say
Pete

Flying Geezer

My Feedback: (14)

I have the 12FG and I personally prefer the module configuration. Think about it, what's next, improvements in the module, 5gHz modules. Who knows? If something new and improved comes along I can get a new module instead of a new radio. JMO

airstik2003

thats the first time i asked
i talked to a futaba rep. last night and explained everything to be

bruce88123

I did say "or someone else"
From Futaba web page comes the answer to YOUR question: http://2.4gigahertz.com/systems/futk9250.html The 10C is a 2048 system.

wind junkie

My Feedback: (1)

Good point. I really do need to fondle one before dismissing it offhand.

It's ironic that I'm even considering such a high end radio for slope sailplanes-- as I consider slope a pretty extreme environment for such a nice piece of machinery. Slope radios get rained on, impregnated with dirt and sand, scratched, dropped and mashed in backpacks on a routine basis. In that light a 10c makes the most sense for me if I can't have all the mixing I want in a 7C FASST package.

The rear removeable module to me is just one more component and set of connectors which can collect dirt, get loose or damaged and get in the way in general. But I realize I'm probably a minority in my reasoning.

nonstoprc

My Feedback: (90)

Well, the discussion seems leading toward whether 72mhz will stay, and if so for how long. I would bet that when the price of the 2.4hz equipement drops to the same level as 72mhz, 72mhz will start to become obsolete. Why pay the same for a technolog that is inferior?

Modularization is good idea, though the key point is what will be the baseline for the new radio. Remember the just-finished battle between blue-ray DVD and HD-DVD. One of the reasons HD-DVD failed is because it tried to be compatible with an old format (current DVD). Maybe there is a similarity here between 72mhz and 2.4ghz?

FlyerBry

My Feedback: (8)

I was the one who made the original comment concerning the antenna placement on the module and I hope my comment hasn't led anyone to believe this isn't a quality transmitter that should be considered. It is every bit as nice and in many ways nicer than the 9C. It is priced well against the competition but like most folks I strive to find the perfect transmitter for my hard-earned money. Between the JR and the Futaba I prefer the 2.4 technology in the Futaba hands down. Futaba has been using 2.4 for years in their industrial applications so they definitely have the expertise and it appears that they have done their homework before bringing their version of 2.4 to market. I like the ergonomics a little more on the JR 9303 and after seeing the 10C first-hand and comparing it to the 9303 I feel like Futaba could have done more with the transmitter case to make it more comfortable. It isn't that the 10C is bad in this respect; it is simply the fact that Futaba seems to lag behind the competition in a way that that seems rather simple to correct. I am referring to Futaba in general as I don't think the 10C is any better or worse than any of the other transmitters in the Futaba line. I don't have a problem with using modules to be backwards compatible either. I just wish they implemented the antenna on the top of the radio and made the module smaller. I guess what I am trying to say is don't read too much into my comment concerning the module setup. The 10C appears to be a very nice, quality transmitter from the short time I examined it. For instance, the new screen is nicer than the one used on Futaba's own 12 channel transmitter. I simply don't see the 10C as the perfect transmitter. In this respect the JR isn't any different. By all means, check it out for yourself before you make a decision.

wind junkie

My Feedback: (1)

Hi FlyerBry,

Thanks for the further clarification on the 10C quality. I would assume that for $600, the quality would be good. I'm glad to hear the screen looks better than other Futaba offerings.

I own 2 9303's-- one is the 2.4 version, and while it isn't perfect, it comes the closest for me of all available radios. I'm wanting a FASST system for the freq-hopping (which I also believe to be superior to the Spektrum approach) but mostly because the FASST RX receiver antenna wires are more easily positioned outside a sailplane carbon fuse than the spektrum dipole antennas with their remote circuit board boxes. In my eyes, if I want to fly high end carbon sailplanes with 2.4 Technology NOW, a FASST system is my best bet. I will miss model match and some aesthetics of the 9303, but it's either wait for another Spektrum antenna solution, modify the Spektrum dipoles to work "well enough" or embrace a FASST system.

I've been hounding the Spektrum reps via e-mail and at trade shows for a good sailplane RX antenna, and nobody seems too concerned with my small niche in the hobby, as evidenced by a general denial that the actual application of their systems inside small carbon fuselages fails to produce acceptible range checks. They tell me "it works" but don't have details on actual installations and when pressed for this they often revert to admitting they don't know if these sailplanes are full carbon or not.

Sorry to hijack this tread. If anyone is interested in this topic, please reference my results of extensive range check testing of current spektrum RXs:

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=670356

Note the above tests reference outside vs fully enclosed installations (not recommended), but I dont' see antenna lenghtening or use of the current Spektrum dipole remote modules as acceptible.

When the weather breaks I plan to do some more range checks with a newly acquired 7C FASST system as applied to a carbon fuselage for a typical easy installation. If these prove fruitful, it looks like a 10C will be my answer, at least in the short term.

Joe

pilotpete2

Since the 10C doesn't include a 72Mhz module, how can you say you're paying for the old technology?? OK,OK, you're paying for the 72Mhz buggy whip

OK, now the Blu-ray vs HD-DVD is a bit OT, but where did you ever get the idea that Blu-Ray players were not backwards compatible with DVD???? If they weren't, they would have bombed big time
Pete

nonstoprc

My Feedback: (90)

Where did you get the idea that the 10C contains 2.4 module only? Please refer to several posts posted earlier on the subject.

Backward compatible with DVD is not compulsorily recommnded by the Blue-ray standard body. Vendors can add extra optical pick-up units to read conventional DVDs and guess who pays teh cost?

FlyerBry

My Feedback: (8)

Maybe he was under that impression because in the very last sentence of my very first post I stated that very fact. The Futaba rep told me there will be no order option where the 10C ships with a 72 Mhz module. The transmitter ships only with the 2.4 module and the 72 module if desired must be ordered separately.

nonstoprc

My Feedback: (90)

Thanks for the clarification. This URL (http://www.flyinggiants.com/forums/f...utaba-10c.html) seems indicate the same, which I quote here

"# The transmitter can also operate in FM or PCM transmission mode; the FM-TW 10 RF module is required for this. It is then compatible with all current FM and PCM-1024 receivers in the robbe/Futaba range."

Some other info on 10C (or fasst)

1. faster frame rate than spectrum but still slower than airtronics (http://forums.radiocontrolzone.com/a.../t-233555.html). faster frame rate -> fast response time

Spektrum = 50Hz frame rate (even on PRO HRS) DSSS only talks to spek receivers
No built in telem thats extra

Futaba FASST = 75HZ frame rate FHDSS only talks to Futaba receivers
No telem

Airtronics = 100Hz frame rate FHDSS only talks to Airtronics receivers
No telem

2. 2048 resolution (http://2.4gigahertz.com/systems/futk9250.html). I do not know if 2048 is applicable to 2.4ghz mode.

leo3d

Hi guys, I want to know what are "Logic switches" its the same that flight conditions?
Thanks.
Bye.

Leo
www.extremeaerobatics.com.ar

summerwind

brought this up again for those waiting on this radio...............found a talk forum where there are a couple people tied to Futaba that confirm a couple things we all want to know........1 of them is whether or not it will be 2048 which it is, and one i wanted to know about was if it had quad bearing sticks........aparently not, but it does use dual bearings.

http://www.runryder.com/helicopter/t407043p4/

ljones5000

My Feedback: (2)

Most people (like me) already have the 72mhz modules. The option is there if you want to use them the way I see it.

systemlord

Can we guys who have a 9CHP just slap in a new module and be able to utilise the 2.4GHz system? I just spent $399.99 for a Futaba 3PKS 2.4GHz FASST system, the 3PK synthesized version looks very much the same as the 3PKS 2.4GHz FASST system. The only visual difference is the 2.4GHz FASST module is installed instead of the synthesized module. Also the 3PKS is backwards compatible with the synthesized version and/or FM crystal version if I choose to do so.

BaldEagel

WindJunki

One thing to check is if you can move the butterfly mixing off the throttle stick, you can't with the 9C but can with the Zap, this allows you to put the butterfly on the side sliders, important if you ever get into power gliders.

Mike

larshkj

To my understanding, it is not a 2048 (G3) system with the FM module. It will however be 2.4 GHz Multi compatible. And you will be able to use the 6014 receiver. With the 6014 receiver it will have a resolution similar to G3 resolution.
Let's just hope it has a lower latency than the 9C.
http://www.helifreak.com/showthread.php?t=60181

Lars