I'd like to chime in on this.
I like the idea, in theory of a highly configurable system. However I learned from my time supporting the IBU that the combinations of boards, radio systems
and implementations is nearly limitless. I can't imagine how someone could support the TCB with it requiring separate ESCs and sound systems;
coupled with whatever radio system you use it with and the possible combinations boggle the mind.. You can of course sell complete systems, which is
how some sellers control the scope of their support but then that's the first step in limiting the possibilities and driving the initial cost up.
I'll come right out and say it: I bit off more than I was willing to chew in terms of supporting the IBU system. The amount of time I spent trying to figure out what someone had done
or replicate the conditions they had created was monstrous. I have no doubt I could have approached the problem more scientifically, methodically but I for one was overwhelmed
almost immediately when sales began. It wasn't so much product issues but rather poor preparation on my part. I have so many different radio systems I acquired in
an attempt to replicate what I was seeing in 'the field'. I can see it could be worse for the TCB.
The other side of me, the pure user side wants my toys to be effortlessly sophisticated, very likely a pie in the sky ask. Complexity and ease of use more likely than not
are mutually exclusive...
I have 5 TCBs, 2 that need the chips replaced and 3 later corrected versions . I've used none of them but I'll get around to them some day.
I hope that someone somewhere resurrects the TCB, I still believe it is a worthy product.
Jerry