Originally Posted by
Jim.Thompson
I am happy to read that report Bert.
However, my history with them has not been such a happy one. There was a historic firmware problem, which has been remedied via an update which is installed in new receivers for some time now.
However, some of the early release X8R, prior to this update, have been associated with catastrophic failures.
Two threads documenting some of these:
https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/show...eiver-failures
https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/show...is-Rx-lock-out
While this problem has been "fixed", my personal experience in FrSky receivers has been shaken severely due to this history I regret to say. I could most likely purchase a new X8R receiver, install it in a plane and never have a RF connection problem.
However, it comes down to a confidence and trust issue for me due to the above. I would tremble before flying with one installed on my valued craft.
In all fairness, I always flash any receiver I buy to the update that I know works for me. I have had a few issues, but they were nowher near as dramatic as described in those links.
All I noticed, was a very occasionally (maybe once per month or so) only one function (always ailleron) responding a fraction of a second late. So little that I usually discarded it as a bit of turbulence countering my own imput, always so little that I only wondered a few seconds after the occurrance "huh? Was that me, or did the plane really not respond for a microsecond?".
Never lost a plane due to it, never even came into trouble because of it, never even remotely close to critical... Just enough to notice aftrwards that it happened again.
I never lost faith due to it, I just know that I need to flash any new receiver, and that's the end of it for me.
Originally Posted by
Jim.Thompson
I am beginning to realise that this project is not for me. Not just for the realities outlined by you above, but for other reasons that will make the last part of your explanation ("the tuning flights") simply impossible.
I have no access to a local, legal authorised flying field, and at this stage, it does not look like this will change.
I have been attending a flying event once per year, and otherwise just flying hand launched craft in a nearby paddock, probably breaking some law or other!
Here in my country, we are losing flying fields on a regular basis - the "squeeze" is on so to speak.
As a result, I will be unable to do multiple flight testing to evaluate and tune up the system, like you describe.
Quite despite this sober realisation, I will likely still go ahead and assemble a controller, set it up on a converted two stroke on the bench just for the exercise.
A bit crazy I know! But still will be a bit of fun.
Thanks again,
Jim.
Jim, I hear you WRT your local field-situation, but I have to say, you are giving up too early... A lot of what I explained about the use of telemetry, was for ME very important, because back when I started this, I ran head over heels into unknown territory, and I needed to use a more structured approach.
Most of it however is generic, and once known, for example the issue with that rich idle can be solved by simply setting it as lean as possible and use a servo slow down function. No need to first experience it, then do test flights and data-analyzing,.. Just follow the trodden path...
It is NOT so, that without telemetry and logging function, or without the possibility to fly test routines, tuning becomes impossible.
It is entirely possible to tune by ear to the rich side, and creep up on the proper settings by carefully adjusting.
I apologize for that message coming across the wrong way.