FASST questions - Inquiring minds want to know
10-31-2007, 10:44 PM
#1
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Hopkinton,
MA
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FASST questions - Inquiring minds want to know
I’ve seen a lot of posts concerning this but I’ve never seen anything close to an official response, so I thought I would post the question again to this forum. I want to apologize in advance if these questions have already been answered or if some of this comes off as a bit of a rant:
Why is the R606FS six channel spread spectrum receiver supported by the 6EX/2.4 transmitter and the 14 channel spread spectrum module, but not by the seven and eight channel SS modules? It sure looks like there are two different FASST standards; if not, can somebody please tell us what’s going on? While we’re on the subject, here are a few other questions:
1) If Futaba has changed the way FASST operates, presumably they’ve improved it. Why not publish the differences? If there’s a problem with the six channel systems will they be discontinued in the future?
2) If there are two different workable FASST standards, why does only the TM-14 support both of them? Given the cost to design and develop chips these days I would bet that there is only one version of the much touted custom FASST IC, and that the different modules’ channel counts and features are just the result of PCB strapping options in the modules. So, is the TM-14’s apparent compatibility to both the original and newer FASST standards merely for market differentiation purposes at the expense of the 7, 8 and 9 channel customer base? If so, I’ve got to say that Spektrum/JR treat their existing customers a whole lot better then Futaba does.
3) Why is Futaba making separate seven and eight channel modules? Why not just make the TM-8 and use it in the 7U, 8U, 9C and 9Z systems, similarly to how the TM-14 is used in the 12FG, 12Z and 14Z systems? (Link to Futaba’s chart: http://2.4gigahertz.com/modules/modules-receivers.html) The increased volume on a single module should reduce the cost and I would bet that the two modules are virtually identical (circuit-wise) internally anyway. In fact, as mentioned above, I suspect that all three of the modules are pretty much the same internally and almost certainly use the same IC
4) We know from the manual (http://manuals.hobbico.com/fut/tm7-manual.pdf) that the TM-7 requires the transmitter to be set to PPM encoding for the module to work. Will that also be true for the TM-8 and TM-14 modules? (BTW, this would be one possible answer to question 3) If this is not the case (i.e. the transmitters would be set to PCM1024 to use the TM-8) why not make a nine channel module which would better support the 9C and could still be used in all of the other aforementioned systems?
5) If all three modules require that the transmitter be set to PPM encoding, what was Futaba thinking of? Why didn’t they design their custom IC to use PCM1024 encoding? Isn’t PCM supposed to be better then PPM? Did they sacrifice PCM’s additional performance and functionality so they could sell the TM-7 and TM-8 to Hitec users? Here’s the link for Futaba’s modulation chart: http://www.futaba-rc.com/radios/modulation.html. Note that all of the supported transmitters support PCM1024. The 12 and 14 channel systems are not on the chart, but I believe that they also support PCM1024 in addition to PCM2048. Also note that the 3-channel car radios (which have been SS for a long time) also support PCM1024. Start the conspiracy theories going:-)
6) Notwithstanding all of the above, if the TM-7 and TM-8 modules are essentially identical (except for a strapping option on the PCB for the extra channel) what is causing the delay on the TM-8? Is it being held from the market intentionally to try to sell off all of the TM-7 modules before discontinuing them, is it due to some kind of technical difficulty within the TM-8 and TM-14 modules, or is Futaba trying to improve their offering in some sense by adding more features to the two non-shipping modules?
Like I said in the title, inquiring minds want to know.
Thanks a lot.
Norm S.
Why is the R606FS six channel spread spectrum receiver supported by the 6EX/2.4 transmitter and the 14 channel spread spectrum module, but not by the seven and eight channel SS modules? It sure looks like there are two different FASST standards; if not, can somebody please tell us what’s going on? While we’re on the subject, here are a few other questions:
1) If Futaba has changed the way FASST operates, presumably they’ve improved it. Why not publish the differences? If there’s a problem with the six channel systems will they be discontinued in the future?
2) If there are two different workable FASST standards, why does only the TM-14 support both of them? Given the cost to design and develop chips these days I would bet that there is only one version of the much touted custom FASST IC, and that the different modules’ channel counts and features are just the result of PCB strapping options in the modules. So, is the TM-14’s apparent compatibility to both the original and newer FASST standards merely for market differentiation purposes at the expense of the 7, 8 and 9 channel customer base? If so, I’ve got to say that Spektrum/JR treat their existing customers a whole lot better then Futaba does.
3) Why is Futaba making separate seven and eight channel modules? Why not just make the TM-8 and use it in the 7U, 8U, 9C and 9Z systems, similarly to how the TM-14 is used in the 12FG, 12Z and 14Z systems? (Link to Futaba’s chart: http://2.4gigahertz.com/modules/modules-receivers.html) The increased volume on a single module should reduce the cost and I would bet that the two modules are virtually identical (circuit-wise) internally anyway. In fact, as mentioned above, I suspect that all three of the modules are pretty much the same internally and almost certainly use the same IC
4) We know from the manual (http://manuals.hobbico.com/fut/tm7-manual.pdf) that the TM-7 requires the transmitter to be set to PPM encoding for the module to work. Will that also be true for the TM-8 and TM-14 modules? (BTW, this would be one possible answer to question 3) If this is not the case (i.e. the transmitters would be set to PCM1024 to use the TM-8) why not make a nine channel module which would better support the 9C and could still be used in all of the other aforementioned systems?
5) If all three modules require that the transmitter be set to PPM encoding, what was Futaba thinking of? Why didn’t they design their custom IC to use PCM1024 encoding? Isn’t PCM supposed to be better then PPM? Did they sacrifice PCM’s additional performance and functionality so they could sell the TM-7 and TM-8 to Hitec users? Here’s the link for Futaba’s modulation chart: http://www.futaba-rc.com/radios/modulation.html. Note that all of the supported transmitters support PCM1024. The 12 and 14 channel systems are not on the chart, but I believe that they also support PCM1024 in addition to PCM2048. Also note that the 3-channel car radios (which have been SS for a long time) also support PCM1024. Start the conspiracy theories going:-)
6) Notwithstanding all of the above, if the TM-7 and TM-8 modules are essentially identical (except for a strapping option on the PCB for the extra channel) what is causing the delay on the TM-8? Is it being held from the market intentionally to try to sell off all of the TM-7 modules before discontinuing them, is it due to some kind of technical difficulty within the TM-8 and TM-14 modules, or is Futaba trying to improve their offering in some sense by adding more features to the two non-shipping modules?
Like I said in the title, inquiring minds want to know.
Thanks a lot.
Norm S.
11-01-2007, 07:23 AM
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: mims,
FL
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: FASST questions - Inquiring minds want to know
im looking into the 7 c fasst system. i dont have your answers,but i can assure you its all about the money. if i have a seven channel system i will buy a seven channel reciever for it. the more options available the more sales they make. jr has great advertizing which is the reason they are popular. but futaba has better electronics. hope you find you answers.
