HarryC, I love to promote the hobby and love trying new things so any good info on a product is more than welcome with me
I like a lot of the Jeti features, fuel telemetry and the ability to shut the aircraft off from the radio is the bomb! I don't like the feel since it has the tray style
Signal wise I am neutral about since I haven't had any issues with futaba, I do the same setup in all my jets and I think most of signal issues that are not
just faulty equipment are placement of electronics causing issues. That being said for me to personally to switch at this time wouldn't be worth it since I
run SBus on everything and really the only thing im wanting in my next radio is fuel telemetry for my jets. All radios have pros and cons

FWIW, Jeti offers 2 style of transmitters:

DC is tray style
DS is handheld style

The DC was the first one released

yeah but the hand held is still flat and a bit wide for me.

+1

I thought the same thing about the Jeti handheld tx until I held one. It's 1/4" wider than my DX-18 but considerably narrower. It doesn't feel boxy because of rubber padding on the sides and back. It's nice and solid and overall feels just right to me. To each his own I guess.

Emerich Deutsch personally assured me that PowerBox WILL redesign the BAT 60 tx to their own electronic standards ( which are of the highest quality) and all current Weatronics rxs will be compatible.

David, So very glad to hear this! I switched to Weatronic just prior to the Powerbox acquisition. Have two Bat 60, 3 Gizmo 10-22 Gyro III, and 4 Micro 12. All function perfectly, in two FM scale jets using patch antennae, as well as std painted scale and sport jets.

Has he given you any idea of timing?

David S

Some really nice information Gents, thank you.

Really nice looking F-100 David, mine is powered by the original JetCat P-180 (predecessor to the P-200).

I'm really looking forward to JetPower 2017 in the fall (Sept 15th to 17th), where I can catch up with old friends (David G, Dave W, Marc S), to name a few, and to also make new ones. Speaking directly to the manufacturers and vendors is also priceless IMHO, and I'm like a kid in candy shop when it comes to all the accessories.

I was about to pull the trigger on a weatronics setup when they went down, I loved the pull back feature for brakes.

Passive from the standpoint that other higher priority transmissions have the ability to over power our class or bandwidth.
Our systems cannot be strong enough to cause interference with official use communication systems.

Hey DT,

Glad that you keep on posting here and you don't lose faith in this forum. This forum taught me a lot learning from people like you. Please don't lose the faith captain, I'm like a kid in a candy shop as well when it comes to our hobby and even more reading useful posts like yours.

Apologies once more you haven't seen me much in the field, caught somewhere between the baby and work, came to the field only a few times this year which is a real pity. Dubai's becoming very hectic these days.

Anyway, jumping back to the post, can you please remind me and everyone how does the Futaba FAAST system work? It locks down 2 x 2.4 frequencies per receiver at any point in time and shifting between them when needed, correct? What's FAAST's redundancy and when used in combination with redundant receivers ie a PB Royal what are the actual risks in our field? Does 2 receivers on a PB royal mean that FAAST locks down 4 frequencies? Please forgive me for my ignorance, I'm a mechanical engineer.

Futaba's been very stagnant in developments the last 8 years with the FAAST coming on board and there's too much silence from Futaba the last years or so with only upgrading the 18MZ to a WC model which is basically a color change. Futaba also launched the more competitive (in terms of price) 18sz, a downscaled version of the MZ but that's more a commercial move rather than a real technological development. JR (which has also served me for decades) seems not to be on a good track trying to survive. But less competition means less developments with Jeti being an exception? And this is a real worry when it comes to fields like ours, I'm really worried.

Your views please.

Tassos

Hi Tassos, thanks for the updates. I will try to post some information before the weekend or very soon after as unfortunately work commitments currently prevail.

Unbelievable how the OP is spamming these threads.

If you have something that works! Stick with it! Its that simple.

I love my Orange

Is there an estimated date when PowerBox will bring Weatronic back to the market? When I hear "redesign", I think a year or two, given the length of time needed for re-certification by EU and FCC

those are two mighty fine models you've got there Mr Searles!

[QUOTE=Vettster;12323575]Unbelievable how the OP is spamming these threads

I love my Orange [


/QUOTE]

What a load it rubbish, facile! Clearly you have completely missed the point of Darryl,s post. He is merely relating his great experience with his systems in a most hostile ref environment. Constructive, informative.

If if you love your Orange, great, but it may not work for others!


In reply to DS :
I spoke to Emmerich Deutsch at Weaton Park last year about Weatronics, which company he had just acquired. He did not give any specifics of time or tecnicalities but said the BAT 60/ 64 will be upgraded by Powerbox with the assurance that it would compatible with current Weatronics receivers. He clearly held the Weatronics system in very high regard, as I do, but he will make the transmitter even better and make the electronics to PB standards, which are as good as they come.

It will not be rushed and will take time. As soon as I know details I will pass it on. In the meantime I continue to have great success with my Weatronics systems using JR12x transmitters and module systems,

My Bat 60 is in use but not in jets as at the moment it has no Giga Control or gyro capability, that may change after Powerbox sorts it all out.

That's all I know at the moment, but If I hear more I will post it here.

And for the critics, I have never had any commercial connection with Weatronics or Powerbox. I use their systems because I believe they are exceptionally good, None better, although I believe Jeti are catching up!

David.

The one thing I find odd is that some here deride Jeti kit on the back of some sort of dislike of the US distributor.

I find most car salesmen obnoxious.
Doesn't stop me buying the car of my choice...

> It locks down 2 x 2.4 frequencies per receiver at any point in time and shifting between them when needed, correct?

It's been a while since I worked on these for cell base stations, but it is probably a rake receiver. The idea is you take multiple antenna data and run it through a processing unit called an fpu (involving complex number signed math) and then combine the individual signal energies into a resultant signal with high signal to noise ratio.

Anyways, on the practical side, an old but interesting video from Spektrum on noise immunity:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QaoXipp_288

Just to put it out there,,No radio system can garauntee that there will never be a signal loss,,period
Jeti,Jr,Futaba,Spektrum,Graupner,Weatronic, ETC. ETC.
yes I do think Jetis Product is the best out right now,

Futaba FASST and FASSTest system use a combination of frequency hopping and direct sequence spread spectrum - as most systems do these days. On the other hand, the Spektrum receivers use a chip set that has significantly lower receiver sensitivity than others - which is one of the reasons that they require multiple satellite receivers to maintain a link.

That video is old and is a justification for Spektrum going from 2 static frequencies (DSM2) to frequency hopping (DSMX) - which again other systems did from the start.

Bob

If I could get more channels, or shoot more 1221 JR rx's, I'd stay with my trusty JR 12x MV and I'm still running DSM2!

I've never thought I've ever had any kind of interference to speak of.

If it ain't broke.....

And I've already given my deposit for a Jeti.

When a manufacturer decides who will distribute their products and sell them at the retail level as well, said distributor is to some point a representative of the company. Obviously there are more than a handful in this forum who find this representative's tactics and posts less than professional which to many is enough to cause them to vow to not purchase a Jeti product. I was in that boat but over time I softened on this issue but there were some who had problems with the Jeti DS-16 that were ignored and blown off by the distributor that should have been covered under warranty. For that reason I find it hard to consider their products.

As mentioned earlier one of the major contributing factors at our club is Drones, without generalizing many of the drone guys are a decent bunch, very sensible and have some really nice equipment (DJI, Yuneec etc.) which are CE and FCC approved I might ad. However, we also have some other gadgets (home built FPV’s to mention a few), which are NOT regulated and/or approved, and are different to the common DRL FPV’s. Hover one of these close to your TX and your telemetry warning goes crazy (Spectrum DX18).

Anyway, up until about 18 months ago there were NO signal issues to speak of (and it had been like this since we migrated from the older FM days with the Peg and Board System), but lately there has been approximately a dozen signal related incidents with about 60% of those resulting in a crash.

With all the data that we collected the most venerable system has been DSM2. This system would go into failsafe – with the most common settings being HOLD (and a few other settings such as gear down, throttle to idle, etc. depending on the users preferences), and in ALL these cases the RX never recovered, they simply maintained their last controlled input until impact. On other occasions with DSMX, FHSS and FASST the models in question also went into HOLD, but recovered after several seconds and a safe landing was made, albeit with a shaky pilot at the helm (only one FHSS crash to date).

I must also highlight that all the models in question; the installations were scrutinized by myself (and other experienced modelers), with single RX setups having dual battery redundancy, and Two RX setups using Power Management Units. One of the most common errors with Two RX setups is the guys would mirror both RX antenna’s so we would make them change this so that all four antenna represent the four axis. The point being that poor installations and setups were unlikely to be the root cause.

So we asked ourselves what has happened, what has changed recently, and several factors seemed very plausible (including new military activity), so we started to collect data, which of course can be very subjective. To know for sure you would have to fly the same model, the same routine, whilst changing manufacturing RF equipment, etc. and this would be impossible, so I decided to do the following and use Gliders, three 6-meter gliders.

WHY, because the're big, they fly high and far, and there would be no contributing external influences in the cockpit/cabin (such as ECU, Fuel Pump, Smoke pump, Ignition, and so on), just two receivers, a power distribution unit, and some servos. All gliders were 6-meter wingspan; all had the same power distribution unit, RX’s and antennas mounted in very similar locations, but all had different manufacture Radio Equipment. Not perfect I know but at least you can collect and record data from three models that have all flown at the same time and in similar parts of the sky.

The results from my 6-meter Ventus were recorded via my JETI telemetry and PowerBox Competition SRS with Zero Lost Frames and Zero Holds. Typically the TX Q-line data will remain almost straight at 100% but on this day there was certainly some periodic RF Noise. Under the same conditions the gliders with other systems recorded almost 100 Lost Frames and several Holds.

To conclude both Weatronic (BAT 60), and JETI are handling “our sometimes erratic”, high noise and hostile RF environment with excellent results.



Additional Information:

FCC Part 15 limits RC 2.4GHz to 247mW and CE conformity limits it to 100mW (perhaps some of you guys can confirm and elaborate on this). Over here some home made units will transmit at extremely high power outputs.

JETI telemetry has a really nice feature where you can download/record your A1/A2 and Q signals. A1 and A2 is the RX signal antenna strength (that the TX receives), and Q is the overall performance of how well the RX understands.

Tassos: Futaba FASST shifts frequency hundreds of times per second, so there are no signal conflicts or interruptions – and no need for frequency pin. As far as the PowerBox protocol works it registers the Two RX’s and uses both RX’s at the same time. JETI does it differently as each RX is bidirectional so Two RX’s is like having four. The P/Box will use the strongest RX (bidirectional signal), and switch automatically should the other one be stronger due to airplane orientation.

Here are some interesting links:

http://www.thenational.ae/uae/201609...drone-activity

http://www.thenational.ae/uae/uae-av...one-disruption

https://www.rc-thoughts.com/

http://www.futabarc.com/faq/faq-fasst.html

Darryltarr,
I am curious where your field is located?. Others seem to know you but I don't.

The "higher end" multirotors (i.e., DJI, Yuneec) use a Wi-Fi link to send their video. Wi-Fi uses Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum to spread the signal over a wide bandwidth so that to other users of the band, it really just looks like a rise in the noise floor. Another system using DSSS or a combination of DSSS and FHSS, like most RC radios, can work around a DSSS-based Wi-Fi link without much problem. We've actually flown a UAV with a 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi link on the aircraft to transmit video to the ground and the Futaba FASST system has no problems with it - at least not that we noticed.

The "cheap" drones, especially the FPV ones, use a simple FM video transmitter, which can be in the 2.4 GHz band or the 5.8 GHz band. If its in the 2.4 GHz band, it can cause problems with 2.4 GHz RC systems as it is a noise source that is much more concentrated in a given area of the spectrum. Since DSM2 chooses two frequencies in the 2.4 GHz band and then doesn't change them, its understandable that a 2.4 GHz FM video link could clobber it. If the video link happens to be close to the 2 frequencies that DSM2 originally selected when it was turned on - bang, your link is dead. Other RC systems that frequency hop, can work around a 2.4 GHz FM video link, but they usually become unreliable in that situation, as you have seen.

A contributing factor is that in order to get a good, reliable video link, most FPV guys run as much transmit power as they can get (legally or otherwise).

The solution is to force all of your FPV guys to go up to the 5.8GHz band. Most FPV guys in the US are already there it seems. We have FPV users at our club (a fair percentage of the "regular" flyers at the club are messing around with FPV racers...), but their video links are all on 5.8 GHz, so it hasn't been a problem.

An interesting and related story... We were working on a UAV research project where we needed a high-power video link, so we went out and bought a 1.2 GHz FM video transmitter (1 watt). We installed it on our aircraft and did a ground range check - which was OK. Unfortunately, shortly after launch, the RC link (Futaba FASST) went into failsafe and the plane landed in the trees. Subsequent investigation with a spectrum analyzer revealed that the 2nd harmonic of the 1.2 GHz video link, which was right in the middle of the 2.4 GHz band, was almost as powerful as the primary frequency at 1.2 GHz and was also very wide. The result was that the Futaba FASST link checked out on the ground OK, but suffered significant range reduction in the air.

Needless to say that we "adjusted" the cheap video transmitter with a 5 lb sledge hammer to eliminate the problem from reoccurring...

That same "adjustment" technique could be applied to the errant drone that wanders too close to a pilot on the flight line!

Bob

Needless to say that we "adjusted" the cheap video transmitter with a 5 lb sledge hammer to eliminate the problem from reoccurring...

That same "adjustment" technique could be applied to the errant drone that wanders too close to a pilot on the flight line!

Bob


I have used the same practices on some of my models. Glad to hear others have tried it.