ramboy

Futaba has come out with some new transmitters that are FHSS, but not the FASST versions. What is the difference? I noticed the newer FHSS radios do not have the short antenna like the FASST radios.

BuschBarber

My Feedback: (2)

S-FHSS is a 2.4 protocol that enables Futaba to offer lower cost radios. It is not compatible with FASST, however, the 18MZ will be able to use both. Future updates to other Futaba radios may allow similar compatibility.

Silent-AV8R

The FHSS radio line, currently comprised of the 6J and 8J radios, are a lower cost more sport oriented line of radios. The FHSS is a frequency hopping scheme, but is less expensive to make. It is not compatible with the FASST line of radios. The antennas for the TX are internal. These radios have proven to be very reliable and robust. But they lack features of the higher cost FASST radios.

This page has a bit more info:

http://www.futaba-rc.com/technology/fhss.html

This chart shows the 6J (the 8J is the same, just 2 more channels):
http://www.futaba-rc.com/systems/feature-compare.html

TFF

Both radios frequency hop. FHSS only hops which is its defense against interference. Fasst hops and has a microprocessor that decides if the signal is correct before it implements it. Airtronics and Hitec are FHSS too.

Pippin

Due to lower output power Futaba FHSS has less range than FASST.

The Futaba FHSS antenna is not inside the Tx handle. Just open one Tx and check yourself.

Airtronics uses two different FHSS protocols along their line of air radios. The cheaper one called FHSS-1 is similar to Futaba or Hitec's FHSS. The second more advanced protocol called FHSS-3 uses the whole band, is faster and has some extra features like strong interference resistances, temperature resistance, low voltage (down to 1,2V) etc.

Silent-AV8R

I corrected my post about the antenna location. However, I challenge your statement that the J series are not full range radios. Lots of people are flying them with no range issues reported. I have no idea how the range compares to FASST radios, but the range of the J series is more than sufficient for normal flying (not just park flier, etc.).

Krysta

Pippin,

Although the Futaba 6J and 8J transmitter have slightly less power output than the 8FG, Futabas' engineers and designers go to great lengths to insure that every product performs correctly in the environment for which it has been designed. The team at Futaba has tested both the 6J and the 8J transmitters in "real world" conditions and found that they meet or exceeded parameters need for full range RC applications.


Sincerely,
Krysta
Product Development & Support Specialist
Futaba Service Center USA
[email protected]

rajul

My Feedback: (58)

Is the 14mz 2.4GHz considered a FHSS radio?

Silent-AV8R

The 14MZ is a FASST protocol

jcvt

My Feedback: (2)

Funny but there are 222,000 results when you search for ¨¨FASST vs FHSS ¨¨ , in Internet. If both system are rock solid why someone would choose a 7c instead the 8J?, same for the 6J and 6EX

Silent-AV8R

First off, the 6J actually has features the 6EX lacks. Like more model storage, 3 timers vs none, availability of triple rates (18 in fact), and several other programming features the 6EX lacks. Then figure in that the J-Series radios use a much less expensive line of receivers, and I think it becomes clear why the J series would be chosen. Similar arguments can be made for the 7C vs 8J as well.

The full range R2006GS RX is $45 vs the R617FS at $85. The R2008SB is $60 vs $140 for the R6208SB.

Seems like several good reasons for someone to choose one over the other. However, people who want the ability to update over the web (which the 6EX and 7C cannot do anyhow), even more powerful and flexible programming and the ability for 14/18 channels can go with the 8FG to 18MZ. Lots of choices for the consumer.

rmh

Tho some will say nay-
I can find no difference in actual range and ability to transmit /receive in systems which are very inexpensive.
Performance is NOT tied to cost.
There are some systems which are designed for short range operation and are very inexpensive
These typically are not good for long range -nor are they intended for same
The price of some 2.4 systems is almost whimsical - but some feel price is an indication of actual performance.
Features in more expensive radios ( more adjustment/programming) may/may not be worth the added costs -
Some will say a Lexus is a "better" car than a Hyundai.
performance is the true indicator but not may be the reason for purchase.

harphunt

The 7c and 6ex were introduced a few years prior to the j series which is why I own a 7c and not an 8j. [&o]

peace

jcvt

My Feedback: (2)

Well, one thing's for sure , Futaba are creating a lot of expectation!!!!!
The way I see it :
FASST: Is like the PCM of 2.4 world.
FHSS:Perfect for sport application.
FASSTest:For the Profeccional.

I will wait two or three months before next buy.

Silent-AV8R

FASSTest (Futaba Advanced Spread Spectrum Technology - extended system telemetry) is not just for the Pros. It has applications for many people. Anyone who wants to monitor receiver pack voltage, motor power pack voltage, engine/ESC/motor temperature, altitude, airspeed/location (GPS) and such will find the FASSTest equipment very useful. It is just now showing up, but I'm betting as time goes by it will prove to be a really valuable tool for all modelers.

TimBle

especially once all the add ons are available and the technology trickles down to 8FG level. But it looks like that is going to take a few years

Silent-AV8R

I doubt that it will take "years", but I know it will never be as quick as most people will want.

Pippin

Futaba 8FG FASST:

EIRP
P=16.77dBm=47.53mW


Futaba T8J S-FHSS:

EIRP
P=13.24dBm=21.095mW

As you can see, the 8FG has much more power than the T8J.

In a fast plane/in a fibre fuse/many servos and electronics put into the plane, I would prefer Futaba FASST over Futaba FHSS/S-FHSS. The difference is not the protocol itself but HF output power.

Well, full range seems to be defined by a marketing department. IMO, full range is the pilot's line of sight. Futaba or rather Hobico states that 600 size helis a more or less end of the line for Futaba FHSS/S-FHSS.

rmh

Do some actual comparisons
The very expensive systems have no better signal and interferrence protection than some $100 setups
features- yes - absolutely- lots of features
2.4 is getting pretty well sorted out and price of the chips used does not mean better recption/transmission.
if it does -let's see actual proof.
Range adv are pretty "iffy"

TimBle

I fear you are not correct there.

Charlie P.

Well said, TimBle.

The price is held down by reducing the sophistication.

rmh

Stab in the dark?
The FrSKy telemetry stuf seems as good as any when I actually test it - no failure at max distances
ditto for Spektrum stuff- or Futaba most expensive and inexpensive stuff-I do fly alongside the latest, best Futaba setups
-point being I simply have not seen any setup on 2.4 which has a clear range advantage .
claimed?
sure
actual - just whimsy.
Rant on -
The actual setup in the model makes the most difference -proper rx for application set up properly.

jcvt

My Feedback: (2)

How would you compare Futaba´s FHSS vs Airtronics´s FHSS-1_?

TimBle

You know full well that real world range at limited power output (2.4Ghz system are limited to 100mW) that receiver sensitivity plays the big role.
Its nearly impossible to test accurately. The best way is too determine the sensitiveity in db and convert that into a range.
At the close distance we typically fly more sensitive Rx means a stronger more reliable signal to interpret commands
Add speed of transmission, packet data structure and redundancy, error correction and hopping sequencing and you determine robustness to noise rejection. That + sensitivy = reliabilty of the link and the range.
Some cheaper systems may be good enough in normal club environments but in high noise areas the extra performance of systems like FASST has proven to be reliable. The others may well be good enough here to but IME the FrSKY FASST clones (TFR-8) has proven to not be as good as genuine FASST in high noise.

The potential buyer needs to weigh up how they intend using their radio to decide if FASST is worth the extra expense. But FHSS/S-FHSS is not nearly as good. The fact that other manufacturers are all now following the Futaba FASST system makes it failry obvious which direction was the right way to go from the start.

rmh

Who is following Futaba?
Do you mean using their original chipsets?
The Frsky I have evaluated is sold as a module for Futabaor JR txs -60 mw output -3072 resolution- It is very inexpensive but appears solid at extended ranges
As for "high noise areas"- that is quite subjective -how do you measure it?
Futaba introduced their newer systems to enable them to enter more of the market -and it appears to me the system works very well
I have seen holds on the latest most expensive FAAST- -no crashes bu tdefinate holds - I suspect the rx/ antenna setup in this instance.
Bottom line - I see NO provable ,effective range of operation differences in the most expensive or some (FrSKY in particular) inexpensive sets
My personal choice is Spektrum- and that is based on their features line up.
If I suspected the range/signal was marginal -I would not use it.
However having used it since it's introduction- I find no such issue.
If you believe your choice is better - that is your choice- I simply do not see any superior range.