For most of you guys this is nothing new, but for those that want to get rid of that silly track recoil and still haven't done so, this is the way I got rid of mine. Not to mention that I take any chance I get to shoot BBs at the camera.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20kR0R_7Gjg

Very nice! Looks like that Pershing has a lot of German armor to knock out!

That is a lot of Komodos....

nice as always. but yeah thats like what 18 komodos

Hey, some people have Dobermans ...

Track recoil sucks.

true on both acounts

All the more reason for Taigen to tweak the board to add a jumper or something will allow the user to turn off the track recoil. Given that this is largely targeted at the toy market, it can even be enabled by default, requiring the buyer to open the tank and move the jumper to disable the track recoil. But, it seems like it wouldn't be that hard. For me, I just don't hook the gun up to the recoil switch on the board. No gun sound, but I can't hear it very well anyways.

I totally agree, Philip, and that gives me an idea. I know Imex is working on a new board, and I keep saying that there are only a few things I want that would eliminate the need for me to even think about hobby grade on most of my tanks. If they would give us a board that:

1. has a provision to eliminate track recoil
2. have volume control from TX
3. turn smoke on/off from TX
3. lights on/off from TX
4. proportional speed on turret rotation (and maybe gun elevation, I could live without that if we had number 5)
5. Up/down gun movement from left stick forward/reverse
6. separate button for cannon fire

The idea I just had is: Let's start a separate thread and get a consensus of what should be included in a redesigned stock MFU and TX. We're getting a lot of vendor and manufacturer participation on the forum, let's use it to get this message across to the people that make tanks.

If I could buy an airsoft tank with the features listed here I would never have the need to spend all that time and money upgrading electronics and I could spend more time detailing the tank and ... actually driving it!

Just make it hobby grade with regular PWM servo signals and a separate receiver.. DO that an all the aftermarket boards can be added without having to buy a new radio,

Gary, similar thoughts but tweaked for me...

1. has a provision to eliminate track recoil (absolutely agree)
2. have volume control from TX (nice to have...but would be cool)
3. turn smoke on/off from TX (nice to have...but would be cool)
4. lights on/off from TX (nice to have...would be the first priority "nice to have" over the others simply for night time stalking or ambushes)
5. proportional speed on turret rotation (and maybe gun elevation, I could live without that if we had number 6) (absolutely agree)
6. Up/down gun movement from left stick forward/reverse (absolutely agree...could even keep the current elevation assembly. I could live without a servo doing it.)
7. separate button for cannon fire (absolutely agree...keep the separate button for the machine gun and engine start-up, change the machine gun lever to a button switch. HL got that one right)
8. ability to change the sounds with a micro-USB port (or microSD card)

I don't know a lot about radios and how channels are assigned. However, it would seem to me that Taigen and HL may already be using a 5- or 6-channel radio. Each stick seems to occupy 2 channels (one for up/down responses on the stick; one for the left/right responses). That makes 4 channels between the two sticks. I believe Taigen and HL use another channel for two of the controls - engine sound and machine gun. And, HL may be using half a channel for the main gun firing (has button for that on their controller). That would leave another half a channel available for continuous action (like Taigen's machine switch that causes the machine gun to fire as long as it is in the "on" position). Using that channel count, Taigen is using a 5-channel transmitter/receiver (no separate button for main gun firing sound). Seems that it wouldn't be too hard to give us items 6 and 7.

To prioritize the "nice to haves"...4, then 3, then 2.

My two cents...

I'm watching and do appreciate the input

Hi PhiliPat

Though your assumptions on how Heng Long and Taigen do their RC stuff would seem logical - It is not quite the case. There are no "Channels" to speak of at all. The information from the sticks and buttons on the radio are converted into a SINGLE data stream and this data stream is then received by the MFU and covered into the required actions. For example the data stream would follow a format like this
7E FF 06 12 00 00 01 FE E8 EF
With header info at the front of the message (7E FF) the data on what should be doing what (06 12 00 00 01) a checksum for date integrity (FE E8) and an end of message (EF). So there can be as many "channels" as you could want within the data stream. Because this data is sent in a particular order it is the reason the RC5HL/RC2TG are so particular with how you plug in the receiver channels. Both these units need to see the data in the order expected. Both the new HL and Taigen 2.4gHz units use common 2.4ghz transceivers that you can buy for $3-$4 off eBay. There is nothing 'special' about them

My point is that HL and Taigen are not really limited by what you might view as separate channels but rather the cost of implementation of the extra switches and components required to do what you would like. So you are completely correct it would not be hard at all to put more data (channels) into the stream. Which could instead be like this

7E FF 06 12 00 00 13 10 01 00 00 20 21 13 00 21 00 01 12 FE E8 EF

Pretty much all that you guys want is already available on other boards - and these boards cost $$ - There is a reason for it - The actual process of putting an extra switch on a radio to access that function/generate the control data costs. Likewise the cost of improving operation -The cost of proportional /directional control of the elevation is 4x more than the existing solution. Only 1 FET is reguired at present to operate the gun elevation- at least 4 are required for proportional /directional control (or a single more expensive driver chip). At some point HL/TGN have struck a compromise between function and cost.

There is one point missed in this debate and I think it is important - It is a bad idea to promote proprietary control - It would be far nicer for HL to adopt the existing RC protocols (Hobby grade). By doing so opens the development of user innovations and makes a HUGE range of existing products available for use. Look at the nightmare of IR battle to see why proprietary systems are a bad idea for the end user.

Finally, Asp does ALL of the points on your list AND more that you may not have even though of.

BUT (pt1.) It is Hobby Grade - it does require a programmable 8 channel radio - because you need lots and lots of switches to turn on/off all the functions, activate the user sounds and adjust volume.

BUT (pt2.) the parts cost alone for an ASP board is more than the cost of a RX18. And I am sure that it is the same for El Mod and others. I've tried putting cheaper components on the design but when I told Gary what this would mean he baulked at getting the board. And you know what Gary is totally correct and some point the sacrifice of quality for a cheaper board makes that board not worth it.

I have tried with ASP to bring all those features you have listed onto a single solution with the most simple installation possible for the lowest cost possible. And if Gary didn't convince me the change to bigger output motor drivers then ASP would be available now There are far too many on this forum that bag RCTA stuff and I suspect that ASP will probably get bagged for not being able to "make coffee" or "take the dog out for a walk". But hey - at least my M1Abrams starts up with the proper gas turbine engine sound and I didn't have to buy an El Mod to do it. NOR have I have to change ANY of the existing wiring (admittedly without rewiring the elevation motor I don't have prop control).

Oh yeah and NO DARN TRACK RECOIL

Cheers
Kevin G

Hey Kevin, I still want to try out the Asp when you get it to market. I think you have the right idea and you know if I can make it work, ANYBODY can make it work.

One of the things that's kept me from getting an abrams is the fact that you can't get the right sound, so don't forget to let us know when the Asp is available for purchase, my friend. The photos you sent of the new sound system are very impressive.

One more thing, I hope you don't consider me one of the guys that's "bagged" RCTA stuff here on the forum. I had my problems, but that was my own stupidity and no fault of the board. I've always said you make a quality product and I don't know any other guys that are more serious about making this hobby better than you are. I absolutely love the Komodos, (evidenced just by how many I have!) and for me any of my tanks that run on stock electronics absolutely MUST have a Komodo+.

Can't wait for that ASP to come out either. but in the end I'd rather wait and know that the motors aren;t going to fry it by being overloaded to easily. you vidoes that you have put out on it really make it something to behold. But im pretty sure that the last time I saw specs on the board that it could DO coffee just not espresso.

PS i got the parts i order the other day. RC2TG, MAKO2 and a couple of vipers. Ii'm looking forward to tearing down my Sherman and getting that stuff installed.

Bill

And the Asp won't walk the dog, but it has a provision for programming it to clean out the litter box for the cat. You have to have an RC Bulldozer for that job, though.

Hey, April Fool's day only comes once a year, I like to make the most of it.

It worked on me,I am lost

I also mentioned earlier whatever they do make it hobby grade with standard PWM servo signals. This will allow 3rd party developers to come up with innovative products.

I have been proponent all along of standardized IR( Tamiya) as the basic we all build from . IF Clark, RCTA, IBU or whoever want to expand IR to something more,great, but for the benefit and growth of the hobby every system needs to play together well at a basic level.

This market is to small to try and develop and patent a proprietary system. You will make zero money with it. Instead we need to work together so all consumers who buy our products, know full well they will work with each other. You don't want to fragment an already small market, I mean for heavens sake Taigen IR and Heng Long IR don't even play well together. This proprietary stuff is just not good for the overall growth and health of our hobby.

I come from a model railroad background where the NMRA has a broad set of standards. This allows consumers who buy products that are NMRA compliant,know with confidence that they will work together, Look At DCC for an example. I can buy any brand decoder and it will work on a DCC system.. It would be nice if we could move this hobby to the point that when you buy an IR battle tank, it will play at a basic level with all other IR tanks.

I suppose I should have specified earlier that when I talk about a stock electronics package that would eliminate the need for me to go to hobby grade I was talking about airsoft tanks. That's the main reason I got so excited about the Asp - it was specifically designed for airsoft. Kevin then added IR capability, but he tells me he'll have an airsoft version at a lower cost.

I think it's easy to get just a tiny bit of tunnel vision once you've been bitten by the IR battle bug, but we need to keep in mind that of all the 1/16 RC tanks sold today, over 80% of them are airsoft. And we all know that what's being sold today drives ... well ... pretty much the whole freakin' world. I'll be buying more tanks, and most of them will be airsoft, and I think that's why I'm so interested in a decent stock electronics package for airsoft tanks. I love detailing and upgrading the tank itself and adding all the details, but I don't particularly care for working on electronics, so a tank that has what I want in a dependable unit is just the thing to expand my army and still have plenty of time for road building, airbrushing, stowage creation, and mainly ... Driving them!

Of course, that's strictly my own selfish opinion based on what I want, and I know there will be plenty of guys that don't share my point of view.

Where'd you get lost, Mike? Maybe we can help you find your way.

Agreed. It would be nice for everyine if you could buy a tank that was IR and know that I would be able to take it to an event and at least try it out. I'm not saying that it should be a built battler right out of the box (It would be nice though). But the ability to buy one and play with each other whether it is Tamiya, Taigen or HL would be greatly received by all I think. I still wouldn't mind the ability to upgrade different features. Throw in a more robust board, change the radio out, or whatever I feel. But to be able to play with anther tank without having to worry about what brand it is would be awesome.

I can't wait for the ASP. I love airsoft tanks.

Don't want IR; I like airsoft.

I understand the dislike for proprietary stuff, but the hobby isn't big enough. Asking for others to adopt the Tamiya IR programming isn't standardization. It's simply one proprietary standard co-opted by others. The model train example is a good example of a standard established by an independent group.

For me, there are three things that kill my interest in the "hobby-grade" electronics. Price, complexity on the controller and a bias for IR. Price is the coffin...too high gets hard to swallow. Bias for IR is the lid because airsoft, which I want, is often an afterthought and poorly implemented. The nail in the coffin is the complexity on the controller. Extra knobs for turning stuff on and off are fine. But, as soon as it requires special stick movements to do stuff, then you've made it hard for my 10YO to learn. Hard learning is not fun driving. The basic controls should be easy to learn so that it's fun driving for me and the kids (i.e., future of the hobby anyways). If the ASP can answer those, I'll definitely look into it. Getting past the lid and the nail would make a slightly higher cost easier to accept. But, it does need to work with 480 motors. Need that for the heavy or fast tanks.

Again, my two yenners...

P.S. Kevin, thanks for the explanation of how the Taigen and HL controls work. That helps a lot!

DCC was invented by Lenz. They in turn opened up all the patents to other manufactures in the interest of growing the hobby.

The standard N scale coupler at one time was a Rapido product. There was a time if you bought train cars from different manufactures, they couldn't be coupled together. Rapido offered their design to the NMRA and said they would allow all manufactures to use it., which they did for many years. So in these cases, designs from manufactures in the market were freely given to others in the name of standardization.

Wondering what is wrong with track recoil

To many of us, track recoil is unrealistic. Yes we drive our tanks in a very unrealistic manor, but we do try to keep them as true to life as possible.

Herman