XtremeLink™ - 2.4GHz for Futaba, JR, and Hitec radios

[JimDrew]

We are pleased to announce that we will be releasing a new product in the near future that will allow you to upgrade you exiting Futaba, JR, and Hitec radio systems to 2.4GHz.

Our system replaces the existing transmitter RF module and includes a brand new receiver.

This is a professional upgrade, not a park flyer upgrade. Our system offers up to 5 miles of range, no frequency conflicts, the ability to have up to 390,000 people flying at the same time, and gives you the option of having telemetry data.

Information and pictures of the prototype units are on our website.

http://www.xtremepowersystems.net/xtremelink.php


The telemetry system interfaces to the receiver. The telemetry sensors are all daisy-chained together (each unit plugs into the next, with the last unit plugging into the receiver). We are going to release the information on how the interface works so that anyone can create their own sensor. The interface is serial, with a special protocol and packet structure. We will be providing complete PIC micro assembly source code for a sample sensor. It will be easy to simply add a sensor and pass the data to receiver using the provided code.

[pbunnstf]

Budget price?

[JimDrew]

MSRP for the "flight pack" will be $179. This includes your choice of transmitter module (JR, Futaba, or Hitec) and one 8 channel receiver. MSRP for the 8 channel receiver will be $99. MSRP for the 10 channel receiver will be $119, and MSRP for the 16 channel receiver will be $149. MSRP for the telemetry system will be $129. Additional sensors will vary in price, depending on what they are. Considering a good 10 channel PCM receiver is right at $200 street price, this system is quite a bargain, besides having its numerous other advantages.

[jbeanelliott]

Jim,

Sounds like a great product. A few questions if you have the time:

Will the rx antenna for the receiver work in carbon fuselages?

Can the rx antenna be mounted on a shielded extension cable away from the receiver electronics?

Does the rx antenna have to oriented vertically or can it be mounted horizontally to reduce drag?

-John Elliott

[MatC]

Nice idea, and not a bad price, especially if it includes the downlink.
A few questions... ;)

Is there an option to mount the receiver aerial inline with the receiver, rather than sticking out like that?

How are more receivers bought, is there a unique code that we need to send to you, or can it be configured to different transmitter modules? Is that what the program button on the receiver does?

Is there any interference from all the other 2.4GHz users? How does someone with a wireless network impact on those 390 000 available modules?

Any idea when you're thinking of getting CE approval ?

Is B/TM the downlink module input?

How do you extract the telemetry from the "transmitter"? Or is that another module?

[jbeanelliott]

Jim,

It looks like some of my questions about Rx antenna mounting have been
answered in the other forum at:

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=566018#post6022025

-John Elliott

[JimDrew]

We already have CE approval.

There are not 390,000 modules available. You can have up to 390,000 modules in use at the exact same time! There is 1 in 18.664 quintillion chance of having a "frequency" conflict, and that is only if we sold that many receivers + 1. :)

There will be an option to mount the antenna remotely, but it is HIGHLY unlikely that anyone would ever need it. It "sticks out" only 1.2".

B/TM is the battery/telemetry interface for the receiver. The transmitter module has a plug inside of it for the telemetry control unit. It sits on top of your transmitter, mounted in the old (and now unused) transmitter antenna hole. There is a cable that connects the telemetry control unit and the transmitter module.

The receiver can be mounted anyway you like.

[gedaso]

Any plans for a module to fit Multiplex MC4000 radios ?

[MatC]

CE Approval: great :)

I figured that wlan and all the rest of the 2.4GHz things would take up bandwidth, meaning you get less than 390,000 simultaneous modules. Although if there are a third of a million planes in the sky, wlan is the least of your concerns.

Still not sure how you select "channel" ? Do you make sure you are the only transmitter in range and press the program button on the receiver?

[JimDrew]

The transmitter and receiver are bound together so that only they will talk to each other. If you have multiple receivers (multiple R/C aircraft, cars, etc.) you can use a single transmitter to learn all of the receivers. There is a rather large portion of 2.4GHz that is reserved specifically for ISM and does not conflict (frequency) with other 2.4GHz devices (like the Spektrum radio system).

[Kosmic]

JimDrew,

Whats the real range (at 50mW and 100 mW output power)? 5 mile is the theoretical range in the perfect condition ..

Nevertheless I see that your Maxstream RF module use frequency hopping. That a really good thing to reduce interference at minimum.

Kos

[JimDrew]

100mw is 5 miles air <> ground, unobstructed. 50mw is a little more than 1/2 of that.

[Kosmic]

Did you do some real field test or that the number from Maxstream ? Even at 100mW I really doubt you can have a range of 5 mile. Mainly because of the frequency used (2.4Ghz).

Anyway your product look great and considering the technology I think the price is fair too!

Kos

[bruff]

Any news when you are talking pre-orders?
Thanks,
Bob
PS Hope to see you at the 2007 Arizona Electric Festival

[JimDrew]

The numbers come from a combination of real world field testing to verify the paper numbers. I flew a foamie to 4947 feet (yes, out of site), and was able to bring it back with no problems. Realistically, nobody is going to go that high without binoculars strapped to their head. :)

[JimDrew]

We do not take pre-orders for products.

[AnthonyRC]

Have you tried the compatibility between this system and existing aerial video systems?. I know that the spektrum system isn't happy to have 500mW of 2.4GHz RF emitted from the plane.

[JimDrew]

No, we have not tested with video systems. According to the FCC, the frequency allocated for our units and video broadcasting is different, so we should not have any conflicts.

[AnthonyRC]

It might be worth testing this. The specktrum modules should theoretically not interfere either, but relatively high powered video transmitters emitting near the sensitive receiver seem to cause problems.

If indeed you are right, and 5 mile range is possible even with a 2.4GHz transmitter on the plane, then this system would be extremely interesting for flying by video.

One more question, will the antenna on the Tx end be detachable?, and use a standard connector? If you can obtain 5 miles using the tiny antennas shown in the pictures then a nice high-gain patch, or Yagi, should bump up the range significantly.

[jimimonet]

How is the AMA going to classify this, have you looked into it yet. I think the rules state 72 MHz for air other than parkfliers.

[pda4you]

How is the AMA going to classify this, have you looked into it yet. I think the rules state 72 MHz for air other than parkfliers.

Ummmmm Nope....they are very supportive and there is no such restriction on 2.4GHz for Parkies only.

http://www.modelaircraft.org/spreadspec.asp

Mike

[jimimonet]

My club won't allow 2.4 GHz for anything but electric parkflyer types. I assumed they knew what they were talking about.

[pda4you]

My club won't allow 2.4 GHz for anything but electric parkflyer types. I assumed they knew what they were talking about.

Well considering the only 2.4GHz air system out (Spektrum) is ONLY for parkie use that makes sense, for now at least.

In fact I know a number who have used the Spektrum in very large planes - all with no issues, but when the guys who make the systems say Parkflyer only they likely have a fair reason for that.

But this new module - working as promised would need a "lift" of that ban :) ;)

Mike

[ZAGNUT]

what i want to know is how i can get 12 bit resolution when my encoder is only 10 bit....don't make sense to me.



dave

[JimDrew]

The encoder outputs a signal in a particular time, that time is measured with a 12 bit counter. That time is sent to the receiver as 12 bit number. Regardless of what the resolution of your transmitter is, the data sent to the receiver is 12 bits. If you have horrible resolution on the transmitter output, then that will be the same for the receiver. I have not seen any transmitters (that our system works in) that are even mediocre. They are all good, using 10 bits or better.

[llamatrails]

***AnthonyRC: Have you tried the compatibility between this system and existing aerial video systems?. I know that the spektrum system isn't happy to have 500mW of 2.4GHz RF emitted from the plane.
***JimDrew: No, we have not tested with video systems. According to the FCC, the frequency allocated for our units and video broadcasting is different, so we should not have any conflicts.

Jim,
I think AnthonyRC was referring to more localized video broadcasts, not commercial.
For aerial photography, we have the video signal being sent back to us on the ground from the heli/plane on a 2.4g transmitter.
See http://runryder.com/helicopter/t261489p1/?highlight=spektrum and http://runryder.com/helicopter/t222052p1/?highlight=spektrum for a couple of reports of problems.

Is this something that you can test for us ?

TIA,
Rick

[Nicetie]

what i want to know is how i can get 12 bit resolution when my encoder is only 10 bit....don't make sense to me.



dave

Dave, Well....It's er....uh like this: Ya know when you splice a piece of
300 lb test fishin line in your 12 lb test line ....makes it all 300 lb test line
doesn't it? :p
Ken ;)

[AnthonyRC]

***AnthonyRC: Have you tried the compatibility between this system and existing aerial video systems?. I know that the spektrum system isn't happy to have 500mW of 2.4GHz RF emitted from the plane.
***JimDrew: No, we have not tested with video systems. According to the FCC, the frequency allocated for our units and video broadcasting is different, so we should not have any conflicts.

Jim,
I think AnthonyRC was referring to more localized video broadcasts, not commercial.
For aerial photography, we have the video signal being sent back to us on the ground from the heli/plane on a 2.4g transmitter.
See http://runryder.com/helicopter/t261489p1/?highlight=spektrum and http://runryder.com/helicopter/t222052p1/?highlight=spektrum for a couple of reports of problems.

Is this something that you can test for us ?

Thanks for asking for clarification on this. The lack of a quick answer on this has me a little worried that it suffers the same as the Spektrum... if so, its very unfortunate. 5 mile range is great, but my eyes aren't quite that good, flying by video with that kind of uplink range would be really something.

[JimDrew]

This technology comes from MaxStream's UAV technology. They have up to 30 miles of range on their high-end system and they are flying some of these UAVs via a video link.

In reference to the question about resolution. Most transmitters output 12 bit PPM to the RF module, not 10 bit. The receivers only do 8 bit to 10 bit conversions. There is no way to magically make the output better than the input, but we can give you the full output of the input.

[Brett_Warwick]

Personally i smell a rat.

I looks to me like your taking an "Xstream OEM RF module" and adapting it for RC.

http://www.maxstream.net/products/xstream/oem-rf-module.php

It will take a bit more than that and getting it approved for RC use will be another thing.

I might be wrong but time will tell.. Sorry to be negitive

[hilgert]

Personally i smell a rat.

I looks to me like your taking an "Xstream OEM RF module" and adapting it for RC.

http://www.maxstream.net/products/xstream/oem-rf-module.php

It will take a bit more than that and getting it approved for RC use will be another thing.

I might be wrong but time will tell.. Sorry to be negitive

In fairness to Jim, he has taken an off-the-shelf system and put it into his module, and I think that's a good thing. What it means is that the TX/RX end (exclusive of the RC adaptation by Jim and his crew) is already developed and tested in general by the supplier. It's use in RC devices is another issue entirely, and that's what some of the debate is about (and the associated hype).

Spektrum did much the same thing with the Unigen module (which, in turn, is based on the Cypress chip set). They, however, determined after years of testing that the one-way link reliability was not up to snuff with only one RX receiver/antenna. Eventually they went with two recievers and two antennas in the RX due to microwave multipathing (which cannot be avoided in this situation with 2.4Ghz - the issue is whether is is noticeable or not).

So, if there is a rat to smell, it's not because a modular approach was taken (an approach I happen to like in this case). I'll defend Jim's approach (not sure on choice either way) on this particular issue (using an existing technology for the RF portion).

Many of us have issues with the general claims on how the technology, in conjunction with the overall design, will actually perform as hyped in the real world of RC (with wildly rotating orientations and such) once it is released in mid-October (assuming that date is still on target).

-Hilgert

[JimDrew]

Personally i smell a rat.

I looks to me like your taking an "Xstream OEM RF module" and adapting it for RC.

http://www.maxstream.net/products/xstream/oem-rf-module.php

It will take a bit more than that and getting it approved for RC use will be another thing.

I might be wrong but time will tell.. Sorry to be negitive

A rat is right... that module is huge (and expensive). We are using a module that is designed for our application by MaxStream.