HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Aug 29, 2014, 02:49 PM
Xtreme Power Systems
Lake Havasu, AZ
Joined Jun 2005
15,779 Posts
We manufacturer 2.4GHz radio systems (modules), not transmitters. Our advertised system is definitely "complete". That system consists of a transmitter module and receiver and/or expander. It does not include a handheld box. That is the confusion.

We have been working on a transmitter with the intent to someday go to market with it. That disclosure was a decision that resulted in me taking XPS back entirely (I created it). I wasted an incredible amount of time and money working on the transmitter project instead of more viable broad range products. That basically tied up 2 years of my time, and I am just now starting to get back to where I wanted to be.
JimDrew is online now Find More Posts by JimDrew
RCG Plus Member
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Aug 29, 2014, 03:15 PM
Rangers Lead the Way
Joined Mar 2010
2,010 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by prefabu View Post
My Hitec A9's link has been perfect, but I still bought a Taranis because the a) programming was more flexible, and b) it was clear after a few years of waiting that the XPS transmitter was unlikely to make it to market. I think the XPS technology looks a lot better than FrSky's, but a "complete" system does not exist.
First, you are lucky regarding the Hitec radio link. Their radio link cost me 2 planes (why I switched to XPS) and there are numberous incidents with lockouts on the Hitec equipment. The jet / big airplane guys won't touch Hitec.

The radio itself is hard to beat. It is excellent in feel, the programming puts others to shame, and the screen is the best there is out there. My only complaints are the lower resolution, which has been adressed in the 9X. And there is more going on here than just numbers. The A9 flies much better than other radios I have had even though on paper, the others should outperform it. Move to the XPS RF system, and you have a top combo.

I have to laugh at all the Futaba and JR guys going bonkers trying to program a simple mix into their 12x or their 14mz, when you get there in about 5 screen taps on the A9...

Which gets to my next point, and that is the 3216 TX box. My opinion, for the little it's worth, is that the TX box is a third rail XPS should go nowhere near. Because no matter which one is chosen, almost no one will like it except for the narrow user group that already used that box and that brand. Far better for XPS to develop variousTX boards that other people can plug into their favorite box.

As an additional service, and to approach the complete product, XPS could offer turnkey conversions: if you have a supported TX, you send the box in and XPS does the gut transplant for you (for a fee of course).
TTRotary is offline Find More Posts by TTRotary
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2014, 06:19 PM
Registered User
Joined Feb 2004
190 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by TTRotary View Post
First, you are lucky regarding the Hitec radio link. Their radio link cost me 2 planes (why I switched to XPS) and there are numberous incidents with lockouts on the Hitec equipment. The jet / big airplane guys won't touch Hitec.

The radio itself is hard to beat. It is excellent in feel, the programming puts others to shame, and the screen is the best there is out there. My only complaints are the lower resolution, which has been adressed in the 9X. And there is more going on here than just numbers. The A9 flies much better than other radios I have had even though on paper, the others should outperform it. Move to the XPS RF system, and you have a top combo.

I have to laugh at all the Futaba and JR guys going bonkers trying to program a simple mix into their 12x or their 14mz, when you get there in about 5 screen taps on the A9...

Which gets to my next point, and that is the 3216 TX box. My opinion, for the little it's worth, is that the TX box is a third rail XPS should go nowhere near. Because no matter which one is chosen, almost no one will like it except for the narrow user group that already used that box and that brand. Far better for XPS to develop variousTX boards that other people can plug into their favorite box.

As an additional service, and to approach the complete product, XPS could offer turnkey conversions: if you have a supported TX, you send the box in and XPS does the gut transplant for you (for a fee of course).
Sounds right to me!.....
tande is offline Find More Posts by tande
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 30, 2014, 02:00 AM
Registered User
RyanNX211's Avatar
Upper Arlington, Ohio
Joined Dec 2007
1,456 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by TTRotary View Post

As an additional service, and to approach the complete product, XPS could offer turnkey conversions: if you have a supported TX, you send the box in and XPS does the gut transplant for you (for a fee of course).

I wonder if Tony Stillman could do that. He converted my old Krafts
RyanNX211 is offline Find More Posts by RyanNX211
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 30, 2014, 08:58 AM
PGR
Low AltiDude
PGR's Avatar
United States, CA, Costa Mesa
Joined Jun 2004
7,870 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by TTRotary View Post
As an additional service, and to approach the complete product, XPS could offer turnkey conversions: if you have a supported TX, you send the box in and XPS does the gut transplant for you (for a fee of course).
The problem I see with this is it significantly increases the liability burden. XPS already has to assume liability for for their products, and there's a very real potential that they'd have to assume liability for the entire transmitter if they do the modification.

For example, If XPS converts a TX then they could easily end up in court if someone was injured because a gimbal pot (for example) failed later. I imagine XPS would be exonerated if they could prove that the failure had nothing to do with XPS components or the work they did, but these days it's often less expensive to just settle than mount a successful defense.

Pete
PGR is offline Find More Posts by PGR
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 30, 2014, 11:04 AM
↓↘→ + (punch)
theKM's Avatar
central PA.
Joined Sep 2004
20,186 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by TTRotary View Post
Which gets to my next point, and that is the 3216 TX box. My opinion, for the little it's worth, is that the TX box is a third rail XPS should go nowhere near. Because no matter which one is chosen, almost no one will like it except for the narrow user group that already used that box and that brand. Far better for XPS to develop variousTX boards that other people can plug into their favorite box.
Although they make sense for XPS, I really don't have a great desire for the boards. All Tx's have a resale value, so the total cost of ownership is the host radio plus the board... as opposed to selling the original tx to offset some of the cost of the new system, some may even cover the entire cost of the system. plus, not to mention that most radios don't have "all three position switches" that the xps3216 will, so you're keeping around a case that you'll either have to swap out switches or wont be as capable.

Some people erroneously (not saying you are, but others have) say that they like how their current system programs... but all of that changes with the board swap, it stops being whatever your transmitter was before.

Like, a board for the Taranis. The one thing that is barely adequate about it is the physical Tx hardware. put XPS board in that, eww.
theKM is offline Find More Posts by theKM
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 30, 2014, 02:02 PM
Rangers Lead the Way
Joined Mar 2010
2,010 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by theKM View Post
Although they make sense for XPS, I really don't have a great desire for the boards. All Tx's have a resale value, so the total cost of ownership is the host radio plus the board... as opposed to selling the original tx to offset some of the cost of the new system, some may even cover the entire cost of the system. plus, not to mention that most radios don't have "all three position switches" that the xps3216 will, so you're keeping around a case that you'll either have to swap out switches or wont be as capable.

Some people erroneously (not saying you are, but others have) say that they like how their current system programs... but all of that changes with the board swap, it stops being whatever your transmitter was before.

Like, a board for the Taranis. The one thing that is barely adequate about it is the physical Tx hardware. put XPS board in that, eww.
Re: the boards - My response there would be to just swap the old board back in. Should be easy.

You are right regarding programming and it is good to remind people that this changes. There were comments from Jim a while back that A9 screen functions would be supported in 3216, so I assume that includes the interface, which is a good thing. As for the other radios.... I hear so many complaints about how un-intuitive JR/Spektrum, Futaba, and Airtronics programming is that anything would likely be an improvement, and I'm sure replacing a clunky interface would be foremost in Jim's mind as he develops. I have had first-hand experience with Spektrum "programming" on my old DX-7 and it is ridiculous - it's as if the Wordperfect guys all got programming jobs at Horizon Hobby... years later, the DX-18 is barely better.

As for the box, I agre 100% and that is why I see the box as highly problematic. XPS cannot order a custom box like Fut or JR can...it will always be a donor box, and to keep the cost down, it will have to be a budget radio. Spektrum already has problems with crappy switchgear, pots, and gimbals. An HK orange radio with 3216 in side will feel like an HK radio, which is what you are pointing out. I agree eewww..
TTRotary is offline Find More Posts by TTRotary
Reply With Quote
Old Today, 09:15 AM
Registered User
Joined Sep 2011
90 Posts
Throttle hold

Jim, on my A9 if I touch the airplane icon on screen it activates throttle hold and I do this every time before I plug up the battery, it's a great feature. I think I saw that the 3216 has this feature also, so how will it be activated, switch , knob, or some other way? Someone earlier said they did not trust the throttle hold on the A9 and used an inline plug as the last thing to do before flying. I have a hard time believing people are out there flying without trust in their radios and it's features, and especially if they are using their radio to fly multiple models!! The throttle hold feature was one along with touch screen of the reasons that I preordered my A9 and waited 2 months for it to arrive at my door! I have 10 (about to be 11) planes on my A9 and I do not worry about the motor starting up when I plug up the battery.
xfedex is offline Find More Posts by xfedex
Reply With Quote
Old Today, 09:26 AM
Xtreme Power Systems
Lake Havasu, AZ
Joined Jun 2005
15,779 Posts
Well, technically it's possible for the radio to output full throttle, throttle hold or not. So, most plug their batteries in or attach their shunt right before they fly. Almost all transmitters have a throttle hold. With the XPS3216, I made it like everything else - you assign what input you want to be the throttle hold.
JimDrew is online now Find More Posts by JimDrew
RCG Plus Member
Reply With Quote
Old Today, 09:49 AM
Registered User
Joined Sep 2011
90 Posts
Throttle hold

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimDrew View Post
Well, technically it's possible for the radio to output full throttle, throttle hold or not. So, most plug their batteries in or attach their shunt right before they fly. Almost all transmitters have a throttle hold. With the XPS3216, I made it like everything else - you assign what input you want to be the throttle hold.
Thanks for that quick answer, so that means I can put throttle hold on any switch anywhere I want to. That will actually be easier that than the A9 because I won't have to touch the icon for 2 seconds......
xfedex is offline Find More Posts by xfedex
Reply With Quote
Old Today, 11:02 AM
Registered User
Kansas City
Joined Dec 2009
402 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by xfedex View Post
That will actually be easier that than the A9 because I won't have to touch the icon for 2 seconds......
The A9 lets you assign the throttle lock to any switch. If no switch is selected, it defaults to the touchscreen. I think this is a good design. What I don't like is that the throttle hold switch has to be switched to the "on" position while the Tx is on to activate the hold. By that I mean the throttle hold is not actually activated if I turn on the radio with the hold switch in the "on" position. I have to switch it to "off" and then back to "on". This is a pretty serious flaw.
prefabu is online now Find More Posts by prefabu
Reply With Quote
Old Today, 11:37 AM
Xtreme Power Systems
Lake Havasu, AZ
Joined Jun 2005
15,779 Posts
I have an option for throttle lock to always be on when activating a model (either Tx power on or switching models) , requiring you deliberately toggle it at least once to disable the throttle lock.
JimDrew is online now Find More Posts by JimDrew
RCG Plus Member
Reply With Quote
Old Today, 11:57 AM
Registered User
The Villages, Florida
Joined May 2003
448 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimDrew View Post
I have an option for throttle lock to always be on when activating a model (either Tx power on or switching models) , requiring you deliberately toggle it at least once to disable the throttle lock.
On my Taranis I have throttle lock programmed on a switch......

In addition, I've added "sticky throttle" programming so that if I accidentally switch on the throttle without the stick being in the full down position, nothing bad happens ! Once the throttle is lowered, it now becomes "active" ....

Jim, will the XPS transmitter have similar capabilities ??
JuanRodriguez is online now Find More Posts by JuanRodriguez
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Question Progress of skills, what order to learn progressively hard manuvers? learn2turn 3D Flying 20 Jul 22, 2011 11:42 PM
RBC Beaufighter (work in progress!, long progress) stuart warne Scale Kit/Scratch Built 10 Apr 13, 2003 09:33 AM