HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Feb 12, 2010, 11:56 AM
Who let the dogs out?
phil_g's Avatar
Pontefract, Yorkshire, UK
Joined Jul 2007
1,059 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RENATOA View Post
Can these pins be used as a quantitative approach of RSSI ?
What, for datalogging or something? I dont see why not... you'd need better eyes than mine to solder to it though!

Phil
phil_g is offline Find More Posts by phil_g
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Feb 12, 2010, 12:56 PM
Chuck 'Em and Chase 'Em
Fly2High's Avatar
United States, NY, Plainview
Joined Aug 2005
8,049 Posts
Any chance for a US distributor anytime soon?
Fly2High is offline Find More Posts by Fly2High
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2010, 01:02 PM
Registered User
Romania, Dolj, Craiova
Joined Sep 2007
14,264 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by phil_g View Post
What, for datalogging or something? I dont see why not... you'd need better eyes than mine to solder to it though!

Phil
If increase in switching frequency means start losing reception, to signal this fact via OSD, when flying FPV.
renatoa is offline Find More Posts by renatoa
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2010, 01:52 PM
Registered User
Joined Apr 2007
161 Posts
Yes and no.. Spektrum a few years ago was a new player to the market and its prices were not cheap either. It was new and unknown then as well.

Difference it was not a company from China. Does not matter that if you look at most of the RX's the have a made in China sticker attached. I think the big hurdle that FrSky have to over come is the fact that this is in fact a decent system that comes from China. The world is not used to that.

That being said they have done all the legal certifications to get there product to be compliant in most countries and when I approched them were more than willing to assist in getting me what I needed to certify the system locally. Something unheard of in general from most companies I have dealt with from China.

If they market there product at a price any lower than what they are people will tend not to trust it as they immediately associate the word cheap to it. Also once there name is made it will be hard raise prices as people will ask why so they will run at a almost a risk of not making any profit and bankruptcy.

I think they have done a good job otherwise I would not even be thinking of distributing there product. There price is right as it is cheaper than name brand systems but it is not cheap they you won't get after sales support in a years time because they have gone off the market. In addition I get excellent support from FrSky which really helps for support issues, I can't say that about some of the larger companies out there.

All in all it tends to be a balancing act of too cheap and people say your product it cheap, to expensive and people look funny at it. I think at least in our market in NZ is it priced right. Either way as you say it looks good and I am excited playing with this stuff. This weekend I will be playing a bit more with it testing its limits.

I also know of a FrSky going up in a pulse jet this weekend. If it survives that vibration, heat, speed and big blocks of signal blocking metal then I think that says a lot for it already.

I think it is already proving itself a contender to the name brands.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebbe View Post
A new brand like this need to build up a strong and good reputation first, then you could begin maybee higher the prices,,,, If the differance is only a few bucks/ receivers I think still most would choose for example Hitec 2.4ghz.

Im not saying Hitec is better , only it has a stronger name, and someway people relate that to confidence...
<snip>
....
<snip>
But sure, FrSky sounds good so far..
kneedrag is offline Find More Posts by kneedrag
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2010, 03:57 PM
Registered User
Romania, Dolj, Craiova
Joined Sep 2007
14,264 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by kneedrag View Post
...I also know of a FrSky going up in a pulse jet this weekend. If it survives that vibration, heat, speed and big blocks of signal blocking metal then I think that says a lot for it already.

I think it is already proving itself a contender to the name brands.
I would try it in a dual redundant system as ACT ...
renatoa is offline Find More Posts by renatoa
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2010, 04:18 PM
"The Judge"
sebbe's Avatar
Sweden
Joined Feb 2006
5,757 Posts
kneedrag,,,, I hope the FrSky is good enough for a pulse jet, but I dont think many would put a 35 dollar receiver in a Pulse jet....

I dont want to lift up other brands, but the only 2 brands 2.4ghz system I would thrust in a pulse jet so far is Futaba FASST and ACT.

Let us know how it goes..
sebbe is offline Find More Posts by sebbe
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2010, 04:55 PM
Registered User
Joined Apr 2007
161 Posts
It is not me putting it in a pulsejet I am more a glider person however xjet is putting on up this weekend at the jet meet. I will let you know how it goes as I am curious. I also know he is very calculated when it comes to things like this so I am sure he is reasonabally confident about doing it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sebbe View Post
kneedrag,,,, I hope the FrSky is good enough for a pulse jet, but I dont think many would put a 35 dollar receiver in a Pulse jet....

I dont want to lift up other brands, but the only 2 brands 2.4ghz system I would thrust in a pulse jet so far is Futaba FASST and ACT.

Let us know how it goes..
kneedrag is offline Find More Posts by kneedrag
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 13, 2010, 01:04 AM
Martin - AKA mr.sneezy
PLMS's Avatar
Adelaide, Australia
Joined May 2004
1,669 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by fernandez View Post
With Flydream I found antenna's diversity is doubtfull, how does FRsky implemented it? When do they switch antenna's and is diversity working? In my eyes best diversity is with each antenna it's own receiver chip.
My testing and inspection of the FlyDream system late last year revealed that they just capasitor couple the two antennas into the one input on the T212 amp chip. They didn't use the ES02 RF switch in their receiver design like Corona.
Corona however, did not implement the use of the ES02 chip in the FHSS versions even though it's fitted on the board. Testing showed if you removed the right antenna the system died...
They may use it on the Corona DSSS version, but I was not involved in any pre-production testing on that one.

I'll be very pleased if FrSky do switch antennas on high error rate.

Cheers,
Martin
PLMS is offline Find More Posts by PLMS
Last edited by PLMS; Feb 13, 2010 at 01:05 AM. Reason: name added
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 13, 2010, 04:41 AM
Who let the dogs out?
phil_g's Avatar
Pontefract, Yorkshire, UK
Joined Jul 2007
1,059 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by PLMS View Post
I'll be very pleased if FrSky do switch antennas on high error rate. Cheers, Martin
This was confirmed several posts ago Martin... [here]

Cheers
Phil
phil_g is offline Find More Posts by phil_g
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 14, 2010, 04:06 PM
Martin - AKA mr.sneezy
PLMS's Avatar
Adelaide, Australia
Joined May 2004
1,669 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by phil_g View Post
This was confirmed several posts ago Martin... [here]
Cheers
Phil
Good work. Another box is ticked for me :-)
PLMS is offline Find More Posts by PLMS
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 14, 2010, 05:17 PM
Who let the dogs out?
phil_g's Avatar
Pontefract, Yorkshire, UK
Joined Jul 2007
1,059 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by phil_g View Post
I have a pre-prod Frsky 2-way for trials, just awaiting connection info for the telemetry and the uncommitted serial comms channel... quite excited about this as it will open up all sorts of avenues for experimenters... will report back in due course.
Cheers
Phil
Ok, heres a taster of the new system, its early days and theres much more to come:

I have the pre prod Frsky telemetry set on trial at the moment, I've had the system a few days but have only just got the datasheets through from Frsky as its New Years holiday over there. The module and receiver for the moment comprise two uncased boards, the most noticable change over the existing Frsky set being the additional connectors.

The receiver has four return channels, two of which are analogue to digital converters, reading (in their raw state) zero to 3.3 volts, and having external connections to devices in the model. The third is internally connected and reports bit error rates as seen at the receiver.

The fourth channel is to me the most interesting as it is an uncommitted RS232 serial stream which could be used for all manner of experiments and data. It has a fixed baud rate of 4800 which matches the NMEA GPS standard, which I guess was intentional.

The telemetry channels feature configurable alarms triggered by threshold voltages, ie an "alarm if above V" and "alarm if below V" can be set on each channel, and with three levels of alarm. The configuration is controlled by a protocol of fixed-length packets, and PC software is included to aid this process. The threshold configuration is sent to the receiver from the transmitter module which is connected to the PC serial port.

From an R/C flying point of view, its (as you would expect) very similar to the existing Frsky, but there are a few changes wrt range check procedure, failsafe setting and of course the alarms - which incidentally are simple audio, remember this is a module and has no display, it simply 'beeps' & sends serial data to a terminal. In my case, initially this is a notebook running a comms program, but I do intend to build a pic+lcd module into a small box which will mount on the tx. The failsafe is set by briefly pressing the bind button on the transmitter (not the receiver, as per the existing Frsky) which means you can actually set the failsafe in flight - this is unprecedented as far as I'm aware - so you can shut the throttle, trim the model for stable circular flight, dab the button and thats your failsafe!

The set is quite a bit more complex than a traditional outfit and clearly a complete test is far more involved, requiring external equipment and cabling so I think it will take a little longer to report back, please bear with me.
Cheers
Phil
phil_g is offline Find More Posts by phil_g
Last edited by phil_g; Feb 14, 2010 at 05:45 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 14, 2010, 06:11 PM
Martin - AKA mr.sneezy
PLMS's Avatar
Adelaide, Australia
Joined May 2004
1,669 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by phil_g View Post
but I do intend to build a pic+lcd module into a small box which will mount on the tx.
Another PIC guy, me too.
I might focus on the interface to EagleTree's E-logger then. Any code I write will be open source. Are your intension's going to be the same ?
I'll PM you about HW, as if we use the same type PIC and LCD it will make light work of the TX end at least.

Since this thread is going to spawn in multiple directions it would be good to start threads (when the time is right) with some logic like this. Keeping track will be much easier...

FrSky 2.4Ghz - Two way - GPS - PIC
FrSky 2.4Ghz - Two way - GPS - ATMEL
FrSky 2.4Ghz - Two way - Elogger - PIC
FrSky 2.4Ghz - Two way - TX display - PIC

Martin
PLMS is offline Find More Posts by PLMS
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 17, 2010, 12:25 PM
Registered User
Joined Apr 2007
161 Posts
Right started playing with the small 4ch system and decided to range check it.

Took it to work with me and at lunch time decided to take it down to Victoria Park in Auckland. Great place surrounded by lots of wi-fi networks.

Range on the 4ch is listed at 500m Victoria park diagonally across is about 350m need to find a bigger park.

Basically I hooked up a power system to the rx 3 servo's motor etc basic plane setup and then we started walking away from each other while I was moving the aileron servo only. In addition to this my mate had his body between the rx and the transmitter, trying to block the signal.

Things we were watching for on the rx was the led making sure we had a locked on signal and any jitter from any of the other servo's.

First run we had the aerial point directly towards the rx. First 20m were jitter filled and we lost range at about 50m. That is the worst transmitter setup scenario. (for those that don't know pointing your aerial straight at a rx is not conducive to it getting signal)

Next we turned the tx aerial at an angle to the rx and started again. I eventually lost sight for my mate as he got to the end of the field and carried on walking through trees.

While he was walking in trees he was losing signal and gaining it again. Again nothing new with 2.4g systems they don't like objects between signals. However he was impressed that when it recovered at that distance it was immediate.

So the next challenge is to find a field with more than 500m line of sight.

Personally after this test I would be happy to put this into any parkflyer without fear of it losing reception. If I flew any of my parkflyers at that range I would be having a hard time seeing them anyway.
kneedrag is offline Find More Posts by kneedrag
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 17, 2010, 03:19 PM
Registered User
Birmingham, UK
Joined Apr 2007
483 Posts
practical test last week with the 4ch mini rx in a 28" bright orange flying wing proved only one thing - the range is greater than my eyesight can cope with.
BrumBob is offline Find More Posts by BrumBob
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 17, 2010, 05:33 PM
Registered User
Joined Apr 2007
161 Posts
Yip that is the general reaction, I think 500m is very conservative range to be honest.

Either way I would need to have much better eyes than to fly that far away. Only my large gliders might go further than that but that's what the 8ch full range is for.
kneedrag is offline Find More Posts by kneedrag
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mini-Review The video for FrSky 2.4Ghz Chase Wu Radios 0 Dec 16, 2009 01:18 AM
Discussion Realflight G5 Combat so far so good! splitpilot Simulators 0 Nov 22, 2009 06:36 AM
Discussion So far... So good rikks Mini Helis 35 Feb 17, 2006 12:42 PM
Aerofly Deluxe so far so good! Gary Morris Simulators 5 Aug 19, 2005 07:23 AM
Schulze 18.46K v7.02 - so far, so good! Jason M Electric Heli Talk 4 Aug 11, 2002 01:25 AM