HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Mar 02, 2010, 12:46 PM
Registered User
codezilla's Avatar
Chino Hills, CA
Joined Feb 2003
2,370 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Telrin View Post
The only people complaining about the speed seem to be the ones that haven't flown with one.

The numbers may not 'lie' but people preaching about the effect of the numbers seem to be getting pretty close to it
Using the same argument, how many A9 users who say the latency doesn't matter actually tried faster radios?

While I agree that for over 90% of pilots (or 99% whatever), latency may not matter much, but the numbers cannot be disputed and whether it matters or not is up to each user.

Adrian
codezilla is offline Find More Posts by codezilla
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Mar 02, 2010, 01:46 PM
Registered User
Dallas, TX
Joined Jan 2010
753 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by codezilla View Post
Using the same argument, how many A9 users who say the latency doesn't matter actually tried faster radios?
I'm still waiting to see the first person to use an A9 and feel they had a problem that needed a faster radio.

Quote:
While I agree that for over 90% of pilots (or 99% whatever), latency may not matter much, but the numbers cannot be disputed and whether it matters or not is up to each user.
I don't think anyone is disputing the numbers, just the actual effect that the numbers really have.

Just make your own choice and be happy rather than trying to convince people that they should have a problem that they just don't seem to be experiencing.
Telrin is offline Find More Posts by Telrin
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 02, 2010, 02:12 PM
Registered User
codezilla's Avatar
Chino Hills, CA
Joined Feb 2003
2,370 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Telrin View Post
I'm still waiting to see the first person to use an A9 and feel they had a problem that needed a faster radio.
You won't see that (no one's saying A9 has a problem), but you may see an A9 user who tries a faster radio feeling the difference.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Telrin View Post
I don't think anyone is disputing the numbers, just the actual effect that the numbers really have.
We won't know the actual effect until someone (or a group of people) does a side by side test with an A9 and a faster radio in a capable airframe (R/E trainer won't work). The only evidence presented so far is A9 users saying it "feels" fast or fast enough. If the fastest system you ever used is the A9 or the difference from the previous system is small, then of course you won't know the difference.

Adrian
codezilla is offline Find More Posts by codezilla
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 02, 2010, 03:15 PM
most exalted one
BC Canada
Joined Aug 2002
3,472 Posts
Quote: numbers don't lie, people though are full of crap.
Yup you got my respect now didn't you! Except you I suppose?
4*60 is offline Find More Posts by 4*60
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 02, 2010, 03:45 PM
Hitec/Multiplex USA
MikeMayberry's Avatar
Poway, California, United States
Joined Sep 2000
4,190 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyZRC View Post
sorry guys, but calling the A9 anything other than colossally slow is to deny the truth staring you in the face.

PPM radios have been runniing low 20's average latency for ~3 decades, and the vast majority of flying has been done with those PPM systems for that period.

most PCM systems are (roughly) equal in speed to the A9, a couple are faster (notably, ATX stylus is actually faster than PPM, and that was 10+ years ago) and some are slower (futaba 1024 on anything but a 10C). those PCM systems are colossally slow, as is the A9.

people will say what they feel, and feel what they believe, and believe any damn thing.

numbers don't lie, people though are full of crap.

(if any of you had to drive a car down the road with electronic power steering servoing at 20hz, you'd scream bloody murder)

it's still an excellent, nice to use radio with excellent programming features, but there are *definite* applications where it's shortcomings are relevant.
It's easy to sit back and say that the Aurora is slow due to the numbers posted, but without flying it for reference you're making assumptions that are not substantiated by experience. It's been said that these owners don't know because they haven't flown anything faster (when many actually have,) when in fact the ones saying this don't know either because they haven't flown the Aurora.

It's like my kid saying he doesn't like the food I've given him but has never tried it. Then he finally tries it and say "hey that's good!" So, unless you fly the Aurora, these observations are based on incomplete data.

It's not like I don't expect the latency to be used as a reference against us, it's about the only ammo there is, but the level at which it is being weighted (especially with no personal experience) is a little ridiculous; especially when ZERO Aurora owners have complained about it. If it is as "colossally" slow as you say, then would it not then be reported by at least some users in the real world? Oh that's right... Aurora owners believe what they want and are full of cr@p!

Mike.
MikeMayberry is offline Find More Posts by MikeMayberry
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 02, 2010, 09:54 PM
Registered User
codezilla's Avatar
Chino Hills, CA
Joined Feb 2003
2,370 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeMayberry View Post
It's easy to sit back and say that the Aurora is slow due to the numbers posted, but without flying it for reference you're making assumptions that are not substantiated by experience. It's been said that these owners don't know because they haven't flown anything faster (when many actually have,) when in fact the ones saying this don't know either because they haven't flown the Aurora.
If you haven't used both systems, you can only base your assumptions on hard data. I never personally drove a Porsche Boxster or a Porsche 911, but from the published 0-60mph, I can safely assume that a 911 will be faster than the Boxster. Does that make the Boxster a slow car? Nope, it is still plenty fast for most people, and I'm pretty sure there will be people who can't tell the difference in acceleration even if they drove both cars on the same day.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeMayberry View Post
It's like my kid saying he doesn't like the food I've given him but has never tried it. Then he finally tries it and say "hey that's good!" So, unless you fly the Aurora, these observations are based on incomplete data.
Wrong example. Of course if only the Aurora was available, most people would say "hey that's good!". Better example is, give a kid two candies, one with slightly more sugar content and see which one he likes. He may not be able to tell which one's sweeter and likes both, or he may clearly choose the sweeter one and only wants that one.

Quote:
It's not like I don't expect the latency to be used as a reference against us, it's about the only ammo there is, but the level at which it is being weighted (especially with no personal experience) is a little ridiculous; especially when ZERO Aurora owners have complained about it. If it is as "colossally" slow as you say, then would it not then be reported by at least some users in the real world? Oh that's right... Aurora owners believe what they want and are full of cr@p!

Mike.
I don't think anyone who questioned about A9's latency figures ever said that it is a bad radio or even claimed that the latency figures makes or breaks the radio. Au contraire, every post I've read praises A9, or at least states that A9 is an excellent radio, but just stating their latency figures are not up to par with other native DIGITAL systems. As for the importance of the latency figure, it all depends on each pilot. If blazing fast performance is more important than touch screen, easy programming, or telemetry, then that person will not choose A9 since the latency figure is very important to him. If the latency is not important or if one believes that it doesn't make any difference, then that person will use the A9. Just because there's no boxster owners who complains about its speed doesn't make it faster than a 911. Heck, a 911 GT3 doesn't even have stereo system or air conditioning as standard equipment because it makes the car heavier!!!

Adrian
codezilla is offline Find More Posts by codezilla
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 02, 2010, 10:05 PM
Registered User
USA, CA, Merced
Joined Dec 2007
504 Posts
4*60, Mike;

I say it again, people are full of crap. sit a person in 2 different cars, launch them down the dragstrip, and ask them which had the faster ET. answer : the louder one, or whichever had the faster 60' time.

people are just NOT good instruments.

people talked about how "locked in" and "fast" futaba 1024 was. we all know now that it was total horse-apples.

I gave the example previously, but if you ask people to taste test a batch of wines, the 'best' selections will be all over the place. if you designate to them which wine is 'most expensive', then that will be chosen as best overwhelmingly.. wether it was the cheapest, the most expensive, the most astringent or tannic, blah blah.

so yeah, people are full of crap, in the context that I meant it in.

don't confuse that with me saying that people are dishonest, they're just overwhelmingly terribly horribly wrong when you ask them to observe and quantify phenomena without instrumentation.

the butt dyno is always wrong.
DannyZRC is offline Find More Posts by DannyZRC
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 02, 2010, 10:40 PM
Crazy Heli Technogeek
Kai_Shiden's Avatar
USA, WA, Seattle
Joined Sep 2004
4,205 Posts
Here's my personal take on the latency issue (this is on neither side of the issue), I would rather see consistent medium latency, than highly variable low latency.

On Jkos's thread on runryder, he has some graphs of latency "range" up near the top of the page. I did some calculating of max first change, minus, min first change here's the progression I went through in my time in the hobby:

9CHP PPM 120 eCCPM = 22.3ms "range" (64.9ms average latency)
DX7 DSM2 (AR6100) 120 eCCPM = 22ms "range" (27.5ms average latency)
T8FG FASST (R6008HS in 7ms framerate, I'm running R6106HF's in HS mode, but they should be similar) 120 eCCPM = 6.7ms "range" (14.2ms average latency)

Latency itself is a factor, as my DX7 did feel more "connected" than my 9CHP, but I don't think it's an over-rideing factor (I think servo sync was much of that feel difference in that case). As humans our reactions are not solely governed by "human reaction time", much of what we interpret as "connected" is also how accurately and repeatably it responds to controls (note, this is not about lag/latency).

Watch martial artists do their thing and you'll note that reaction to their opponent isn't the only factor, predicting and watching signs of what the opponent is preparing for are HUGE factors in them appropriately responding. As we practice and improve our flying, much of our flight movements and corrections become muscle memory, I know that I don't even think about flight corrections anymore (it's not like making a decision, my thumbs just act), I of course can tell if I'm having to concentrate harder, but each individual stick movement doesn't weigh on my mind.

I had two nearly identically setup helis on my T8FGH and my non SE DX7 (both LAheli Riccos, only difference being the motors, both are on 4s, both have the same servos, ESC and gyro), in all honesty I think some of the more "connected" feel is because of the 22ms vs 6.7ms variation in response. IMHO, some of the more "connected" feel is also the latency, framerate on the digital servos, and the extended swash geometry corrections of the 8FGH, so quantifying the different "feel" is outside my capability (ie, there is no way for me to break down which is the largest factor, they're too blended together).

If the A9 is more consistent in it's latency consistency (I've seen no tests of that part yet), then the pilot will assuredly get used to it and not even notice the latency difference unless flying back to back on a different TX, and even then, they may not be able to put their finger on exactly "what" the difference is, given enough time on either system they'll adapt.

I personally don't feel that anyone can go wrong choosing between the 8FG and an A9, so long as they choose based upon their own needs instead of going solely by why others are buying them (build yourself a table of what it is you want, then make your choice between them based upon that ).

I feel that having a 7ms framerate effectively provides a similar benefit to DSM2 servo sync, making the swash servo's movements more granular and synchronized. After thinking about servo sync for a while, I began to be concerned that having the cyclic servos all given their signals at exactly the same time might tax some BEC power systems.

-Kai

P.S. I really hope that Jkos posts the A9 test numbers soon, while I think the emphasis on latency average doesn't tell the whole story, he is posting all of his test numbers so the consistency range can be calculated easily.
Kai_Shiden is offline Find More Posts by Kai_Shiden
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 02, 2010, 11:00 PM
Registered User
codezilla's Avatar
Chino Hills, CA
Joined Feb 2003
2,370 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyZRC View Post
4*60, Mike;

I say it again, people are full of crap. sit a person in 2 different cars, launch them down the dragstrip, and ask them which had the faster ET. answer : the louder one, or whichever had the faster 60' time.

people are just NOT good instruments.

people talked about how "locked in" and "fast" futaba 1024 was. we all know now that it was total horse-apples.

I gave the example previously, but if you ask people to taste test a batch of wines, the 'best' selections will be all over the place. if you designate to them which wine is 'most expensive', then that will be chosen as best overwhelmingly.. wether it was the cheapest, the most expensive, the most astringent or tannic, blah blah.

so yeah, people are full of crap, in the context that I meant it in.

don't confuse that with me saying that people are dishonest, they're just overwhelmingly terribly horribly wrong when you ask them to observe and quantify phenomena without instrumentation.

the butt dyno is always wrong.
Hmm... if that's the case, then the latency figures shouldn't matter to anyone since we are not precise enough to detect that small difference. The butt dyno works when the difference is...well BIG. I bet I can tell the difference in speed between a dragster and a Honda Civic no matter how loud a Civic is.

Personally, I don't think I can detect the difference between radios, and the latency #'s probably isn't gonna be a determining factor in purchasing a radio. Now if I'm torn between two radios, then it could be a factor because...it looks better on paper and probably will make me feel good knowing that I have a faster radio than the person flying right next to me.

I just felt it wasn't right for people to just dismiss it without any PROPER evidence.

Adrian
codezilla is offline Find More Posts by codezilla
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 02, 2010, 11:33 PM
Registered User
USA, CA, Merced
Joined Dec 2007
504 Posts
code, you don't have to be able to clearly perceive it for it to affect you.

the A9 has a lot of nice features, but the problem is that they're built onto a platform that does the fundamental job worse than many others.

before any mixing, switch quality, user interface gee-gaws, the job of the radio is to send your commands to the aircraft as quickly and as accurately as possible.

the layers of goodies on top of that, the A9 is stellar... the underlying premise of what it is that a radio actually does, it is absolutely unequivocally sub par, I think it's fair for me to call a PPM FM radio "par", and the A9 institutes twice the delay.
DannyZRC is offline Find More Posts by DannyZRC
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 02, 2010, 11:35 PM
Registered User
fatcat220's Avatar
Plano, TX
Joined Nov 2006
2,218 Posts
Kai_Shiden, nice explanation. Good food for thought.
fatcat220 is offline Find More Posts by fatcat220
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 03, 2010, 12:19 AM
Hitec/Multiplex USA
MikeMayberry's Avatar
Poway, California, United States
Joined Sep 2000
4,190 Posts
Therefor if your "Butt dyno" can't feel it, then it's not an issue.

Don't get me wrong... it's a good argument, and like any good debate it makes sense to exploit a weakness of your opponent (as I have as well by comparing pricing and capabilities like flight conditions in ACRO mode) but the latency of the Aurora is clearly not as big of a deal as some are trying to make it or people would have felt it long before the test results told them.

Jump to the 2:30 mark to show the interaction showing the stick input and movement of the surfaces.

Hitec Aurora 9 Giant Scale set up (6 min 40 sec)


Mike.
MikeMayberry is offline Find More Posts by MikeMayberry
Last edited by MikeMayberry; Mar 03, 2010 at 12:52 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 03, 2010, 03:41 AM
most exalted one
BC Canada
Joined Aug 2002
3,472 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyZRC View Post
4*60, Mike;

I say it again, people are full of crap. sit a person in 2 different cars, launch them down the dragstrip, and ask them which had the faster ET. answer : the louder one, or whichever had the faster 60' time.

people are just NOT good instruments.

people talked about how "locked in" and "fast" futaba 1024 was. we all know now that it was total horse-apples.

I gave the example previously, but if you ask people to taste test a batch of wines, the 'best' selections will be all over the place. if you designate to them which wine is 'most expensive', then that will be chosen as best overwhelmingly.. wether it was the cheapest, the most expensive, the most astringent or tannic, blah blah.

so yeah, people are full of crap, in the context that I meant it in.

don't confuse that with me saying that people are dishonest, they're just overwhelmingly terribly horribly wrong when you ask them to observe and quantify phenomena without instrumentation.

the butt dyno is always wrong.
Don't GET ME WRONG. But you included me in the people are full of crap comment and I am not. I don't buy expensive wine but what I enjoy drinking. I don't drink Pepsi becasue it's too sweet (like candy) If you say "most" go ahead but not all people fit your description.

And BTW you indicating "sub par" has no bearing with me because you, despite not knowing it, have insulted a lot of people with your comments. "Sub par" in your opinion would be more correct but you appear to be someone who feels their opinion is gospel. We happen to disagree with your opinon.

OK so according to you the radio is sub par and it's latency stinks.

Now let's get on with other topics. OK?!
4*60 is offline Find More Posts by 4*60
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 03, 2010, 08:36 AM
Happy Flyer
Leo1's Avatar
Joined Feb 2006
131 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeMayberry View Post
FYI: The LT,CT, and RT digital trim switches can also be assigned to a channel to control anything independently as well as be assigned to adjust the level of certain mixes like gyro gain, governor and more in flight.

I don't know if I'd use the Kia as a comparison... if we're comparing a Korean based car to a BMW (although Futaba is a Japanese company so it's more like a Lexus) then I think the Hyundai Genesis 4.6 would be more appropriate. http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/ca...enesis-4.6l-v8

Have fun with the 8FG, that's really all the matters anyway.

Mike.
Mike,
You are right that Genesis is nice, and it has the clean styling design as in Benz, BMW, Audi and Lexus. A9 plastic case is very dated, it is more like a hyundai model in the 90's. The design makes it cheaper than it is.
I just wonder A9 is from US or Korea design house? I would get an A9 if it had a strong design influence from MPX. Then it is like a Genesis that looks as good as a Benz
Leo1 is offline Find More Posts by Leo1
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 03, 2010, 06:58 PM
Registered User
Denver, CO
Joined Apr 2009
36 Posts
Please take this for what’s its worth: have two years flying experience and only fly electrics.

I just purchased a new Aurora-9 a few days ago. I also have a Futaba 8FG that I have been using for about 6-7 months now and before that a 7c. I really never considered a HiTec receiver because I also felt that I might be down grading myself with a less capable system. But over the months since I owned the 8FG I have tried to call Futaba to ask a few questions, I’m a Denver Cop working the Day shift right now so I call when I can on my lunch break , I can’t just call back in an hour or two like they wanted me to and sit on hold for another hour. I have to say that my 3 times talking to them they have been rude and dismissive because I might not understand that they are trying to tell me and want to pass me off to someone else or tell me to call back another day and talk to someone else. I got fed up with their service and after spending over $1000+ dollars on the 8FG & ten R617FS I said screw it! If this is the way they are going to treat a reliable customer I will just sell it then (which BTW is for sale right now on the for sale forum) the 8FG worked fine never had a problem with it, and it was a nice upgrade to the 7c I had

So I started to look around at other products look at the JR x9303 really like it and was thinking I would get that, and then I saw the Aurora 9 that just came in that day to the LHS. I got the ok to take it out of the box and play with it. And I have to tell you I was VERY impressed with just the way it felt at first, it had a feel of quality to it, the rubber side grips, the solidness of it, and the Ultra smooth gimbals Wow, I was thinking to myself this is not what I was expecting this type of quality, now I’m thinking to myself maybe I have had this all wrong, thinking as another user said Futaba being the BMW of Radios and HiTec being a Hyundai. Then I turned it on and was even more impressed with the Big Screen and incredibly easy menu. As my son would says to me “Dude!” This is awesome! And it truly is. Having NONHTING against the 8FG (Only Futaba support) comparing the two was a no brainer to me; the FAR superior radio was the Aurora 9. I think I’m a pretty reasonable person and if you sat the two right next to each other so you could inspect both of them together I would have to say that that far majority would pick the Aurora 9 over the 8FG, the 8Fg screen just terrible compared to the Aurora, plus the total cost of ownership is a lot cheaper, receivers are almost half the cost of Futaba's.

So I learned a lesson and that is to inspect, examine and study he radios first before you buy if you can, and not just assume like I did that Futaba is the best because I was certainly mistaken. I know there are some tech details that the Aurora is not as fast as the 8FG which is probably true but for the majority of people this may not be an issue. There are a few things that I miss on the 8FG and that the 3- position switches, the Aurora only has 2 and the SD slot it was nice to have but I never used it.

Bottom line is check out the Aurora 9 before you buy and don’t just dismiss it as I did, as you might be incredibly surprised like I was
tmitchell403 is offline Find More Posts by tmitchell403
Last edited by tmitchell403; Mar 04, 2010 at 03:37 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Article Hitec Aurora 9 Channel 2.4GHz Radio System Review pda4you Radios 333 Nov 18, 2011 04:14 PM
Question Hitec Aurora 9 Transmitter & FPV Head Tracking WEREE Radios 6 Jan 18, 2010 02:26 PM
Sold HiTec Aurora 9 2.4 Ghz with two 7 ch Rx - brand new Cloud_Catcher Aircraft - General - Radio Equipment (FS/W) 5 Jan 08, 2010 11:04 PM
Discussion Aurora 9 or Futaba 10CAG or Airtronics 10SD-10G? wollins Radios 12 Nov 21, 2009 09:47 PM
Discussion 8FG or Aurora 9 FLY GUY EDDY Radios 2 Nov 06, 2009 09:15 PM