Minimum possible Fail Safe time

dasrennboot · May 29, 2008, 05:17 AM

I am a racing boat modeller from Germany and using the IFS Graupner System with MX-22 with XR-16 IFS receiver since March 2008. During the last championship race (April 2008) my system go into fail safe but the 1 second minimum possible fail safe time was to long to prevent a full speed crash with the quay wall. My request to Graupner was to minimize the possible fail safe time to JR "standard" 0,25 sec or less. Is there any update available to have this possibility in the "near" future. I change the system back to 40Mhz SPCM because I run my boats during approx. 20 years without any big "impact" like the above described. Fore sure, the problem which caused fail safe, I have also to investigate, but due to the speed of our boats, approx. 80km/h, 1 second fail safe response time is still to long and means approx. 25m movement without control before throttle goes to idle. Any update from JimDrew will be appreciated.
Regards Stefan

dtruffo · May 29, 2008, 07:46 AM

Imagine a pylon racer running at 360 kmh !
Thats why I decided that XPS is not good for me !!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by dasrennboot

I am a racing boat modeller from Germany and using the IFS Graupner System with MX-22 with XR-16 IFS receiver since March 2008. During the last championship race (April 2008) my system go into fail safe but the 1 second minimum possible fail safe time was to long to prevent a full speed crash with the quay wall. My request to Graupner was to minimize the possible fail safe time to JR "standard" 0,25 sec or less. Is there any update available to have this possibility in the "near" future. I change the system back to 40Mhz SPCM because I run my boats during approx. 20 years without any big "impact" like the above described. Fore sure, the problem which caused fail safe, I have also to investigate, but due to the speed of our boats, approx. 80km/h, 1 second fail safe response time is still to long and means approx. 25m movement without control before throttle goes to idle. Any update from JimDrew will be appreciated.
Regards Stefan

JimDrew · May 29, 2008, 02:10 PM

I can't imagine a boat having a failsafe occurring. We have the world champion racers here in Lake Havasu (boating is huge here) and everyone runs XPS here with no failsafes (unless they forget their antenna!) Our boats here are doing 100km/h, so failsafe would also be a concern but nobody has voiced that concern... but nobody is having any failsafe events either.

How do you have your boat setup?

We can change the failsafe time to be shorter, but I think we should figure out why you are having a problem at all. Boats and cars are very simple setups.

We have USRA racers using our systems in their planes, one of which has been clocked at 431km/h.

xman2004 · May 29, 2008, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimDrew

I can't imagine a boat having a failsafe occurring. We have the world champion racers here in Lake Havasu (boating is huge here) and everyone runs XPS here with no failsafes (unless they forget their antenna!) Our boats here are doing 100km/h, so failsafe would also be a concern but nobody has voiced that concern... but nobody is having any failsafe events either.

How do you have your boat setup?

We can change the failsafe time to be shorter, but I think we should figure out why you are having a problem at all. Boats and cars are very simple setups.

We have USRA racers using our systems in their planes, one of which has been clocked at 431km/h.

Jim, it seems you have a hard time believing in any kind of problem reported.... Do you thing we got nothing better to do than make up stories and post them on the forum?? Give us a benefit of the doubt, and take a good hard look at what you are selling before someone gets hurt.....

dasrennboot · May 29, 2008, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimDrew

I can't imagine a boat having a failsafe occurring. We have the world champion racers here in Lake Havasu (boating is huge here) and everyone runs XPS here with no failsafes (unless they forget their antenna!) Our boats here are doing 100km/h, so failsafe would also be a concern but nobody has voiced that concern... but nobody is having any failsafe events either.

How do you have your boat setup?

We can change the failsafe time to be shorter, but I think we should figure out why you are having a problem at all. Boats and cars are very simple setups.

We have USRA racers using our systems in their planes, one of which has been clocked at 431km/h.

Hello Jim

Sure I have also to check why the system went into failsafe. I build up a new model during the winter time especially for IFS without any carbon (normally full aramid/carbon hulls) in the deck hull, enough space as requested in the system description. The first checks and runs are without any problem. The first race, beginning of April, was perfect without any failure. But the second run two weeks later at a different location shows in the second run, especially on the left site of the racetrack, fail safe problems which ends finally in the described crash. For information, I race in FSR-15 class, that means 12 boats, 30 minutes race time.

Finally, for my setup I have to clarify two separate problems: First why Failsafe happened. The real problem is that for this checks I have to race in Championships because the system must work under this condition. But as long as I have not the real reason I need failsafe protection, but with 1 second shortest time this can not protect my boat. It’s a real problem and therefore I will wait until you assist me with shorter failsafe time. I have a long discussion with the Graupner engineer and he confirmed that my request is not the only one; also some car racers have the same request. Graupner announce that the reduction of fail safe time is under preparation without confirmation of schedule.

Are you able to confirm the change and give a look ahead in respect of the possible available upgrade?

Best regards, Stefan

IPFlyer · May 30, 2008, 01:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimDrew

...
We have USRA racers using our systems in their planes, one of which has been clocked at 431km/h.

That's pretty impressive. When and where was this done?

MikeF · May 30, 2008, 02:33 AM

That would be Don Corum's Bearcat. I don't know when they clocked that speed but I believe it. It's definately in the top tier of current Unlimiteds racers. Haven't seen anyone other than Don and myself using XPS at the USRA races and I've been looking.

Back on topic, I agree shorter FS times are needed. I've never been comfortable with one second.

Mike

HarrisM · May 30, 2008, 02:54 AM

I agree with you that a shorter failsafe time is needed, not only for cars and boats but also for helicopters, especially 3D ones. I would also like to see a user-configurable number of lost packets before the system goes in failsafe. Right now even if 1 packet gets through to the Rx it will not go in failsafe. For helis 1 packet per second means that the heli will be uncontrollable and will crash but without going in failsafe. This can be extremely dangerous!

jh2rc97 · May 30, 2008, 07:30 AM

I vote for .25 sec increments.

BulletMaster · May 30, 2008, 10:33 AM

yep.. ditto here (0.25 sec increments). We ALWAYS set failsafe position on our fleet of gas/nitro/electric boats.

JimDrew · May 30, 2008, 10:51 AM

Stefan,

Can you post some pictures of your installation? Boats are a rather simple installation, but you must make sure that the recevier is placed above the water line and wires are completely tied down.

I will change the failsafe time for increments of .25 seconds in the new firmware.

BulletMaster · May 30, 2008, 12:12 PM

Jim,

does that mean you will have a less than 1 second value? I hope so... that would be great

Just had a thought... if this is a firmware change, it won't be XPD updatable?

JimDrew · May 30, 2008, 05:50 PM

.25 second steps would be 250ms.

If you happen to have a unit that is in-fieled flashable, you would be able to upgrade the firmware yourself. NONE of our products at this point are guaranteed to be in-field upgradable. The newer hardware series will have in-field flashing as an advertised feature.

rmteo · May 30, 2008, 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimDrew

...If you happen to have a unit that is in-fieled flashable, you would be able to upgrade the firmware yourself. NONE of our products at this point are guaranteed to be in-field upgradable. The newer hardware series will have in-field flashing as an advertised feature.

Isn't that a contradiction?

4*60 · May 30, 2008, 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rmteo

Isn't that a contradiction?

No!

May 29, 2008, 05:17 AM	#1
dasrennboot Registered User Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 2	Minimum possible Fail Safe time I am a racing boat modeller from Germany and using the IFS Graupner System with MX-22 with XR-16 IFS receiver since March 2008. During the last championship race (April 2008) my system go into fail safe but the 1 second minimum possible fail safe time was to long to prevent a full speed crash with the quay wall. My request to Graupner was to minimize the possible fail safe time to JR "standard" 0,25 sec or less. Is there any update available to have this possibility in the "near" future. I change the system back to 40Mhz SPCM because I run my boats during approx. 20 years without any big "impact" like the above described. Fore sure, the problem which caused fail safe, I have also to investigate, but due to the speed of our boats, approx. 80km/h, 1 second fail safe response time is still to long and means approx. 25m movement without control before throttle goes to idle. Any update from JimDrew will be appreciated. Regards Stefan

May 29, 2008, 02:10 PM	#3
JimDrew Xtreme Power Systems Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Lake Havasu, AZ Posts: 8,045	I can't imagine a boat having a failsafe occurring. We have the world champion racers here in Lake Havasu (boating is huge here) and everyone runs XPS here with no failsafes (unless they forget their antenna!) Our boats here are doing 100km/h, so failsafe would also be a concern but nobody has voiced that concern... but nobody is having any failsafe events either. How do you have your boat setup? We can change the failsafe time to be shorter, but I think we should figure out why you are having a problem at all. Boats and cars are very simple setups. We have USRA racers using our systems in their planes, one of which has been clocked at 431km/h. Last edited by JimDrew; May 29, 2008 at 02:16 PM.

May 30, 2008, 02:33 AM	#7
MikeF Registered User Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Bloomington, Indiana Posts: 482	That would be Don Corum's Bearcat. I don't know when they clocked that speed but I believe it. It's definately in the top tier of current Unlimiteds racers. Haven't seen anyone other than Don and myself using XPS at the USRA races and I've been looking. Back on topic, I agree shorter FS times are needed. I've never been comfortable with one second. Mike Attached Thumbnails 118.6 KB · Views: 211

May 30, 2008, 12:12 PM	#12
BulletMaster Registered User Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Newcastle, NSW, Australia Posts: 2,515	Jim, does that mean you will have a less than 1 second value? I hope so... that would be great Just had a thought... if this is a firmware change, it won't be XPD updatable? Last edited by BulletMaster; May 30, 2008 at 12:22 PM. Reason: had a thought...

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Adding "fail-safe" to PPM/FM systems	Mr.RC-CAM	DIY Electronics	3	Nov 19, 2004 01:16 AM
Futaba Fail Safe Unit For Sale (eBay/No Reserve)	98 SNAKE EATER	Cars - Cars and Parts (FS/W)	0	Oct 02, 2003 10:18 PM
Fail Safe Spring does NOT work	cxTurbo	rec.models.rc.land	1	Mar 07, 2003 08:32 PM
GWS Fail Safe	vancouverflyer	Radios	5	Mar 01, 2003 02:42 PM
Fail Safe for T-Maxx	Tj	rec.models.rc.land	3	Feb 22, 2003 06:42 PM

May 30, 2008, 02:54 AM	#8
HarrisM Registered User Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Limassol, Cyprus Posts: 726	I agree with you that a shorter failsafe time is needed, not only for cars and boats but also for helicopters, especially 3D ones. I would also like to see a user-configurable number of lost packets before the system goes in failsafe. Right now even if 1 packet gets through to the Rx it will not go in failsafe. For helis 1 packet per second means that the heli will be uncontrollable and will crash but without going in failsafe. This can be extremely dangerous!

May 30, 2008, 07:30 AM	#9
jh2rc97 Registered User Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 1,242	I vote for .25 sec increments.

May 30, 2008, 10:33 AM	#10
BulletMaster Registered User Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Newcastle, NSW, Australia Posts: 2,515	yep.. ditto here (0.25 sec increments). We ALWAYS set failsafe position on our fleet of gas/nitro/electric boats.

May 30, 2008, 10:51 AM	#11
JimDrew Xtreme Power Systems Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Lake Havasu, AZ Posts: 8,045	Stefan, Can you post some pictures of your installation? Boats are a rather simple installation, but you must make sure that the recevier is placed above the water line and wires are completely tied down. I will change the failsafe time for increments of .25 seconds in the new firmware.

May 30, 2008, 05:50 PM	#13
JimDrew Xtreme Power Systems Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Lake Havasu, AZ Posts: 8,045	.25 second steps would be 250ms. If you happen to have a unit that is in-fieled flashable, you would be able to upgrade the firmware yourself. NONE of our products at this point are guaranteed to be in-field upgradable. The newer hardware series will have in-field flashing as an advertised feature.