Thread Tools
Dec 27, 2015, 12:04 PM
Registered User
Jhsa:
this is what i have for DJT on ar9x. Also this is the 1st time I use DJT on ar9x. that is why I think it is odd. The DJT has no problem when I put on my Sky9x Tx which has a non-multi version of FW.
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Dec 27, 2015, 12:47 PM
Flying a Chipmunk in Portugal
jhsa's Avatar
those are the settings I have on mine.. I think you should try to find the cause of this on the other thread.. I think this might have nothing to do with the multi.

Joćo
Dec 27, 2015, 01:06 PM
Registered User
I have no problem with DJT on sky9x Tx with an older veresion of ersky9x, and I get telemetry with DJT on AR9X but the ESC won't initialize and serve went crazy. The only two factors I can think of is either AR9X board or the new r218i FW. Because this is the 1st time I use DJT on AR9X and happen to be with the test version r218i FW.
I posted a message to tedbmoss because I know he is testing the Multi with AR9X and the new FW.
on AR9X thread I don't known any one there is using the r218i testing Multi yet, r218i is only for testing Multi, I just happen to notice this DJT phenomenon while trying to compare the hub telemetry between cc2500 and DJT.
Dec 27, 2015, 01:26 PM
Flying a Chipmunk in Portugal
jhsa's Avatar
I meant the openrcforums..

You can try to downgrade the firmware to an older version and check if it works.. I'm not writing here about this problem anymore because we will go off topic..

Joćo
Dec 27, 2015, 04:21 PM
Registered User
I don't think I am going off topic, I am testing if the FW work with multi also testing if the multi hub protocol works well compared to original DJT hub reporting.
I just did not ask you, I was asking tedbmoss to see what his test result is so we can sort out what the problem is. May be it is my set up. I don't know. that is why I ask.
If you are not doing the testing, it is not going to help.
Dec 27, 2015, 05:12 PM
Flying a Chipmunk in Portugal
jhsa's Avatar
No, I was not testing, that is why I didn't install the same version as you to see if my module didn't do the same as yours.. Your problem as far as I understand is not with the multi but with the DJT.
Ok you didn't ask me, so I won't answer you anymore.. Case closed for me as mine works and that is what matters..
Good luck..

Joćo
Last edited by jhsa; Dec 27, 2015 at 05:24 PM.
Dec 27, 2015, 06:24 PM
Over 65 years of R/C flying
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaos0306
tedbmoss:
do you have problem running original DJT with AR9X with this r218i multi test version? It seems to me the DJT won't work, it has telemetry but my servo went crazy and ESC won't initialize.
But no problem with DJT on my Sky9x tx without the test version of ersky9x.
The ppm works ok with servos on my Rx, and the telemetering works but the readings bounce all over. I don't know where the I assume, com 1 tx pinout is on the mother board so my DJT module beeps all the time.

When I tried the logging function, the telemetering seemed to have correct or almost correct readings compared to the Tx. display.
Dec 27, 2015, 07:21 PM
Flying a Chipmunk in Portugal
jhsa's Avatar
Module updated with the 16 Channel version. CX-10 working on Ar9x board.

Joćo
Dec 27, 2015, 09:31 PM
Registered User

Zip files!


Quote:
Originally Posted by midelic
Somehow I understand his (re)action.
He represents directly the competitor of this project.

When he saw that Mike Blandford and his team helped this project by porting this to Er9X/Ersky9x and further the relative OpenTX with Taranis, .....the future perspective of deviation firmware becoming very grim. An Er9x/Erky9X TX or openTX/Ersky9X /Taranis TX with multiprotocol will push away the Devo Tx with deviation .

So he panicked.When people panic the fight or flee response jumps in.

Anyway that made me to disturb Pascal from its Christmas vacation with his family ,and we decided after New Year ,we will make public multiprotocol sources .Not sure yet if it will be on zip files or github.I think the first option.
zip files... come on this is the 21st Century! If you post zips for the source of each version I'll make a GitHub repository for it. Or just send them to me.
Dec 27, 2015, 11:38 PM
Registered User
120pilot's Avatar

Future of the firmware?


I was lucky and picked up a 9X when HK recently put them on sale. I was looking to build 2 or 3 different modules when I ran into this thread a month or so ago. I've been reading and following it since and am now anxiously waiting for all the hardware to show up so i can get started putting it together.

I'm a technician not an engineer so I can follow a schematic but I can't go very far in designing a circuit and I certainly can't write or modify code. So after the last few pages regarding licensing I'm beginning to wonder if by the time I get this put together there will be any firmware available for a layman like me? I am really looking forward to this project. Please tell me that there is a way that all parties can work this out so this is still available to people like me who must rely on the skills and good work of people like you all. Thanks so much for your generous efforts.
Dec 28, 2015, 12:45 AM
Registered User
Hey midelic.
So sharing source pops up again :-)

Any chance of serial interface for deviation?
I ask because ardunio multi module costs about same in hardware as deviation but no porting needed.
Dec 28, 2015, 01:36 AM
Registered User
midelic's Avatar
Thread OP
Phil
,long time no see..Nice to hear from you.
Serial interface on deviation. Idk ....you should ask the new deviation developers.I see PB is not so much around.
@120pilot,
I'll do my best to keep the shop open.
Dec 28, 2015, 02:27 AM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by SadSack
Hey midelic.
So sharing source pops up again :-)

Any chance of serial interface for deviation?
I ask because ardunio multi module costs about same in hardware as deviation but no porting needed.
In don't really understand the reluctance to share sources, only good things can come of it. Having many more people to contribute and debug the code. Personally I like to show off my work and always post sources even in mostly people arn't interested lol. But I also got into the habit of using GIT for version control so sharing on gitb is a 1 click operation
Dec 28, 2015, 01:46 PM
Pascal
hpnuts's Avatar
... Kids asking and asking and asking for the same thing... Doesn't it remember something to some of you who have kids? Even if you tell them you'll get it soon they are on your back all day long and you get quickly fed up isn't it? This is exactly how I feel today. Fed up by all your talk and requests. Wev'e said we will release the source code soon. Isn't it enough?
There are major changes ongoing plus documentation in progress so we'll publish the sources when this is done and tested. Or you want a quick and dirty publication with useless sources? Really?
The github repo is already there, documentation @90% and tests @20%.
But looking at what's happening I'm not quite sure I want to speed things up...
Latest blog entry: Samson RC Tugboat
Dec 28, 2015, 02:03 PM
Registered User
@hpnuts Many people would prefer quick &dirty, yes. It is only showing your repsect to the original authors of the code.

As for myself. I am implementing the UI side of the multi protocol and could use that source to determine what protocol have bind/autobind/range/option_range options actually implemented so I can hide/show them in the UI depending on the protocol.

For many people, inclduding me, when you publish source code under the GPL, you do that in the hope that other people will profit from your source code and also that these people are giving back by releasing the source code. When you see that people are not doing that, it feels very wrong. (Just search in the play store for VPN and I guarantee you that at least half of that products are in violation of the GPL of my app).

So it is probably a different view of how/when to release sources. You and midelic want a proper and cleaned up source publication and others want source publication of GPL programs immediately. Not saying that either alternative is better than the other but the GPL has decided on the latter.

But I really appreciate your effort in making the sources public.
Last edited by plaisthos; Dec 28, 2015 at 02:11 PM.


Quick Reply
Message:

Thread Tools