Looking to replace FF9 with FRSKY module with a better transmitter

[leccyflyer]

I currently have my models split between most of my power models which use Spektrum, on my DX9 and DX7 transmitters and my gliders and a few powered models which use a Futaba FF9, with an aftermarket Frsky module. In terms of receivers those models are all using the older Frsky protocols -including FRSKY V4-FR-II,  D8R-II, V8-FR-II and V8-R7-II - a substantial number(>20) of receivers

Having got used to all the advantages of my DX-9 - voice alerts, ease of programming and model set up, model match, easy timer set ups and capability for telemetry - I'm in the market for a replacement tx for the FRSKY equipped models- mostly for gliders, but also for some smaller powered models.

I'm aware of changing protocols WRT EU vs UK vs International specs for these systems and the "grandfather rights" which enable the continued use of their older receivers, but do the users of this kit have any recommendations for newer transmitters, with a bit more to offer than the venerable FF9 and module? With a large number of these older receivers, which are working fine, if a more modern Frsky or compatible tx doesn't support those receivers I probably wouldn't bother, but I'd like to find out what is out there.

 

[Martin Arnold 1]

One of the multi protocol models such as the Radiomaster TX16s is worth a look, it will talk to all your Frsky rxs'.

 

You could look at a Frsky Qx7 or X9d, but they would need to be running the ACCST V1 protocol in international/fcc mode to run your older rxs'

[Andy Gates]

I agree with Martin.

 

At this moment in time the TX16 would be the best fit for you.

This has the ability to run your FrSky stuff (both old and newer protocols - not the new access stuff though) and the Spektrum machine all off the same transmitter.

 

There may be a bit of a learning curve initially to get used to OpenTX but believe me it is well worth the time invested.

[leccyflyer]

Thanks gents, I'll have a look at that option.?

[MattyB]

As the others have said, the only new TXs that will drive V8 and D8 series RXs out of the box are those based on the MUltiprotocol module (MPM); Frsky don’t make a transmitter that does those any longer. The RM TX16 is probably the best of those, though it probably still won’t feel terribly well built compared to a FF9. 
 

The only other option is to buy a new Frsky X9D, X7S or X10S and fit a DJT module in the back for the older protocols (bafflingly T9 and others are still selling DJTs despite the protocols not complying with EU regs since 2015).

 

Edited November 1, 2021 by MattyB

[ken anderson.]

hello leccy,all good advice for you here ............ i have  radiomaster T16s...impressed with it...the only thing you will probably have to contend with is it it uses Open TX as its software ...... bit of a learning curve until you get your head around it as its different to Futaba....... but don't be too daunted as its good.

 

ken anderson...ne...1..daunted dept.

[Mike Blandford]

3 hours ago, MattyB said:

. . . . fit a DJT module in the back for the older protocols (bafflingly T9 and others are still selling DJTs despite the protocols not complying with EU regs since 2015).

I've asked FrSky about this. I'm working with them on something new (including Tx RF) that supports D8, but this item is legal in the EU (I assume does LBT, but a FrSky engineer has confirmed it is legal).

 

Regarding firmware on the TX16S, and FrSky radios, there is also the option of using erskyTx. erskyTx is er9x updated for the ARM processors now in use. A manual for er9x is here: https://openrcforums.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=6473

openTx was forked from er9x, so many things are similar in both.

 

Many users find erskyTx easier to use than openTx as the menu system is "better". In passing, sticky throttle cut is built in as an option.

As an example, here is the model setup main index screen (this is for the smaller display radios). You may easily see what is available, and quickly go to it.

 

 

Mike

[Graham Davies 3]

7 minutes ago, Mike Blandford said:

I've asked FrSky about this. I'm working with them on something new (including Tx RF) that supports D8, but this item is legal in the EU (I assume does LBT, but a FrSky engineer has confirmed it is legal).

 

Regarding firmware on the TX16S, and FrSky radios, there is also the option of using erskyTx. erskyTx is er9x updated for the ARM processors now in use. A manual for er9x is here: https://openrcforums.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=6473

openTx was forked from er9x, so many things are similar in both.

 

Many users find erskyTx easier to use than openTx as the menu system is "better". In passing, sticky throttle cut is built in as an option.

As an example, here is the model setup main index screen (this is for the smaller display radios). You may easily see what is available, and quickly go to it.

 

 

Mike

Hi Mike,

 

I considered a TX16 a while ago, but decided at the time to stick with my 9CAP with FASST module as it's mostly all I need. However, it would be really helpful for someone like me to know exactly WHAT the likely challenges are when considering openTX based systems. I have seen a number of TX16s for sale, and most cite a difficulty in adapting to OpenTX as the reason.

 

Given your example above, what has to happen with OpenTX to set up a model? Your example is really good, and this is the first post I've found that hints at what the actual differences are. I think it would be really helpful to have some idea of WHAT the challenges are when considering OpenTX so I can make a value judgement as to whether I want to tread this path.

 

Thanks

 

Graham

[Kim Taylor]

Easiest way to get a 'feel' for what's involved would be to download OpenTX Companion to your computer and have a play with that.

For what it's worth, I changed to OpenTx on a Taranis X9D 2019 and was expecting to struggle at first. In fact, I found it relatively straightforward to set up, using the built in wizard for the basic setup, then adding features such as throttle cut and flaperon having followed an online tutorial.

I would say that as long as you're willing to 'forget' what you've done previously, it's a non issue.

Hth

Kim

[Max Z]

1 hour ago, Graham Davies 3 said:

I think it would be really helpful to have some idea of WHAT the challenges are when considering OpenTX so I can make a value judgement as to whether I want to tread this path.

This might be useful: https://rc-soar.com/opentx/basics/index.htm

 

And you can try all this out by installing the Companion software on your computer, as already mentioned by Kim. HERE is a manual, but don't get intimidated by all the references to actually uploading your "Profile" version of OpenTX to your transmitter.

 

Max.

Edited November 1, 2021 by Max Z

[Max Z]

To give you an example of how the simulation looks, here are a few pictures of adding a new, simple 4-channel model to my Taranis X-Lite Pro.

All the entries you see are introduced by a wizard, no extra effort from me required inbetween the pictures, just pushing the red buttons....

("MODEL06")

 

 

The bold numbers are weight factors that you can alter to your requirements. In this example there is no difference between doing that in INPUTS or MIXERS, but there will be when you are introducing actual mixers or dual servo's on a single input/stick.

 

The outputs are unchanged, with a default sub trim at 0.0%, and a range of -100% to +100%. This is the place to calibrate individual outputs towards the servo's.

 

Cheers,

Max.

Edited November 1, 2021 by Max Z

[Graham Davies 3]

Thanks Max, Kim.

 

I read through the link on your post Max. I have to say, I know more now than I did before.

 

I also now fully understand why this is not for everyone. 

 

Kim, your words:

"I would say that as long as you're willing to 'forget' what you've done previously, it's a non issue."

May be a slight understatement! I consider myself reasonably tech savvy, but it is a wholesale change in approach. My concern would be the number of ways to skin any particular cat, and the the foreseen and unforeseen (to the unwary) consequences of those choices. 

 

Whilst there are always built in limitations in any menu based system as they have to have a 'standard user' in mind when created, I feel I may be that 'standard user'!

 

By no means ruling OpenTX out, but from that little taster I will wait and evaluate the alternatives. Or carry on with my old 9CAP!

 

Graham

 

[MattyB]

2 hours ago, Mike Blandford said:

I've asked FrSky about this. I'm working with them on something new (including Tx RF) that supports D8, but this item is legal in the EU (I assume does LBT, but a FrSky engineer has confirmed it is legal).

 

Sorry Mike, but I am extremely sceptical of what the Frsky engineer is telling you. How it may work technically or whether they changed the code post 2015 to comply with the revised ETSI regs is really a moot point, as without a valid certificate of conformity it is not legal to sell in the EU.

 

Frsky pulled the DJT CE cert from their website in 2015 (and the DFT cert too) and it has never come back. They never recertified it against the new regs, presumably because it does not comply. Compare that to the XJT module and other current TXs like the X9D plus; the manuals of the most modern TXs like the X20 also state CE and FCC compliance explicitly. If it complies a) why did they pull V8 from all the EU sold TXs in 2015, and b) why not just put it back through certification to prove it? 

[Mike Blandford]

3 hours ago, MattyB said:

 

Sorry Mike, but I am extremely sceptical of what the Frsky engineer is telling you. How it may work technically or whether they changed the code post 2015 to comply with the revised ETSI regs is really a moot point, as without a valid certificate of conformity it is not legal to sell in the EU.

The unit I'm working on has a new RF module that supports ACCESS, ACCST D16 and D8, I believe this is the first ACCESS module to support D8. This is not yet a product that is available.

 

MIke

[Mike Blandford]

5 hours ago, Graham Davies 3 said:

. . .Given your example above, what has to happen with OpenTX to set up a model? Your example is really good, and this is the first post I've found that hints at what the actual differences are. I think it would be really helpful to have some idea of WHAT the challenges are when considering OpenTX so I can make a value judgement as to whether I want to tread this path.

The example I posted is for erskyTx (not openTx). For erskyTx, there is also a PC program (called eepskye) that may also help when looking at erskyTx (companion was forked from this). Both eepskye and erskyTx are available at http://www.er9x.com/

 

Mike

[Martin Arnold 1]

3 hours ago, MattyB said:

 

Sorry Mike, but I am extremely sceptical of what the Frsky engineer is telling you. How it may work technically or whether they changed the code post 2015 to comply with the revised ETSI regs is really a moot point, as without a valid certificate of conformity it is not legal to sell in the EU.

 

Frsky pulled the DJT CE cert from their website in 2015 (and the DFT cert too) and it has never come back. They never recertified it against the new regs, presumably because it does not comply. Compare that to the XJT module and other current TXs like the X9D plus; the manuals of the most modern TXs like the X20 also state CE and FCC compliance explicitly. If it complies a) why did they pull V8 from all the EU sold TXs in 2015, and b) why not just put it back through certification to prove it? 

How do Radiomaster get round this then, the multi protocol module in the TX16S supports all Frsky protocols except for ACCESS, this includes the original ACCST V1 D8, newer D8, D16 FCC, D16 EULBT and ACCST V2 again in both FCC and EU LBT.

[MattyB]

53 minutes ago, Mike Blandford said:

The unit I'm working on has a new RF module that supports ACCESS, ACCST D16 and D8, I believe this is the first ACCESS module to support D8. This is not yet a product that is available.

 

MIke

 

OK, sorry, I understand you now - when you referred to "this item" I thought you were talking about the DJT, but you actually meant the new prototype module. I wouldn't expect to get much back from Frsky on the DJT tbh; the fact they have had 7 years to recertify it but haven't tells the story! ?

[MattyB]

13 minutes ago, Martin Arnold 1 said:

How do Radiomaster get round this then, the multi protocol module in the TX16S supports all Frsky protocols except for ACCESS, this includes the original ACCST V1 D8, newer D8, D16 FCC, D16 EULBT and ACCST V2 again in both FCC and EU LBT.

 

Your guess is as good as mine. They have issued a CE cert for it, but as you are probably aware it is a self certification scheme. Draw you own conclusions... ?

 

EDIT - Jsut to be clear, whether or not Radiomaster, Jumper et al are bending the rules anyone who uses a UK sourced MPM compliant TX with a CE cert is operating perfectly legally. This is because the onus to prove compliance is on the importer/seller, not the user.

Edited November 1, 2021 by MattyB

[Allan Bennett]

6 hours ago, Graham Davies 3 said:

 . . . Whilst there are always built in limitations in any menu based system as they have to have a 'standard user' in mind when created, I feel I may be that 'standard user'! . . . 

 

I moved from Futaba to FrSky/OpenTx a couple of years ago when I (and forum members) couldn't figure out how to do a very simple thing with the Futaba -- have a throttle-cut operating on both motors of an electric twin, where each motor was on a separate Rx channel so that I could have differential by linking them to the rudder.  Having used OpenTx, I simply couldn't live without much of its flexibility, and its ability to put voice alerts on every switch and action.

[GrumpyGnome]

Couldn't agree more.  I have voice alerts on all my switches and a series of logical switches, so flicking a momentary switch, I get a 'checklist' of switch positions. Can't imagine going back now........

 

GG

 

P.S. love my TX16S too ?

[Graham Davies 3]

7 minutes ago, Allan Bennett said:

I moved from Futaba to FrSky/OpenTx a couple of years ago when I (and forum members) couldn't figure out how to do a very simple thing with the Futaba -- have a throttle-cut operating on both motors of an electric twin, where each motor was on a separate Rx channel so that I could have differential by linking them to the rudder.  Having used OpenTx, I simply couldn't live without much of its flexibility, and its ability to put voice alerts on every switch and action.

Good to hear a positive outcome Allan. I certainly appreciate the limitations of the 9CAP. Some things are just ridiculous, and others are not possible at all. But it's nearly 20 years old, so progress is to be expected. I think for me, I'd like to see how other operating systems work so I can find a system that gives me something over what the 9CAP offers without becoming a hobby in itself! But, I'm in no hurry. For the most part, I am happy with what the 9CAP can do,

[leccyflyer]

24 minutes ago, GrumpyGnome said:

Couldn't agree more.  I have voice alerts on all my switches and a series of logical switches, so flicking a momentary switch, I get a 'checklist' of switch positions. Can't imagine going back now........

 

GG

 

P.S. love my TX16S too ?

Those voice alerts and a decent voice timer are two of the things I really miss when using the FF9 rather than my DX9.

[MattyB]

1 hour ago, Graham Davies 3 said:

Good to hear a positive outcome Allan. I certainly appreciate the limitations of the 9CAP. Some things are just ridiculous, and others are not possible at all. But it's nearly 20 years old, so progress is to be expected. I think for me, I'd like to see how other operating systems work so I can find a system that gives me something over what the 9CAP offers without becoming a hobby in itself! But, I'm in no hurry. For the most part, I am happy with what the 9CAP can do,

 

The Open source firmwares OpenTX and ErSkyTX (and I believe the new upstart Edge TX in the latest release) are the only ones that offer a free "try before you buy" option via a PC simulator. Anything proprietary from Spektrum, Futaba et al and you are going to have to borrow or buy one to get the full experience, or watch a lot of Youtube vids! 

 

PS - What is it that you want/need to do with your new TX that the 9CAP cannot? If you list these out we can give you some guidance on how easy or difficult you might find them in OpenTX. Coming from a radio like that I suspect the things that are frustrating you will be relatively simple to do in OpenTX/ErSkyTX...

 

PPS - This is my favourite video on OpenTX; 7 years on OpenTX now has even more additional functionality than it had back then, but the fundamentals of how information flows through the system are the same today as they were then; this will never change:

 

 

Edited November 1, 2021 by MattyB

[Graham Davies 3]

It's not so much what the 9CAP can't do, but what would I replace it with? I'm operating a moribund technology (FASST) so at some point I will need to do something different. The one thing I would take advantage of is telemetry, but I am then thinking about all the other things more modern equipment can offer that I didn't know I couldn't live without!

 

There will be some things I won't make use of, and others I will. I have a pretty solid personal routine where I always check switch positions prior to take off, so the example above of voice prompts would probably get on my nerves. However, I can imagine making use of flight modes.

 

But the real question for me is if I am forced to buy another transmitter, which protocol would I get on with? It's certainly handy to have an emulator. Otherwise it's often a case of simply taking a plunge and then getting your head down to learn how to use the equipment you have.

 

Everyone's input on here has been very  helpful though.

 

Graham

[MattyB]

10 hours ago, Mike Blandford said:

Regarding firmware on the TX16S, and FrSky radios, there is also the option of using erskyTx. erskyTx is er9x updated for the ARM processors now in use. A manual for er9x is here: https://openrcforums.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=6473

openTx was forked from er9x, so many things are similar in both.

 

Many users find erskyTx easier to use than openTx as the menu system is "better". In passing, sticky throttle cut is built in as an option.

As an example, here is the model setup main index screen (this is for the smaller display radios). You may easily see what is available, and quickly go to it.

 

 

Mike

 

I have to say that I agree that ErSkyTX is a tad easier for someone coming to open source firmwares from a canned mixer system. By the time I discovered it I had already gone "all in" on OpenTX so I stuck where I was (moving across was relatively pain free for me as luckily I was coming from Multiplex, the only proprietary brand whose core logic is very similar - in fact it's said that the Mpx P4000 was what guided the early Open Source firwares). However if I hadn't already been so far along I would probably have gone the ErSky way, the interface is that bit nicer and it's still just as powerful.