Looking to replace FF9 with FRSKY module with a better transmitter

[PatMc]

On 31/10/2021 at 13:41, leccyflyer said:

...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

 

 A couple of things that you might find handy using Open Tx when flying gliders is that any D series Rx's can prompt voice alerts for low Rx voltage &/or low RSSI value. Also if you have any 4 channel Rx's they can be used to give E,R & spoilerons, which can be a boon with gliders having tight fuselage space.      

[MattyB]

20 minutes ago, Graham Davies 3 said:

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.

 

If you want to use telemetry, then voice functionality is an absolute must - looking down at a screen whilst flying is bad news, especially if you have a lot of sensors onboard! For intance if using signal strength telemetry any RSSI warning will be spoken to you if they occur, so you can turn back and avoid losing a model. Flight modes is another good one - having the current mode played back to you when you select it is absolutely great, as with so many switches on the average modern TX it can be easy to flick the wrong one.

 

20 minutes ago, Graham Davies 3 said:

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.

 

The advantage of the MPM radios is you don't have to select just one - you can buy different RX types and use them all from one TX, just like in the good 'ol days! I personally have had good luck with Frsky ACCST, but in recent years they have made a few false steps and the rollout of ACCESS (their newest protocol) and their troubleshooting of a bug in ACCST v1 certainly left much to be desired. However, if starting afresh with no legacy RXs as you will be then ACCESS looks like a pretty good bet, though Frsky prices are not as bargainous as they were in the old days of D8 and D16 ACCST.

Edited November 1, 2021 by MattyB

[GrumpyGnome]

7 hours ago, Graham Davies 3 said:

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.

 

Graham

 

Hi Graham

 

You can have voice alerts when you need them.

 

For example, model name and throttle enabled/disabled when you select a model or switch the tx on; an alert when a switch changes, e.g.  'full flaps'; and an alert when you hit a momentary switch, e.g. flap position + undercarriage position + motor time remaining + flight time.

 

All VERY configurable (and customisable - my non system messages are samples of my wife's voice....).

 

GG

[Graham Davies 3]

Thanks GG.

It's not that i don't see the benefit in some of the options, or would not make use of them. I can certainly appreciate a voice alert for flight time remaining as I peer under my specs and try to quickly focus on the digits on my screen! I think where I come from is that whatever system I go for, I expect it to have such functionality. It comes down to HOW it is implemented and whether it is the best option for me. It's very clear that those that have got past the initial stages that it provides a hugely flexible platform.

 

When I get 2 minutes I will try the emulator.

 

Graham

[MattyB]

32 minutes ago, Graham Davies 3 said:

Thanks GG.

It's not that i don't see the benefit in some of the options, or would not make use of them. I can certainly appreciate a voice alert for flight time remaining as I peer under my specs and try to quickly focus on the digits on my screen! I think where I come from is that whatever system I go for, I expect it to have such functionality. It comes down to HOW it is implemented and whether it is the best option for me.

If that is the case I think you need to make sure you set a budget before comparing TXs. The different manufacturers price based on different things.

 

Futaba and Spektrum use the old skool model where sets with increasing channel count/functionality increase in price (and those increases seem to be larger for the steps at the top of the ranges). Jeti sell you the base transmitter with the DS12, then charge for additional software functionality whereas the ones higher up (the 16 and 24 variants) I believe come with “complete” software off the bat, though they are very expensive. Frsky have also gone for a new proprietary OS (ETHOS) with their new X20, but it has way more functionality than a comparable “big brand” Tx at the same price point (ETHOS development has been led by a member of the OpenTX team so is quite similar in some ways). Finally the commercial open source TXs essentially come with identical software and channel counts in the main; it is only the form factor, quality of the hardware and RF protocol(s) that differentiate them, but they are generally a bit less polished than a proprietary TX. Sadly some good mid range options have fallen by the wayside  in recent years (especially Hitec) so there are less options than there used to be.

 

Which TX is right for you will depend on multiple factors, but make no mistake that to get open source levels of functionality in a proprietary TX you are going to be at the top end of the range so talking a lot more money (£500-£2k+ depending on brand).

 

Edited November 2, 2021 by MattyB

[Graham Davies 3]

Thanks Matty. That's another useful nugget!

 

I had briefly considered a Futaba set, but not only are they eye-wateringly expensive, it's not particularly easy to see exactly what you get for your money. I would have to say; i'd be somewhat upset to find after spending a load of cash (by 'load' I mean more than for a reasonable OpenTX system) to find I have barely any more useable functionality that I have now. In any case, it would defeat the object of opening up useable and cost effective protocols.

 

It is indeed an interesting and extremely valid point you make; if you want maximum functionality (or at least flexibility) at minimum cost, then OpenTX is worth serious consideration. Put in that context, the inevitable learning curve is just part of the price to be paid.

 

I have not even considered the proprietary OS's such as ETHOS! 

 

The feel of the hardware is going to therefore become a major factor. Sadly, that's far less easy to try than it used to be. But given that I ma using pretty old gear, and the real world cost of a TX16 is relatively low, it may be a low risk gamble.

 

Heartfelt thanks to all that have contributed to this thread. It really has helped to demystify this complex issue.

 

Graham

[Max Z]

If I may add another 2ct.:

 

If you are used to Futaba, or another "canned mixer" system as @MattyBidentified it, you should ban the "Master/Slave" way of programming things from your mind.

In OpenTX, the relations are more like "Supplier/Customer", where the customer is in charge and can select its supplier independently.

In this way, the MIXERs are the customers, and they select their INPUTs as supplier. The term MIXERs is a bit misleading here, as it can also be a one to one relation with the INPUTs, as you can see in my pictures in an earlier post (and at the other end of the spectrum they can be a separate calculation line, to be used in turn as the input for another mixer).

 

Max.

[Graham Davies 3]

Hi Max,

 

Yes, I'd already mentally made that leap. I had it in my head as a process; Inputs -> Process -> Outputs.

 

I agree the term 'mixer' may be responsible for a lot of misunderstanding.

 

It's also clear to me that you have to define your signal path, or potentially nowt happens!

 

I'm an engineer and appreciate the evolution from single function product to complex solutions. Think how mobile phones have evolved and the inevitable compromises that have to be made to accommodate the colossal functionality we now (mostly) enjoy. A pocket calculator does a better job of being a calculator, but most people now use their phone even though it takes 4 steps to get to it. We are talking now a similar case; low functionality permits dedicated functions; high functionality requires some definition of what you want to do; that's the compromise we need to make here.

 

I think I've decided that I'm up for it. I can understand the logic, and there appears to be plenty of support for when I get stuck. But it looks easier to learn than SQL database languages...

 

?

 

Graham

[Max Z]

Hi Graham,

 

I'm also an engineer, albeit of the mechanical kind, but I have always been intrigued by programming stuff. Since a few years now I (mostly) enjoy programming Arduino boards for a variety of RC-oriented purposes.

About 25 years ago I made a deliberate choice for a Multiplex system as my first programmable Tx, after studying the manuals of the mainstream systems of those days, as it conformed best to the input-process-output stream I had affinity with. As MattyB said, it has helped understanding OpenTX relatively easily when I decided to take the plunge ??.

 

Max.

Edited November 2, 2021 by Max Z

[MattyB]

2 hours ago, Graham Davies 3 said:

The feel of the hardware is going to therefore become a major factor. Sadly, that's far less easy to try than it used to be. But given that I ma using pretty old gear, and the real world cost of a TX16 is relatively low, it may be a low risk gamble.

 

Yep, it is pretty much impossible to hold any TX before you buy it these days unless you know someone who has one. Luckily the TX16S has a pretty cnventional case, so if you are used to a 90s TX like the Futaba you will probably feel pretty at home - it's not exactly cutting edge design, just a bit larger than you are used to. You'd probably also like the original X9D Taranis too, as that is based on an ageing but effective case design from way back in the day. The Jetis, Frsky QX7, X10 Horusand the new X20 are all physically a bigger departure from your current set though, so if you are considering those go the extra mile, find someone who has one and get a grab before handing over any cash.

[Martin Arnold 1]

You're quite right MattyB, I went totally Frsky about 4 years ago and bought a QX7... I just could not get on with the shape of it, next was a Horus X12, just loved the looks... Too big and heavy.... After those two I ended up with the Taranis X9D Plus SE, which 

i have been very happy with over the last 3 1/2 years.

 

Would love an X20... A friend of mine has recently gone away from Futaba and bought one, I was so disappointed when I got my hands on it, for me the case is too short and it feels like the sticks should be about an inch and a half higher up in the case, a bit like the QX7 but worse, pity for me as I love the looks and build of it.

 

So in the mean time time I have bought a Radiomaster TX16s MAX, which I am comfortable with but not too impressed with the build quality, that said there is not much it won't do, but think I still prefer my X9D.

 

 

[GrumpyGnome]

X9D certainly feels better but the inbuilt MPM plus colour touch screen (when I load EdgeTX) swing it for me .......... 

[Allan Bennett]

22 hours ago, Graham Davies 3 said:

 . . . 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. . . . 

I have a few standard switch positions, but for many models I need one-off switches, such as 'cabin lights on', 'throttle differential', 'glider tow released', etc., so remembering which is which is sometimes problematic at my age ?  The announcements don't have to be made when you switch on the trannie because OTX will warn you if any switch is not in its proper position.  I program them to only announce when the switch is moved, and I can do that before flight to remind myself which is which for the particular model.

[Andy Gates]

On 01/11/2021 at 22:22, Graham Davies 3 said:

I always check switch positions prior to take off

Believe it or not, the RM Tx16 and the Jumper T16 can both do this for you with warnings if the switches are set in the wrong positions after the model is selected.

This means that the models can also have different switch positions programmed in.

The other thing I have found useful is a customised check list for each machine, in here I put info like differential thrust switch positions and telemetry call switch positions.

This is displayed on start up after the switch position check and prior to the Tx actually transmitting anything.

[EarlyBird]

18 hours ago, Graham Davies 3 said:

I think I've decided that I'm up for it. I can understand the logic, and there appears to be plenty of support for when I get stuck. But it looks easier to learn than SQL database languages...

Definitely easier. Start simple with a basic model and gradually build up adding as you go. Just like SQL but easier.? 

 

[GrumpyGnome]

MUCH easier than SQL.......... honest!

 

As you can see from the above, you certainly have huge flexibility - it's hard to think of something you can't do.

[Graham Davies 3]

I think I'm sold on the idea. Quick question; what is the difference between TX16S and TX16S SE? I have an option on one for not many sheckles..

 

Graham

[GrumpyGnome]

Gimbals not hall effect on SE

Less protocols supported on SE

 

Probably some more but I think those are key.

 

GG 

[leccyflyer]

Thanks to all who have contributed to this very interesting discussion. I've just taken the plunge and ordered the Radiomaster TX16S from a UK supplier. Prepared for a steep Open TX learning curve. ?

[ken anderson.]

well done leccy,you'll be pleased with the T16s...go in with an open(pun) mind and once you see how open tx works you'll be ok.

 

ken anderson...ne..1   happy leccy dept.

[leccyflyer]

It was your confidence in the product which convinced me Ken

Brian Cullen one-1  ah-Ken-Fine-Well-dept ?

[leccyflyer]

Have just opened my new Radiomaster TX16S and can see what others said about the build quality -in that it certainly doesn't feel as robust as a Futaba or Spektrum - but all the switches I could ever need are there and in the right place. The screen, on the other hand, is beyond superb-fantastically clear and easy to read. I'm very impressed with the screen. I opted for the 2s1p 5000mah lipo power pack rather than the loose pair of lipos and the Tx came with a carry bag, strap, screen protector, spare springs, USB cable and an SD card already fitted. Incredible for the very modest cost. Excellent service from the UK supplier too - delivered within less than 24 hours. Manual is a bit thin, but says that a more comprehensive version is available online.

 

[PatMc]

@leccyflyer can you tell me how the battery is connected & charged please. Is it connected to the Tx via the XT60 but charged externally from the Tx using this plug & balance lead in similar manner as an electric powered model ?

Also does the supplied Li-on tray have the same XT60 & balance lead ?

 

TIA, Pat.

[leccyflyer]

Hi Pat

The only connection from the 2s1p 5000mah battery to the tx is via the balance lead. The XT60 connector is redundant other than for charging. I'll be removing that.

The supplied battery tray for the loose 18650 cells just has the balance lead, no XT60 connector.

The instructions state that charging is through the USB charge port and a lead is supplied.

[Kevin Fairgrieve]

The full manual can be found here.

Manual.

 

I have a TX16S as my back up, backup, for my OpenTX TX.