By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more
Forum sponsored by:
Forum sponsored by CML

Radiomaster TX16s Anyone tried one?

All Topics | Latest Posts

Search for:  in Thread Title in  
Tim A15/07/2020 21:53:59
234 forum posts
13 photos

With Hitec going out of the transmitter market, my concern is if my Aurora 9 dies, I am left with a lot of usless receivers. With this in mind I came across the Radiomaster TX16S witch is a Multiprotocol Open Source based system capable of communicating with Hitec receivers.

The reviews I have read all sound good and rate it higher than the Jumper T16, however there is a lack of feedback from users. So if has anyone got one I would be interested in their opinion.

J Moyler15/07/2020 22:15:41
151 forum posts
56 photos

I have recently brought one and am in the process of setting it up. First impressions are good. One little thing the I like is that all the switches are labelled, unlike some Frsky transmitters. If you do not know open TX prepared for a steep learning curve. There are a few videos on on you tube. Try painless360.

The reason why I got mine is for training. With a 4 in one module, you should be able to It use as a master radio With any radio as a slave. At the moment I have it set up as a master with a spectrum DX7 as slave. I have still got a few things to do before I going flying. Will report back next week once I use it.

JM

Steve Balaam15/07/2020 22:29:58
avatar
133 forum posts

I have one but unfortunately haven't had chance to fly a plane with it yet.

I changed from a Jumper because of the problems users were having with the ribbon cables although updated ribbon cables are now available. Overall the build quality of the Radiomaster is good but doesn't quite match my FRsky X10s but then again for the price the Radiomaster is a steal. I've updated the Radiomaster to the latest OpenTX 2.3.9 using Companion software with no problems and transferred my models from the X10S with little or no changes. I'm eagerly waiting OpenTx 2.4 which should enable the touch screen functions. The Radiomaster is also Multi-protocol as is the Jumper so you should be able to still use your existing RXs. For me the weakest parts are the three rotary knobs and two side sliders which seem to be not the best quality. I personally will not fly a plane with a Tx that has a battery tray it's just inviting trouble, I purchased a lithium -Ion battery for mine but a LiPo can be used too. There are lots of reviews on YouTube which may also help your decision to purchase one. Hope this helps.

Stephen Smith 1416/07/2020 19:08:37
228 forum posts

I have an Aurora 9X for sale if you want to stay with hitec. Perfect condition, lipo fitted, and in an original hitec case.

Tim A18/07/2020 01:26:03
234 forum posts
13 photos

Thanks for the feed back, obviously judging by the few replies there can't be many in use yet!

Stephen thanks for the offer but my idea is to future proof in case of the terminal demise of my existing TX's. Also I live in New Zealand and the cost of your TX and freight, taxes etc would work out dearer than the TX16s!!

After a long and technical discussion with our club electronics guru. at club night on Thursday night I pushed the button on Aliexpress last night for a very reasonable NZ$260.00 (Approx. 130.00BP). The other incentive was the tax man giving me a very nice EOY refund.

All I have to do now is get my head round OpenTX, Club Guru said "Oh it's easy" which is all very well for him, he was an RNZAF Avionics Tech!!

Richard Clark 218/07/2020 04:42:58
426 forum posts
Posted by Tim A on 18/07/2020 01:26:03:

Thanks for the feed back, obviously judging by the few replies there can't be many in use yet!

Stephen thanks for the offer but my idea is to future proof in case of the terminal demise of my existing TX's. Also I live in New Zealand and the cost of your TX and freight, taxes etc would work out dearer than the TX16s!!

After a long and technical discussion with our club electronics guru. at club night on Thursday night I pushed the button on Aliexpress last night for a very reasonable NZ$260.00 (Approx. 130.00BP). The other incentive was the tax man giving me a very nice EOY refund.

All I have to do now is get my head round OpenTX, Club Guru said "Oh it's easy" which is all very well for him, he was an RNZAF Avionics Tech!!

You can tell how 'easy' it is by the huge question count of the "How do I do this?" or "Why won't it connect to?" or "Why won't it update?" or "Why do I have to update the receiver software?" etc etc etc on this and other forums.

Open software is an excellent idea in principle and as a model flyer I was very interested in OpenTx initially.

But regarding OpenTx in particular, as a professional programmer who, among other things, has written high end 'mainframe' operating systems for 30 years plus and still doing it I see these endless questions, coupled with the many ways of doing the same thing, as a sure sign of too many amateur cooks

Ron Gray18/07/2020 07:48:16
2235 forum posts
978 photos

Tim A, good luck with the TX16, it looks to be a very good radio and running Open Tx will make it very easy to use.

Tim A19/07/2020 03:59:39
234 forum posts
13 photos

Thanks Ron, I am actually looking forward to getting the grey matter going on something new, not that I expect it to be a major challenge having been fault finding electronics for the last roughly thirty years before I retired. Will keep you posted.

Richard, I think a lot of people have trouble because of a lack of research, reading then following instructions (Manuals are for Sissy's), and the old if I push this button what will it do? Others do not have the ability or mindset to work with these systems, they can be complicated yes but a methodical and logical approach is the only way. The other thing I found in my working life is you always hear all the negatives and very few positives. Auntie Google is great source for depression.

Oh Ron by the way, have yet to fly my Radial Rocket and it will have to wait till spring when the grass is beaten to within microns of it's life, plus the image in the July issue's parting shot fades from memory.secret

Richard Clark 219/07/2020 05:23:20
426 forum posts
Posted by Tim A on 19/07/2020 03:59:39:

Thanks Ron, I am actually looking forward to getting the grey matter going on something new, not that I expect it to be a major challenge having been fault finding electronics for the last roughly thirty years before I retired. Will keep you posted.

Richard, I think a lot of people have trouble because of a lack of research, reading then following instructions (Manuals are for Sissy's), and the old if I push this button what will it do? Others do not have the ability or mindset to work with these systems, they can be complicated yes but a methodical and logical approach is the only way. The other thing I found in my working life is you always hear all the negatives and very few positives. Auntie Google is great source for depression.

Oh Ron by the way, have yet to fly my Radial Rocket and it will have to wait till spring when the grass is beaten to within microns of it's life, plus the image in the July issue's parting shot fades from memory.secret

 

Tim,

It's not that OpenTx is 'difficult' or won't do what people want, it's that by the usual commercial standards of ANY software the user interface is awful. Most people want to do their jobs or pursue their 'entertainment', be it flying model planes or anything else. They don't want to faff around with software or post questions about it on forums.

And humans are neither 'naturally' logical nor want to be. We have to be 'trained' in it. Most animals are logical  as it's all they have. 

Manuals. Yes. First nobody like writing them and 'testing' them step by step with a naive user against what actually happens is very time consuming.

Incidentally Multiplex users have no problem with OpenTx as they are both 'object orientated' unlike most other radios.

Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 19/07/2020 05:32:26

Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 19/07/2020 05:34:22

kc19/07/2020 16:52:55
6588 forum posts
173 photos

Anyone considering the Jumper T12 or Open Tx should read David Ashby's article " Look before You Leap" in RCME Oct 2019. The article said basically that Open Tx is for those who enjoy such things, whilst if you are just a fixed wing aeromodeller ( and especially those needing the help of an instructor) buy a radio which is more familiar in your chosen club.

Mike Blandford19/07/2020 20:11:07
avatar
646 forum posts
25 photos

I have erskyTx running on most of the radios that run openTx (I'm just sorting it for the RM TX16S). Note that erskyTx is offered by FrSky as an option for the X9Lite.

erskyTx is much easier to navigate than openTx, while providing about the same flexibility (both were forked from er9x).

When you go to set up a model, you first get this index page:

sd1.jpg

From where you may easily see what is available to configure.

So if you are having difficulty with openTx you might consider erskyTx.

Mike

Richard Clark 220/07/2020 03:10:27
426 forum posts
Posted by kc on 19/07/2020 16:52:55:

Anyone considering the Jumper T12 or Open Tx should read David Ashby's article " Look before You Leap" in RCME Oct 2019. The article said basically that Open Tx is for those who enjoy such things, whilst if you are just a fixed wing aeromodeller ( and especially those needing the help of an instructor) buy a radio which is more familiar in your chosen club.

David Ashby's comments are interesting. Bur though I am sure he did not intend it, some would see his remarks about "just a fixed wing aeromodeller" and "those needing the help of an instructor" as sneers about people who make other choices.

He may not intend to sneer  but there are many OpenTx advocates  that most certainly do.

However, on to OpenTx itself.

I have seen and heard several times   that the initial concepts  of OpenTx were 'inspired' by the old (first  produced in 1998-2000 or thereabouts)  Multiplex Profi 4000.

Having just read Mike Shelim's recently updated 'OpenTx Key Concepts' article I would go further.

The  concepts  of OpenTx were 'lifted'  in their  ENTIRETY straight from the Multiplex Profi 4000 with no changes whatsoever except for altering a few names.

 

Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 20/07/2020 03:39:50

Ron Gray20/07/2020 06:11:11
2235 forum posts
978 photos
Posted by Richard Clark 2 on 20/07/2020 03:10:27

However, on to OpenTx itself.

I have seen and heard several times that the initial concepts of OpenTx were 'inspired' by the old (first produced in 1998-2000 or thereabouts) Multiplex Profi 4000.

Having just read Mike Shelim's recently updated 'OpenTx Key Concepts' article I would go further.

The concepts of OpenTx were 'lifted' in their ENTIRETY straight from the Multiplex Profi 4000 with no changes whatsoever except for altering a few names.

Yawn, here we go again and completely off topic.

ken anderson.20/07/2020 07:40:21
avatar
8714 forum posts
808 photos

hello Tim, check out a number of threads relating to the jumper TX's which is basically what the radiomaster is....good/bad attempts to set up etc....good luck,i was quite taken by the tx been multi protocol...… but don't know from what I've read it it would be money down the sink...

 

Type Jumper in the forum search box....there are a few threads...

 

ken anderson...ne...1.sink dept.

Edited By ken anderson. on 20/07/2020 07:48:02

MattyB20/07/2020 12:14:53
avatar
2105 forum posts
32 photos
Posted by Richard Clark 2 on 19/07/2020 05:23:20:

..It's not that OpenTx is 'difficult' or won't do what people want, it's that by the usual commercial standards of ANY software the user interface is awful. Most people want to do their jobs or pursue their 'entertainment', be it flying model planes or anything else. They don't want to faff around with software or post questions about it on forums.

...Incidentally Multiplex users have no problem with OpenTx as they are both 'object orientated' unlike most other radios.

...I have seen and heard several times that the initial concepts of OpenTx were 'inspired' by the old (first produced in 1998-2000 or thereabouts) Multiplex Profi 4000.

Having just read Mike Shellim's recently updated 'OpenTx Key Concepts' article I would go further.

The concepts of OpenTx were 'lifted' in their ENTIRETY straight from the Multiplex Profi 4000 with no changes whatsoever except for altering a few names.

I am struggling a bit to see how you are reconciling these points of view. You are a Mpx user who likes their kit and acknowledge OpenTX is based on the Profi4000 OS, but you also believe the OpenTX interface is awful? Have you tried OpenTX on a more recent TX like the X10 or X12 with a better screen and more real estate for displaying things?

Having used an 35MHz Evo (~10 years) and P4000 (~2 years) in the past I find OpenTX more usable than both. The most straightforward setups were slightly easier on the Evo, but there were significant foibles/limitations to learn not present in OpenTX (one good example is the left/right Mpx channel sequencing rule) to catch you out. It also had limited functionality by comparison (no logical switches, global mixers across models, etc) which did make it simpler but wassomewhat limiting.

The Profi was for me way harder than OpenTX. It had a similar level of functionality (minus telemetry) but you were limited to setting up on the TX; having Companion makes that process far easier, especially if you are looking to use the more advanced functions. It was an amazing set in it's day, but being born before internet usage was fully mainstream meant it was always going to be niche due to the effort needed to utilise that functionality. By comparison OpenTX and the other open source (and even closed source object oriented systems like the Jeti) have advantages that make them much easier to get more out of - there are PC simulators, loads of templates to download and use/learn from, and a huge community and network of resources to support users.

So putting the Mpx comparisons to one side, how usable really is OpenTX? You are right it is not perfect, though some of that is about it's origins; in the early days hardware restrictions (screens and processing power) of the and the demands for more functionality by users meant usability was not a focus. Even now low cost sets with lowish resolution LCD screens make up the majority of sales, but the interface is better on sets like the X10/X12. I still think the main "problem" users have with OpenTX is not a fundamental lack of usability, it's all about unlearning their old system. Object oriented is fundamentally very different approach, and if a new user approaches it from the angle of "How would I do this in my old Futaba/JR/Spektrum?" then it is always likely to be a struggle. I think this is why it has been so popular with complete newcomers to the hobby - it's cheap, feature rich and they haven't had to forget alternative ways of achieving the same results! Understand the flow and you are all good...

Edited By MattyB on 20/07/2020 12:19:08

MattyB20/07/2020 14:53:07
avatar
2105 forum posts
32 photos
Posted by Mike Blandford on 19/07/2020 20:11:07:

I have erskyTx running on most of the radios that run openTx (I'm just sorting it for the RM TX16S). Note that erskyTx is offered by FrSky as an option for the X9Lite.

erskyTx is much easier to navigate than openTx, while providing about the same flexibility (both were forked from er9x).

When you go to set up a model, you first get this index page:

sd1.jpg

From where you may easily see what is available to configure.

So if you are having difficulty with openTx you might consider erskyTx.

Mike

+1 vote for erskyTX - I really liked it when I tried it out, it defiitely has enhanced usability. However I'd been using OpenTX so long by that point and had multiple transmitters to convert, so I decided to stick.

Ron Gray20/07/2020 16:55:29
2235 forum posts
978 photos
Posted by Mike Blandford on 19/07/2020 20:11:07:

erskyTx is much easier to navigate than openTx, while providing about the same flexibility (both were forked from er9x).

Whilst off topic of this thread I can't see what is much easier than this to create a model

img_4430.jpg

img_4431.jpg

img_4432.jpg

img_4433.jpg

img_4434.jpg

img_4436.jpg

img_4437.jpg

Richard Clark 220/07/2020 17:17:55
426 forum posts
Posted by MattyB on 20/07/2020 12:14:53:
Posted by Richard Clark 2 on 19/07/2020 05:23:20:

..It's not that OpenTx is 'difficult' or won't do what people want, it's that by the usual commercial standards of ANY software the user interface is awful. Most people want to do their jobs or pursue their 'entertainment', be it flying model planes or anything else. They don't want to faff around with software or post questions about it on forums.

...Incidentally Multiplex users have no problem with OpenTx as they are both 'object orientated' unlike most other radios.

...I have seen and heard several times that the initial concepts of OpenTx were 'inspired' by the old (first produced in 1998-2000 or thereabouts) Multiplex Profi 4000.

Having just read Mike Shellim's recently updated 'OpenTx Key Concepts' article I would go further.

The concepts of OpenTx were 'lifted' in their ENTIRETY straight from the Multiplex Profi 4000 with no changes whatsoever except for altering a few names.

I am struggling a bit to see how you are reconciling these points of view. You are a Mpx user who likes their kit and acknowledge OpenTX is based on the Profi4000 OS, but you also believe the OpenTX interface is awful? Have you tried OpenTX on a more recent TX like the X10 or X12 with a better screen and more real estate for displaying things?

Having used an 35MHz Evo (~10 years) and P4000 (~2 years) in the past I find OpenTX more usable than both. The most straightforward setups were slightly easier on the Evo, but there were significant foibles/limitations to learn not present in OpenTX (one good example is the left/right Mpx channel sequencing rule) to catch you out. It also had limited functionality by comparison (no logical switches, global mixers across models, etc) which did make it simpler but was somewhat limiting.

The Profi was for me way harder than OpenTX. It had a similar level of functionality (minus telemetry) but you were limited to setting up on the TX; having Companion makes that process far easier, especially if you are looking to use the more advanced functions. It was an amazing set in it's day, but being born before internet usage was fully mainstream meant it was always going to be niche due to the effort needed to utilise that functionality. By comparison OpenTX and the other open source (and even closed source object oriented systems like the Jeti) have advantages that make them much easier to get more out of - there are PC simulators, loads of templates to download and use/learn from, and a huge community and network of resources to support users.

So putting the Mpx comparisons to one side, how usable really is OpenTX? You are right it is not perfect, though some of that is about it's origins; in the early days hardware restrictions (screens and processing power) of the and the demands for more functionality by users meant usability was not a focus. Even now low cost sets with lowish resolution LCD screens make up the majority of sales, but the interface is better on sets like the X10/X12. I still think the main "problem" users have with OpenTX is not a fundamental lack of usability, it's all about unlearning their old system. Object oriented is fundamentally very different approach, and if a new user approaches it from the angle of "How would I do this in my old Futaba/JR/Spektrum?" then it is always likely to be a struggle. I think this is why it has been so popular with complete newcomers to the hobby - it's cheap, feature rich and they haven't had to forget alternative ways of achieving the same results! Understand the flow and you are all good...

Edited By MattyB on 20/07/2020 12:19:08

Matty,

I'll start with the Profi 4000. It's not 'difficult' to 'configure' ('program' is technically incorrect though we all use the term) bur it very tedious due to the small four-line display meaning you can't do much in one go, you have to keep jumping about.

However, enough of that

OpenTx.

The 'flow  is identical to Mpx for all l practical purposes.

However, because I have serious doubts about Mpx continuing as a radio manufacturer for much longer I am beginning to think about something else.

Jeti costs more than I am willing to pay as does  Powerbox (who I suspect won't last long). The cheapest Futaba that even comes close to equalling Evo functionality is over £1000. And I would prefer to avoid its 'bus' system even though I only have two models with more than 8 channels at present.

So OpenTx it is likely to be. But I have doubts about the quality and 'feel' of the transmitters that support it (though Mpx is nothing special either). And I think 'companion' though not compulsory is too much of a faff to bother with.

However, I'm thinking about it. But I'm, not yet prepared to spend the money (including receiver) on what  for me at present would be an 'experiment'.

Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 20/07/2020 17:29:40

Phil Olson - Model Technics26/07/2020 10:11:21
avatar
46 forum posts
1 photos

Well I ordered mine a week or so ago from Banggood - I guess it will be a couple of weeks before it actually arrives but I'm looking forward to trying it out - I was originally Futaba but went FRSky Taranis when they first came out and then put a Multi Protocol module in tha back of it. I'm hoping the Radiomaster will replace the Taranis without any problems, from the RC Groups thread the quality of the Radiomaster seems to be OK

ken anderson.26/07/2020 13:03:06
avatar
8714 forum posts
808 photos

well done Phil, let us know your opinion when you get yours delivered, thanks... ……… they seem to have a good spec when I've read about them..

ken anderson...ne..1....spec dept.

All Topics | Latest Posts

Please login to post a reply.

Latest Forum Posts
Support Our Partners
Sussex Model Centre
Slec
CML
electricwingman 2017
Sarik
Advertise With Us
Latest "For Sale" Ads
Has home isolation prompted you to start trad' building?
Q: The effects of Coronavirus

 Yes - for the first time
 Yes - but Ive bashed balsa before
 No - Ive existing projects on the bench
 No - Im strictly an ARTF person

Latest Reviews
Digital Back Issues

RCM&E Digital Back Issues

Contact us

Contact us

Magazine Locator

Want the latest issue of RCM&E? Use our magazine locator link to find your nearest stockist!

Find RCM&E!