MattyB
-
Posts
4,549 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
10
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Calendar
Downloads
Posts posted by MattyB
-
-
Sadly I think it's vapourware. They have been promising a more advanced higher channel count TX for years, but even if they came up with it tomorrow they have lost so much ground and so many customers I would think long and hard before investing in a system whose future was uncertain. I would recommend you look at another player with a more certain future, be that FrSky, Spektrum or Futaba (JR and other smaller manufacturers like Graupner and Multiplex may make great products, but IMO none of them are certain to exist in the RC market in 5 years time).
-
Posted by jim longbon on 20/02/2017 11:38:26:
Hi chaps l have been trying to reflash two brand new X6R receivers. l have been following a mixture of Painless 365 and sincere advice given by some very helpful forumites. It seems so simple to do mmmmmmmmmm!!!!.
l would like to start again from ground zero. My taranis plus was purchased in the early part of 2015, l still use the original taranis firmware. The taranis shows i,m running open tx -9dp -v2.0.92-eu with a date of 2015-02 -27. The taranis shows D16-eu on the internal RF. My question is have l started up the wrong road ( the rx,would not bind to the taranis straight out of the box). and what am l running is it EU then why did the new rx,s not bind or am l running something else. Cheers chaps.
If you bought your TX in early 2015 then it will definitely have the v1 EU firmware on it that some people found gave range issues. Do not be tempted to useyour TX in this state - we do need to make sure that RF firmware is updated! As BEB states above the EU v1 firmware will not work with currently sold EU v2 (LBT) RXs, hence why your newly purchased X6Rs are not very lively at this point.
Things to do, in order:
- Leave the RF firmware in your new X6R RXs alone - there is no need to change them.
- Read back through this thread from the start and you will find lots of links and all the steps needed to update your Taranis Open TX firmware to v2.1 and it's (separate) RF firmware to the latest EU LBT standard. Follow them to achieve this goal (you can ask questions here if needed, but the key bit is reading this thread, it will really help you).
- Once your Taranis is on OTX 2.1 and the latest EU LBT RF firmware, try binding your new RXs - they should now work fine.
- Flash your older X series RXs to the latest RF firmware following the instructions linked from this thread, then rebind them.
- Use the system as normal. All your current RXs should now be working, and any future X series you purchase will work straight out of the box.
- Should there ever be another change in EU regulations that means a change to FrSky's RF protocol you will be able to update any X-series RXs by connecting them to the transmitter and reflashing to whichever version of RF firmware you want to use.
Edited By MattyB on 20/02/2017 12:34:47
-
Any old standard servo should be fine - 311s are as good as any. I've certainly never seen one broken, but fit an MG version if you are worried.
Edited By MattyB on 16/02/2017 12:22:43
-
Posted by Guvnor on 15/02/2017 23:52:17:
It's over. Horizon UK shuts end of March, all staff going.
If true there is a certain irony to that. So many times those with Spektrum radios have told me the reason they would never go with FrSky is an absence of UK based mail in support (fundamentally incorrect, but many are unaware of the services offered by Premier FrSky dealers like T9, plus spares are readily available for repairs at home too). Now with this change that is exactly where Spek users are themselves; mail in support is going to get a whole lot more expensive and time consuming now international shipping is involved.
-
Posted by Martin Harris on 15/02/2017 10:27:13:
To clarify, the actual orientation of the aerials isn't the important factor - you just need to make sure they are at 90 degrees to each other in one plane to give maximum diversity. The other concern, not likely in your case, is to ensure that a large engine, motor, battery etc. isn't likely to shade reception for both aerials in a particular direction.
Not strictly true, at least if you are using a TX with a single aerial.
You are right that the RX aerials should be at 90 degrees to each other. However, under normal circumstances (i.e. the models most common orientation, which for most but not all will be straight and level) the RX aerials should be in the same plane as the TX aerial to avoid losses associated with polarisation i.e. if the TX aerial is layed down flat across the top of the TX both RX aerials should be flat too relative to the fuselage. Not so important in aerobatic aircraft flown close, but this can make a real difference if you fly models at long (but still within LOS) range - it's especially important for glider guiders.
Important note - Obviously if you have a TX with diversity (one aerial vertical, the other horizontal) this guidance is moot; just separate your aerials at roughly 90 degrees to each other wherever they can conveniently be fitted without being blanked by engines, motors, batteries, servos and other metal or carbon fibre components.
Edited By MattyB on 15/02/2017 18:28:11
Edited By MattyB on 15/02/2017 18:28:45
-
Posted by SONNY MONKS on 15/02/2017 15:27:09:
which spectrum dx6e or the 6i?
Sonny your question is not really anything to do with the original topic being discussed here - please start a new thread so the conversation does not get dragged off topic. Many thanks.
-
That's fairly old news - Staufenbiel were acquired by HH way back in July 2014. Doesn't surprise me that the fabled HH customer service is dropping off though; I understand they were acquired by new owners some years back who have done some quite substantial restructuring.
-
Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 10/02/2017 16:12:28:...Considering the other manufacturers there doesn't appear to be a lot to say. JR in steady slight decline - but that's not news! MPX and Jeti have their loyal followers and seem to be broadly maintaining their share of the market - but not expanding dramatically.Posted by James Middleton on 15/02/2017 01:14:14:
To answer the question... What's the MAIN radio brand you use 2017?... I had to vote "FrSky" ...it's actually an old X388S with a DJT module and D8R-11. If/when I upgrade it's likely to be to a Taranis X9D +
James post is another example to me of why JR are well beyond "slow and steady decline"; I would say they are in terminal freefall. They have a small band of fiercely loyal users, but by far the majority of those are still using the bombproof 35MHz sets from the 90s and noughties with 2.4 modules from FrSky et al in the back, or the DSM2 era 2.4 sets. How many JR users have actually gone and bought a DMSS TX? Almost none. Combine that with the huge numbers they lost when they split from Spektrum and the current R&D/new product moratorium and I just cannot see a way back.
Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 10/02/2017 16:12:28:...The HiTec result is bit surprising to me. They showed quite strong growth between 2012 and 2014 and with a new attractive range of the Tx's out I had expected them to continue that growth. But they seem to have plateaued?Problem is they got themselves stuck with a protocol with a very low (9) channel count, and despite promising a new mid range TX in the 14ch region for years still don't have one. Everyone else - Spek, Frsky, Jeti and even Futaba - moved on and have far more compelling mid range offerings, whilst Jeti have done a good job of gathering a good chunk of the high end sales.
The Flash TXs are nice, but why would anyone buy one if no-one they know locally has one to show/help them with, I can have all of the HH ecosystem of BNFs if I go Spek, or massively more functionality if I choose FrSky? They are short of a USP and have lost the momentum the Aurora gave them; everyone I know who had one still has given up and moved on to other TXs, mostly FrSky and Spek.
Edited By MattyB on 15/02/2017 01:46:42
-
HobbyWing are definitely the OEM for the Turnigy Plush; their ESCs have been rebranded many times across the world, but whatever the wrapping on them they seem to work very well and are my ESC of choice for small sport planes. Whether the Overlander is a Hobbywing rebrand I can't say, but it is highly unlikely that Overlander are selling a product manufactured exclusively for them, especially given the low price point. As for IP violations, well... given a huge percentage of these low cost electronic devices are made in China, good luck with any prosecution!
Edited By MattyB on 13/02/2017 16:47:54
-
Posted by Ian Jones on 12/02/2017 20:52:25:
If you are not tied to Spektrum, many Hitec receivers have a SPC connection which can take up to 35V.
Not a lot of servos can handle 35V though...!
-
I agree with Martin - LiFe is a better chemistry in general for RXs and servos - but if you still want to run a Lipo just get a 5A rated switching BEC, or if it's a bigger model either retracts and flaps too a 10A would be safer (the Castle Creations one is good and is rated to a true 10A on up to 3S).
-
Posted by Mannyroad on 12/02/2017 12:41:33:
Hi Alan,
I think I still have the original Ken Stokes plan somewhere and have my own version of the plan, reproduced using AutoCAD. If you want to PM me I could probably arrange to get a copy done.
Given the interest level and the fact the plan is no longer available (commercially or otherwise) perhaps you should upload the file to Outerzone? Site seems to be down at present though...
-
Ade, be aware that any really sharply tapered delta will not perform that well on the slope, irrelevant of the section used. Soaring performance will be poor compared to a straight or slightly swept wing, and whilst they can be made to go fairly quick in a straight level line inertia tends to be quickly killed in the turn.
A Vulcan type platform is about as far as I recommend you can go on the slope unless you have a brick lifter like the Orme as your local slope. If not choose another subject, otherwise your hard work will just deliver you a hangar queen!
-
Posted by Mannyroad on 10/02/2017 21:28:36:
...Anyway, I read numerous build blogs on this forum but have never done a build blog myself. So I got to thinking, should I do a build blog for the Mirus build? Now, as I mentioned, being a simple box sheet fuselage, with sheet fin and stab, maybe nobody is interested in such a build, I asked this question of a friend of mine, an experienced builder of many years who is a very active forum member. His reply was that it is "too simple a build, which would be (to forumites) rather like watching paint dry".
I see his point, but thought this might be a question that should be put to the forum members? What's your view? Do I do a blog on the Mirus, or wait till i get cracking on my TN 72" Spit or my Topflite Sea Fury kit, which will be my next projects?
This is a public forum, and anybody can post what they like providing it is modelling related and falls within the CoC. You don't need to ask anyone's permission! If "experienced builders" don't want to follow, who cares - if you enjoy doing it that is all that matters. I guarantee there will be people who contribute and learn from it however the build goes.
Personally I think your friend is completely incorrect; more experienced builders often like to follow those type of threads so they can share their skills and offer encouragement to those who are not as experienced in building.
Edited By MattyB on 12/02/2017 09:50:00
-
I have been a mode 1 thumbs flier since I was taught around the age of 7. I did try and change to made 2 for fixed wing in the early noughties, but I never felt 100% confident so went back after around 18 months. Weird thing is when I started flying the odd coax heli and multirotor indoors a few years ago they were all mode 2, but I had zero problems! Go figure. The only explanation I can think of is that that I pinch the sticks on all the rotorcraft which must be enough to remind my brain what I'm flying and which control does which.
Edited By MattyB on 10/02/2017 23:32:47
-
Some helpful resources...
- PDF of the firewall (inside and out; I only fitted the outside one).
- 3D print file for download
-
Just a 1/32 ply disc, drilled with suitable cooling holes and glued in without UHU POR. You could use pretty much anything though tbh - acrylic would be good, and there is even a file on the RCGroups thread to 3D print your own precisely fitted version. Some have also reported that the fuse is weak at the back of the wing where the air vents are, so I am going to reinforce mine with carbon strip and CA tonight. Pics to follow...
-
Posted by Richard Marklew 1 on 06/02/2017 15:52:31:
...Matty B. may have a good point as well. It may well be that market forces will drive the more expensive brands either into a niche in our niche (and hence out of business) or to pick up the Low cost Competition protocols. I believe, in the words of a misquoted Chinese proverb, we live in interesting times.
Yep, there is definitely going to be some consolidation in the nearish future - some will exit through attrition, whilst others will be acquired.
Based on this survey and watching the conversations online I would only say 3 of the main players have a guaranteed long term future - Futaba (slightly on the wane but still with a loyal following and lots of other products outside of consumer RC to drive their overall business), Spektrum (the market leader in terms of sales globally) and FrSky (growing and developing products rapidly, they could be an acquisition target but will not be leaving the market anytime soon). Some would add Jeti into this group - they seem to have won a fair few sales in the higher margin end of the market with their excellent telemetry and high build quality - but without finding a way into club level sets (i.e. £100-400) and the growing offering something for the multirotor market I wonder whether they will decline over time.
So what about Hitec, Multiplex, Graupner SJ, Multiplex and JR? All have their advantages and none are bad products, but I am not sure any of them are big or nimble enough to adapt competition from the big three and challenger Chinese brands like Flysky. I have no doubt some of them will continue to produce RC gear long term, but not all of them will survive. JR are the ones that look really vulnerable to me - yes they may still be in business, but I am not sure in the current market you can pause all development and expect all your customers to still be there when (or if?) you come back, especially if RXs become as common as Dodo eggs. There must be some very nervous 28x owners out there...
-
Did it fly successfully, or were you beaten by the weather?
-
Probably a bit too much theory in this thread guys(!) - simply check the batt voltage under load, and if that looks ok out ok plug a different servo into the throttle channel and see if that works. No point doing any further theorising til those simple tests are done.
Edited By MattyB on 06/02/2017 19:32:54
-
Posted by Steve Houghton 1 on 06/02/2017 15:36:13:
Hi TP - I agree with MattyB and leave it alone.
However, I have had a lot of success with laminating film, particularly the really thin 42 micron stuff.
Unlike MattyB I find it very easy to apply. You just have to remember that it doesn't shrink and so it is best ironed on from the centre and then worked outwards, unlike covering film.
Yeah, I guess you are right really - it is not that difficult, just quite different from applying traditional iron on films because it does not shrink. Applied the way Steve suggests though and you can get a great finish and a lot of rigidity for not a lot of weight. Just be careful you don't melt that foam!
-
Posted by Timothy Harris 1 on 06/02/2017 14:06:13:
Thanks Matty and Paul it sounds great . I look forward to when it arrives. I will check out the HK retracts too .
These are the ones you want - might be a bit overkill, but better that than too bendy. My Dad is installing some in his Seagull Spitfire; that is a fair bit bigger than this model, but they still should be made to fit in your Jug. It really does show how HK prices have gone up though; they were about £15 each when he bought his!
-
Whether a common protocol would improve or negate competition can be debated (I'm more with Richard's view myself), but the fact is it isn't going to be happen, at least no time soon.
Whether you agree or not, the protocol brands do matter to manufacturers. They see them as something that can mark them out as superior to the competition when marketing in terms of reliability, range or latency. The market now has a fairly large number of proprietary protocols in it, but that is likely to reduce over time as peripheral players exit the market (the low cost competition to the established brands from China and the rapidly evolving market means some are bound to get left behind). Once that happens it would seem even less likely common protocols will develop, as the remainder will all have a bigger slice of the market by percentage. I used to get worried by this, but tbh I no longer see it as an issue - it is not a big problem to run two protocols that cover all my model types (one with cheap lightweight RXs with no telemetry for my smaller park fliers, and the other a bit more costly but with a full but affordable range of telemetry sensors).
-
That model uses pretty dense EPO; unless you are planning to fly it at it's absolute max speed on the slope I don't think covering is necessary. If you do want to make it tougher though thin laminating film is probably the best material for increasing rigidity for minimum weight, although it's not the easiest stuff to put on (it needs to be pleated around tight curves at tips etc rather than stretched and shrunk like Profilm/Oracover). Google for "New stuff laminating film"; there is lots of info on RCGroups and Youtube.
If all you want to do is add colour, any of the commercially available trim products will work, or alternatively pop down to your local signwriters and grab a few handfuls of their vinyl offcuts - they normally give away the scraps for free.
Edited By MattyB on 06/02/2017 13:28:43
How to set up a CCPM heli?
in FrSky
Posted
Hi Allan. Unfortunately CCPM helis are an acknowledged weakness in OpenTX - they really need a wizard coded for setting them up, but since no-one on the Dev team are heli guys it has never happened.
I think the answer to your question about "I assume you have a model that has elevator, aileron, and collective programmed" is available on the OpenTXU page on CCPM. Take a look at the top of the page; their quick list for the impatient(!) step 1 is "Program Ail, Ele and Col independent of mixing (-100 to +100)". I take that to mean you just need to set up single lines on your mixer screen for each of these functions to start with. Try that then follow their instructions through and you will probably be ok.
I also suggest you take a look at this CCPM setup on RCSettings - it may help.
Edited By MattyB on 20/02/2017 13:20:01