Which Radio Would You Buy.....?

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Yes, I agree Olly and indeed made this point above. The really clever thing about FASST is that when it was first implemented it was designed with all the hooks and "slots" in the software for future expansion. Yes it is pricey - but through the softeware upgrade path you are largely "future proofed".

 

One of the misapprehensions often stated is that Spektrum developed the first 2.4 R/C gear - they didn't. Its true that they developed the first for us modellers but Futaba had been developing and marketing 2.4 (and other bands) for military "drone control" systems for some time. This is isn't just a "point scoring" issue I think. The experiences of companies like Futaba (and JR) in making "professional" systems I believe changes their outlook. I believe they have a much more thorough, systematic and strategic approach to product development and testing than perhaps is the case with some other manufacturers in the hobby market who have, on more than one occassion now, perhaps been guilty of "rushing to the market" before all the creases are ironed out.

 

FASST will continue to develop - its not a "finished" product in the sense that it is no where near the end of its potential development lifespan - its an expandable and updatable system. This is a different approach to the likes of Spektrum who address the development issue with new systems that are upward/backward compatable. They are two different approaches - both valid, both workable. Although as many software houses have found as time moves on, and products diverge, it becomes increasingly difficult to ensure compatability. But that's a design philosophy issue and a question for the companies themselves.

 

But my key point is: it is mistake I think to say "FASST hasn't got xyz" and then think that's the end of the matter. It would be with most other systems - but not with FASST as it can grow.

 

BEB

Edited By Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 02/02/2012 10:38:32

[Steve Hargreaves - Moderator]

BEB Makes a good point.....reputations take years to establish & can be trashed with one dodgy product....

 

Futaba may not be the fastest to market but they do seem to be very thorough. From the Poll on this very site a few months back Futaba seem to have well over half the market yet you rarely hear anything bad about them.....apart from expensive receivers.... although they do seem more in line with the competition now.....

 

From a marketing point of view though they do seem to have got themselves a bit confused by offering both FASST & FHSS & now S-FHSS with certain transmitters doing only FASST & others doing only FHSS......as has been said once the decision is made you are "tied in" to a certain manufacturer so its important to know any limitations of a system before parting with your cash....

[Simon Chambers]

On the issue of Futaba Telemetry, the receiver hardware certainly looks like it can do it and they are in the FCC certification database (which signifies that they are legal in the US to transmit). Ok, the FCC is the states, however its very likely if they went through type approval in the US to transmit, they have done so for the EU market. The problem is in terms of updating these receivers. I believe there is no way for the user to upgrade them (a la Hitec Optima receivers)? Again the transmitters will have to be updated to support it - lucky most now are user updatable.

 

The other issue with Futaba is in terms of compatibility. Currently there are now two main different types of Futaba 2.4GHz systems - FASST and S-FHSS (there are additional ones to these, such as FASSTest - however these are extensions of the current system). These two systems are completely independent of one another, so a FASST receiver will not work with a S-FHSS transmitter - unless you have the top of the range 18MZ (with a £1k+ odd price tag).

 

According to Futaba marketing, it appears that FASST is going to become their 'premium' range and S-FHSS for the lower end. They also have stated that more of their transmitters are going to work with both systems.

 

Its this very point is what makes me hesitant in every giving any recommendation to Futaba right now. As Futaba, like a lot of other manufacturers, have stopped being module based, any existing transmitters could only be upgraded to FASST&S-FHSS compliant by Futaba service centre. Note that the S-FHSS transmit hardware is different to FASST, so its hardware and software change, rather than just software. So if you buy into a Futaba Transmitter now, in a year or so time when its replaced, you won't have the flexibility of using the cheaper range of S-FHSS receivers (a genuine Futaba S-FHSS 6-channel receiver is around the £30 mark). This would bother and annoy me. However this maybe wouldn't bother you? Each have their own opinions (as this thread shows :D)

 

The best analogy I can think of, is that it would be like buying a 35MHz Transmitter that only supports PCM. Fine if your happy buying the manufacturers expensive PCM receivers, but if you have a few smaller cheap models, do you really want to spend £45+ on a receiver for them?

 

Lets also not forget in this thread, the Graupner HoTT and Multiplex gear. Smaller brands, but appear to have a good loyal following too.

 

Edited By Simon Chambers on 02/02/2012 11:01:09

Edited By Simon Chambers on 02/02/2012 11:02:45

[Simon Chambers]

There is also a new high-end Spektrum transmitter that may also of interest, the DX18:

Spektrum DX18

Horizon Hobby UK - DX18

 

It looks very sexy if I say so myself! The design will possibly raise a few eyebrows and I should imagine become Marmite. Quite a departure on many existing radio designs.

[Pete B]

I wonder if Futaba saw the prolific cloning of their FASST system and realised they could not, or would not, compete on price, which prompted them to develop a cheaper system for the lower end of the market? That would at least make the price difference less attractive for the clones.

 

The question is, what will they do when the cloned S-FHSS Rx's appear?

 

Pete

[Jon Laughton]

Simple thought, apart from the technical capabilities of the various contenders - get your mate to go and hold / twiddle with the various different t/x s; ergonomics may come into play more than he realises - also the cost of r/x s is something to bear in mind (I am a Futaba man and I know this now - too late!)

 

Jon

[Erfolg]

I do think that many of the points made by contributors with respect to Futaba hit the nail on the head.

 

I own a 8fg, I am not that enthusiastic. As a radio it works well in many respects. My gripe with respect to programming, is not that it is hard, in that it requires any intellectual skill/knowledge, it is the interface. Simon makes the point Aura has a touch screen, I understand it is a very competitively priced product, not the 8fg. I know I keep carping on about my wife's phone, the battery is the biggest part of it, yet it has a touch screen. Icons greet you on start up, logical images, direct you towards the function required. The icons can be dragged, opened up to a sub menu. It is all in colour, it is easy to read, in fact a joy. Ah yes, the manual. erm, just three pages, it is just so intuitive to use, no encyclopaedia of instructions are required to use it. I now look at my 8fg interface, all I can say, not that impressive at all.

 

On the good side, the actual case, is functionally and arguably stylistically, the best around. It does balance well, ergonomically, the basic access to the trims works better than the 6ex (which I have two), in that I can use the stick and operate the trim easily, with my clumsy hands. The switches seem to be well ordered and differential ordered lengths aid identification. As for the case, no longer Far Eastern looking, with nooks and crannies, chromed plastic. Neither does it look or feel like many of those European monstrosities, which could double as a tea tray. It has more in common with B&O, or Apple and increasingly Samsung products, than any other transmitter case in my opinion.

 

A lot has been made of the future capability of the Fastt system and the high costs. To date there is nothing to suggest it is worth it. So many times I have in the past authorised major IT purchases, with tha assurance that it is future proofed, only to find a year down the line, the equipment has been superseded and what ever future proofing there was, is very expensive, and lacks full functionality.

 

I still think Futaba is good, but some prices need looking at and above all, all mid and top range models need a good touch screen. Particularly now that Aurora and other manufacturers are heading in that direction

Edited By Erfolg on 02/02/2012 13:00:10

[Olly P]

Simon,

 

How do we know a hardware difference exists? I hadn't seen any information to that effect.

 

If it is purely encryption difference most encryption these days is software/firmware based, and is easy to update.

 

Olly

[Tim Hooper]

I sold my Waltron 4/5 in 1975.....

25 years later I came back to the hobby and had 10 years faultless service from a pair of Sanwa transmitters.

However I ran out of model memories, and plumped for Spektrum; firstly a DX7 (faultless), and latterly a DX8 (flawed)

The DX8 has been back to have the gimbals replaced and software updated, and the Nimh pack died every few days, so I've switched to li-po power now. I'm really hoping to keep it for some years now as I find the features and ease of programming very user-friendly.

 

So, I'd love to recommend the DX8 - but it's very dependant on manufacturing quality.

 

tim

[Simon Chambers]

Posted by Olly P on 02/02/2012 13:05:04:

Simon,

 

How do we know a hardware difference exists? I hadn't seen any information to that effect.

 

If it is purely encryption difference most encryption these days is software/firmware based, and is easy to update.

 

Olly

FASST uses the ML2724 IC - from Micro Linear.

S-FHSS uses the CC2500 - from Texas Instruments (some of the older folk on here will remember the Texas Instruments scientific calculators - they are the same company)

 

Both uses proprietary signalling methods and aren't compatible. The 18MZ contains both devices, to allow both supported systems.

 

For the smoking gun proof, here is a cut-out from the FCC internal photos of the 18MZ transmitter section - Red square is ML2724, Blue square is CC2500:

 

 

This image is public domain - found on FCC OET site - under the 18MZ FCC ID of: AZPT18MZ-24G. Markings not particularly clear in this photo, however you can match the pinouts of the ICs and if you look at the RF section, you can see how the 2.4GHz switches connect together to the single antenna. IIRC, you can check the Futaba 6J FCC internal images and see the CC2500 clearly.

Note that even though Futaba marketing spout about it being a custom designed IC - reality is, its an off the shelf IC die that is packaged and marked as Futaba. As its off the shelf, the compatible receivers can exist.

 

Also of note, the CC2500 device is used in other manufacturers 2.4GHz systems. Of which these include FrSky, Hitec, RadioLink, Corona - and I also believe Jeti, Graupner HoTT and Multiplex too (I'm 90% of these 4 manufacturers do, but I'd have to double check to say for 100%).

 

This means it would be possible to have a generic receiver if all these separate protocols are reverse engineered and put into a single receiver product. Something for the future

 

Edited By Simon Chambers on 02/02/2012 13:32:19

[Jon Laughton]

Tim

 

Its a personal preference but although I am a Futuaba diehard I have used Spektrum transmitters quite a lot when I was learning to fly and I found the ratchet on the sticks too light and with less feel than all the other transmitters I have flown with? I believe this can modified though?

 

Jon

[Erfolg]

Tim

 

I was not wise enough to sell my Waltron Sportsman 4/5

 

 

Sill lurks on my my model shelf.

 

I also had a Sanwa Clubman, although my own failed when I returned to modelling. As did my Futaba Gold.

 

Simon

 

It makes sense to use standard components doesn't it. The product development costs are shared by a wide audience, enabling yey more advanced products to be developed in a simial manner.

 

We once had a Ferranti IC chip designer in our club, when Ferranti (before there regretted demise) manufactured bespoke chips. He said that the chips were essentially a basic design, which was tweaked to customers requirements. This apparently minimised both design and logic testing costs.

 

I seem to remember that it is not the first time that Futaba has marked commercial available items with there own identifiers, I would guess they are only doing what others also do.

[Tim Mackey]

Yup, easy adjust to change the stick spring tension - and the ratchet feel.

[Olly P]

Simon - Thanks for that info, very handy to know.

 

a hardware change would be less attractive - but a dual type Rx would be very easy.

 

Thanks again.

 

Olly

[Reno Racer]

For what its worth, I switched from a Spectrum DX7 to a Futaba T6J and haven't really noticed a difference in functionality. I don't fly fancy top end jets or gliders, so 6 channels and its functionality is good for my B cert (+) level sports, warbirds and scale planes, from 40 size to 1/4 scale. I have so much more confidence in the T6J, than I ever had in Spectrum, but that's just my opinion.

 

The T6J looks 'Audi' like and is well balanced and easy to use. I first started flying with a Futaba 6EAX, but that had limited functionality, even as a 6 Ch TX.

 

Futaba will soon be releasing a T8J, a 8 ch S-FHSS set, with even more features. The T6J already has a ton more features than the FASST 6EAX, so this should be pretty good.

 

The best thing about the T6J is that I can but recievers for $40 (30 quid).

 

My personal opinion is that the FHSS system will continue to grow; Futaba has to keep competing with lower priced other brands of system. The release of the S-FHSS/FHSS T8J and the new Futaba radios becoming dual S-FHSS/FHSS and FASST system would indicate this is not just a fad.

 

If I had the money and started again, I'd get the Futaba S-FHSS T8J. I do like the HITEC Aurua 9, but quike frankly don't really need telemetry, I'd rather be looking at my plane than the TX whilst flying

[Trevor Crook]

Not sure if anyone has mentioned this yet, but a feature that (I think) is unique to Spektrum/JR DSM2 and Spektrum DSMX is Modelmatch, which prevents you from using the wrong model memory - a potential model saver. Spektrum also gives ready access to the large range of BNF models, if that's your interest. End of sales pitch from Spektrum user!

In our club, most makes are used, with very few problems from any. Multiplex are the only ones to put the Tx display in a sensible place, and have very intuitive programming. As advised throughout this thread, best to get the feel of your shortlist before buying. It's also worth seeing what your friends/fellow club fliers use - if you buy the same there will be plenty of experience and advice available.

[Frank Skilbeck]

Posted by Christian Ackroyd on 02/02/2012 17:16:59:

 

If I had the money and started again, I'd get the Futaba S-FHSS T8J. I do like the HITEC Aurua 9, but quike frankly don't really need telemetry, I'd rather be looking at my plane than the TX whilst flying

 

You are quite right you don't "need" telemetry, much like you don't need a timer, but it's nice to have the option to monitor your Rx voltage, signal reception in tricky planes, fuel level or flight pack battery, vario in a glider etc which can all be set to give you alarms if you require.

 

I thought cruise control in a car was a waste of time, until I got it, now I find it quite useful.

[Erfolg]

Now I have never used the cruise control on my car, other than once. In the USA they work, as the traffic density can be much lower, distances far greater. I do agree telemetry is the way to go. As some one who uses there Satnav a lot, it is significantly more reliable than the human version, what ever the Satnav's limitations.

 

I do think the model match is a very good feature. That is speaking as one who has crashed once because I did not switch model memory.

[Simon Chambers]

Posted by Erfolg on 02/02/2012 20:47:56:

Now I have never used the cruise control on my car, other than once. In the USA they work, as the traffic density can be much lower, distances far greater. I do agree telemetry is the way to go. As some one who uses there Satnav a lot, it is significantly more reliable than the human version, what ever the Satnav's limitations.

 

I do think the model match is a very good feature. That is speaking as one who has crashed once because I did not switch model memory.

I love cruise control on my car, I use it all the time! Apart from the motorway and in 50mph speed average zones, I find it useful in 30mph streets when you always get that idiot up your bumper trying to intimidate you to go faster.

Personally it would be nice to have model match, but its certainly not a deal breaker with me. Always before take-off, I always do a last minute control surface movement check that they are free and move in the correct directions.

 

On the Aurora I've never had an instance where I've gone with the wrong model - as it says the model name before you confirm that you want to transmit.

 

My old Field Force 6 however only had model numbers, which I always was forgetting which model was which - even when I had written it on them!

 

I do hate how Spektrum have Patented it, when the idea as a patent is tenuous at best. Unfortunately no-one in the RC field has the funds to fight a patent, let alone against one of the biggest RC manufacturers. I should expect if it did go to court, the patent would be found to void as it could be a logical progression. After all, Bluetooth paring is very similar way to how model match worked originally.

[Simon Chambers]

I have to say, what ever the final choice is, its a very interesting time in the RC market. Reading through past RC history, there has been very few times (arguablly if any) when so much change has happened so quickly.

 

Not only are there are a fantastic bunch of radios out now, that offer unthinkable reliability that radios of even 15-20 years ago could offer. There is also new amazing features such as telemetry and two-way links. But also cheap, reliable, powerful petrol engines.

 

Finally lets not forget the Electric revolution that is happening in the hobby. Already its possible to power an aircraft with better performance and for less cost with brushless motors and Li-Po batteries, than using a IC glow engine!

 

Looking back it on the last few years, it does make you wonder what will happen in not only just in the next 5 years, but in the next 10 years!

 

I think what ever radio your friend gets Steve, he will be very happy with it. Choosing a radio seems to be a very personal thing, and most people (certainly me included) love their choice and will argue its points over others till they go blue! I suppose this points to the fact that no radio is perfect yet.

 

Good job we have plenty of choice then!

[Josip Vrandecic -Mes]

Hi All,I started in 1975.with MPX 4 ch Europa then three Futaba,the last one is T8FG....I can say that I'm Futaba man.......but old passions and habits never die...so ,if I will be alive and healthy,....I wont to take this one.........

Cheers

Jo.

[Dave Bran]

Posted by Andy Green on 30/01/2012 16:20:27:

I only make the point, I for one would not use a clone Rx, the savings are lost the first time it fails in a model.

 

Andy

 

 

Your choice....................speaking as a frequent several times a week Futaba user with 3 Tx and now 25 plus Futaba Rx and 20 plus FRSky FASST Rx's in use, inc radio noisy EDF and wings, with one of each make faulty, both straight from supply, rest perfect in use, 8 channels for £23 or so against £110 or so, I'm convinced....................

 

PS I also own and use Spektrum roughly weekly with approx twice as many compatibles as bespoke, only had one issue with an Orange (dropping bind between sessions) and one on an AR500 (same basic problem but difficult to bind at all), so I'm also convinced for that make,too!!

 

My fault rates certainly do not seem to support your argument!!

 

[Frank Skilbeck]

Posted by Dave Bran on 02/02/2012 22:01:06:

Posted by Andy Green on 30/01/2012 16:20:27:

I only make the point, I for one would not use a clone Rx, the savings are lost the first time it fails in a model.

 

Andy

 

 

Your choice....................speaking as a frequent several times a week Futaba user with 3 Tx and now 25 plus Futaba Rx and 20 plus FRSky FASST Rx's in use, inc radio noisy EDF and wings, with one of each make faulty, both straight from supply, rest perfect in use, 8 channels for £23 or so against £110 or so, I'm convinced....................

 

PS I also own and use Spektrum roughly weekly with approx twice as many compatibles as bespoke, only had one issue with an Orange (dropping bind between sessions) and one on an AR500 (same basic problem but difficult to bind at all), so I'm also convinced for that make,too!!

 

My fault rates certainly do not seem to support your argument!!

 

How many!, I thought I had a lot