Futaba T6J or 6EX

[Dai Fledermaus]

I would appraciate your oppinion again fellers,

In simple terms and from a beginners point of view, is there anything to choose between the Futaba T6J and the 6EX? I think I'm right in saying that the T6J is the newer model, but does that mean it's necessarly better?

[FilmBuff]

Colin, I've had both.

Go for the 6J.

It has more model memories, you can ID them by four character model names.

It has a range of timers - essential if you fly electric

I think the mixes and software is pretty similar - but it has an all round nicer feel.

[The Wright Stuff]

I've not used the EX, but the T6J is fabulous. It was my first 2.4 GHz radio (indeed first computer radio), and it was very easy to learn to use. It also has the bonus of a 5th proportional channel in case you ever want fully continuous flaps!

I thought the lack of rechargeable battery pack with the 6J was a negative at first, but actually, using dry batteries is far more convenient - a decent set lasted over 80 flights!

I agree with FilmBuff - it's lightweight and has a great 'feel'!

[FilmBuff]

Posted by The Wright Stuff on 03/09/2013 13:19:09:

I thought the lack of rechargeable battery pack with the 6J was a negative at first, but actually, using dry batteries is far more convenient - a decent set lasted over 80 flights!

 

You can buy a rechargeable pack and charger - the charge socket is much smaller than the standard Futaba one - but there's no need.  I use four high capacity (2000mAh) "low self discharge" re-chargeable cells. As TWS says, battery life is amazing. I think I've only charged them two or three times this year!

Edited By FilmBuff on 03/09/2013 13:46:46

[Dai Fledermaus]

Thanks for that. I had looked at the rechargeable pack for the T6J, but in addition to that you have to buy an upgrade battery compartment cover. Thats about £20 saved.

[Bruce Austin]

Hi Guys

Newbie here Flying Bixler 2 for last six months and starting to get the hang of the basic flying aspect. (Mode2)

Now starting to explore my T6J possibilities in relation to flaps and flaperons and so on.

Just "browsing" at the moment.

QUESTION

I thought that I read somewhere about the possibility of mixing throttle and flaps? Throttle above the middle point and flaps from below the stick centre point. Or maybe it was the other way round?

Perhaps this was on a more sophisticated TX?

Perhaps it's desirable?

Perhaps it's a disaster waiting to happen?

Currently I am flying the Bixler, but am eyeing the possibility of a Phoenix 2000 or some such and the possibility of tight landing spaces.

So............... any thoughts on the matter????

Go With the Flow

Bruce

[The Wright Stuff]

Interesting idea, and I can certainly see a certain logic. I'd never heard of it, so if you happen to recall where you read it, please do share!

Sounds overly complicated to me though, particularly if you also end up needing to mix elevator as well.

[Allan Bennett]

I believe one point in favour of the 6J (and other Futaba "j" series trannies) is that they use the FHSS receivers, which are much cheaper than the FASST equivalents. How FHSS and FASST compare technically, I don't know.

[Frank Skilbeck]

Posted by Bruce Austin on 07/02/2014 16:33:15:

I thought that I read somewhere about the possibility of mixing throttle and flaps? Throttle above the middle point and flaps from below the stick centre point. Or maybe it was the other way round?

Perhaps this was on a more sophisticated TX?

Bruce

You would need a higher spec transmitter, probably want such a mix active on the landing phase only as you want to be able to shut down the motor in flight without accidentally adding any flap when thermal hunting.

[cymaz]

As I understand it FASST and FHSS are not interchangeable, Futaba dropped the ball thinking that one up.

[Allan Bennett]

Posted by cymaz on 08/02/2014 07:48:02:

As I understand it FASST and FHSS are not interchangeable, Futaba dropped the ball thinking that one up.

You're right, they're not interchangeable, though the 14SG transmitter can use either system. The point is that FHSS receivers are, I believe, cheaper than FASST ones, so for a beginner the FHSS trannie (6J) may be the best option if technically it matches the 6EX.

[..]

Posted by cymaz on 08/02/2014 07:48:02:

As I understand it FASST and FHSS are not interchangeable, Futaba dropped the ball thinking that one up.

 

I don't agree they dropped the ball , I did when they first introduced the FHSS system but as time has gone by I can see their thinking in having a high end & a budget option, And as Allan states the higher end transmitters cover them both, So as a user upgrades and wants a higher spec TX then it doesn't mater what system you start with.

As for where they differ , its all to do with the frequency hopping. This explains it all and how it works. Click on the Technology bit at the top of the page to see the differences in the two.

**LINK**

Edited By Justin K on 08/02/2014 09:14:11

[Dave Bran]

Posted by cymaz on 08/02/2014 07:48:02:

As I understand it FASST and FHSS are not interchangeable, Futaba dropped the ball thinking that one up.

That is a little harsh, IMO. You have to relate the events in time order. Futaba are far bigger than RC. Spektrum arrived with DSM and after a (typically large corporate) delay, Futaba eventually focussed and designed their first system, FASST. As is usual for Futaba it was somewhat conservative and over engineered, but from the start fully bullet proof even with sometimes from my observation horrendous abuse. I still have first batch 606 Rx's in use that have massive range and have never ever given even the briefest of glitches or concern. Operating from an ESC with decent capacitors, they even work for some significant number of seconds when the battery has departed the plane!!!

Spektrum stole the march though, especially in getting BNF etc up and going and buyers flocking, DSM2, etc, and Futaba were going to be unable to compete as the price of a FASST Rx could not be reduced to compete and reading between the lines there were concerns re: chip availability long term. Availability of new cheaper chip types with a more certain forward life meant they could not retain compatibility, so along came FHSS.

[cymaz]

For someone who invested in FASST I just thought "great a really good 2.4 system". I put up with the high cost of the Rx's. When futaba brought out the FHSS Rx's I thought that I might be in luck reducing the cost. No, 2 systems totally incompatable. I bought the FrSKy Rx's and have been 100% satisfied both with price, operation and reliability. Futaba lost my trade.

[Allan Bennett]

Posted by Justin K on 08/02/2014 09:11:07:

As for where they differ , its all to do with the frequency hopping. This explains it all and how it works. Click on the Technology bit at the top of the page to see the differences in the two.

**LINK**

Edited By Justin K on 08/02/2014 09:14:11

Sorry Colin, if we're digressing a little from your original reason for posting

I've looked at the pages in the link, and I can't see what the difference is between FASST and FHSS: Futaba say that FHSS "... literally hops from frequency to frequency in a pseudorandom sequence ..."; and FASST "... The frequency of Futaba 2.4GHz FASST shifts hundreds of times per second ...". So, what's the difference? Does FASST check for clear frequencies before shifting whereas FHSS simply goes, as it says, randomly?

[MAD Dave]

Not up to speed with the technical differences between FHSS & FASST but I do own two T6J Tx's and four R2006GS Rx's. What I am aware of is that I have enjoyed many glitch-free flying hours with this equipment. This includes time spent standing on the flight line alongside up to five other club members operating a variety of other hardware on a variety of frequencies and standards etc.

[Phil Green]

Posted by Allan Bennett on 09/02/2014 11:38:05:

So, what's the difference?

The main difference is that FHSS uses a commonly available CC2500 chipset, which makes it far cheaper to manufacture. This is the reason Si has been able to accomodate Futaba FHSS in his Delta multi-protocol receiver.

 

One massive advantage of the 6J that I dont think has been mentioned is the internal aerial.

'Conventional' 2.4 aerials are so fragile, so easily broken - possibly without any visible evidence.

Just sliding around in the back of the car could easily break a 'standard' aerial, they're not made for rough & tumble.

The 'handle' aerial on the other hand is superb, you can just forget all about catching it on things, stuffing it into a case, or carry-bag. So much more practical. You can of course modify a 6EX (I did mine) but of the two I'd suggest the 6J. Unless you're an RF tech with a genuine interest in chipsets & protocols, FHSS vs FASST wont make any difference to you, other than cheaper receivers!  

Cheers

Phil

Edited By Phil Green on 09/02/2014 14:01:11

[John Privett]

Posted by Phil Green on 09/02/2014 13:54:08:

Unless you're an RF tech with a genuine interest in chipsets & protocols, FHSS vs FASST wont make any difference to you, other than cheaper receivers!

Indeed, outside of Futaba, how many people actually know what the differences are between FASST and FHSS?

Popular opinion seems to indicate that FASST is totally-bulletproof, but a bit pricey to manufacture, whereas - with the benefit of a few years experience - FHSS is sufficiently-bulletproof, but cheaper to produce. But I don't think anybody has yet identified a real-world situation where FASST would work but FHSS might have failed...