The FrSky revolution - very worried men?

[Brian Lambert]

Erflog asked "Hmm, if so what is Taranis?"

In Celtic mythology Taranis was the god of thunder. (Thanks to Wikipedea)

[Erfolg]

Now somebody in China knows their mythological figures, both Egyptian and Celtic. Such an indication of the breadth of education (electronics, computer science, production, probably business and classical education) within one, I am assuming, small business, should be a wake up call to us all, with respect to what we expect from our educational system.

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Not only China Erf

They knew it in Yorkshire

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

The question was worried men ? Its stated elsewhere (most popular brand) that price of main brand rx's has been driven down (USA). So the answer appears to be Yes. Good news if it happens in the UK.

John

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Yes - good news indeed for buyers. It appears some manufacturers might be listening after all! They have a long journey ahead of them though!

BEB

[avtur]

There is an interesting 'top letter' in this months mag regarding 'Taranis'.

The way I read it it cautions against the possibility of getting overly hung up in the Tx/Rx technology to a point where it interferes with actually flying.

I can understand a lot of the comments made in this thread support the idea that the potential functionality is 'opened up' by the use of open source equipment, and clearly there are some folks here who have embraced it and can explore the functionality of a Taranis. But the author of the letter expresses a concern that some might end up being drawn into exploring the Taranis at the expense of time spent outdoors flying with their chosen control system.

I'm a simple soul and for the time being I'll stick with my DX6i which suites the needs of my flying and models. I do like new technology but I'm not sure I would have the patience to learn a new method of programming just now.

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Hi Avtur,

To tell you the truth I'm rather surprised at the mag making that letter of the month (which if memory serves me correct it was). In my opinion its a classic example of strong opinions about other people's motivations and experiences being aired by someone who actually has no experience at all of he is talking about - as he's never used a Taranis and I suspect has never even spoken directly with anyone who has! Some informed comment eh?

I've tried to counter some of the myths this letter puts forward in the fourth post down on this page.

BEB

[Concorde Speedbird]

We don't know about the person who sent the letter- he may know someone who owns a Taranis very well. I don't think we need people going around praising a single transmitter a lot of the time, if you like it then great but that doesn't mean by next week everyone should have it. I'm not against FRSky- I've just converted a Sanwa RD6000 to FRSky 2.4 GHz using the DHT telemetry module which has been a fun little electronics project, and I am looking forwards to trying it in my now FRSky receiver SLEC Funfly (which has now had Spektrum, Orange and FRSky receivers!). It works perfectly on the ground and I think it should do in the air. I'd like to have a go with some basic telemetry (altitude basically!) but I do not know if it is possible using the RD6000.

It's the flying bit that matters, what you are using to guide it does not as long as it retains a signal. Well that's my opinion anyway, I'm usually wrong!

CS

[avtur]

BEB,

I understand where you are coming from and you are obviously one of the chaps who can clearly make the most of Taranis, as a result of what I have seen you post here I regard you as a ambassador for the open source revolution.

My previous post is made because the the author of the 'top letter' claims a considerable understanding of the principles of 'open source' all be it in an industrial environment which I can only take as a means of lending credibility to his comments, yet he is offering words of caution about the possibility of becoming 'over absorbed' in the technology. I take it to mean be careful not to become absorbed in technology for its own sake.

I find it interesting that a contribution to the mag is given such prominence when it actually seems almost at odds with the ground swell of comment here on the forum.

I have actually downloaded the open source software to take look at it but have to admit to being a bit 'scared off' by it, although I imagine a one-to-one session with someone who understands it may well break down a few barriers for me.

I don't know how typical my attitude is, but perhaps as open source develops if people like me can become absorbed and some of the 'mystique' broken down then perhaps that would make the move to open source all the more unstoppable ...

Edited By avtur on 13/05/2014 00:24:26

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Don't be so hard on yourself CSB its your opinion, fair enough. I don't have a problem folk praising something they like, it happens with the Wots, engines, electrics etc etc. We all have our own minds and make our own choices. I've enjoyed the thread myself, learnt quite a bit and have to say I want one. I don't need it, but i'm very keen to have a dabble. As for it takes time to learn..so did flying, building, covering, walking, talking. so what.

John

[Erfolg]

I keep reminding myself, the question is should other manufacturers worry about Frsky and the Taranis.

I have been pondering for some time now, what causes one brand to prosper and which to loose ground.

In the case of Spektrum, the answer seems axiomatic (self evident, how I love those fancy words), that was being the first with 2.4, an open attitude towards licencing and being aggressive on pricing and promotion.

So what is it with Frsky and their current apparent success. It is partly the capability of the equipment and price. Yet it is not everything.

Frsky were one of the first to become alternative suppliers of Fasst Rxs, in addition they I understand supplied Spektrum compatible Rxs. Many of these were initially personal imports. There was a reaction from trade interests and a suggestion by a body representing (purportedly us modellers) that without a CE mark they were illegal, would affect insurance cover. A debate was sparked of to the true position, but this was enough to probably suppress demand from some. Allthough it was evident that the equipment was of good quality and legally compliant with EU regulation at the technical level, having compliancy test certificates (from EU testing agencies), design and manufacturing documentation.

Now Frsky seem to have adopted a different approach, there are a number of retailers in the UK selling to the modelling public. This does seem to be a game changer, in that some of the false arguments cannot be made and there is now a UK based allegiances. This combined with both the keen price, relative to the equipment capability and the high quality, are a very real threat.

Will it stop vested interests rubbishing the manufacturer, as we have seen with HK. Even though they now have a number of EU outlets, they are subjected to spurious allegations, with respect to tax, copyright, service etc. Much I am sure arises from vested interests, doing their best to spin the situation, to thwart real threats to their interests.

I also think there is another change which should concern many. Frsky, must be one of the first Chinese companies, to start trading under their own "brand". In the past most if not all were content to allow others to stick their own brand on the products. I know that HK have pushed their own branding of Turnigy and Durafly, although they have not manufactured, more a Graupner, Ripmax, in commissioning some products.

 

Edited By Erfolg on 13/05/2014 09:46:48

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Ah Ok, I think I see a the misconception here! Taranis uses OpenTx and yes that is the source of its power. But the user doesn't program the OpenTx! You could use a Taranis and know absolutely nothing about OpenTx.

To explain what I mean,...The Spektrum Tx you have now for example, the software on that is written by Spektrum, they will have used some commercial software development system to write it. It creates all the menus etc you use. But you don't see that software - you just see the menus it produces. Strictly speaking you don't "program" it - you make selections from predefined lists of options that the software gives you.

The OpenTx stuff in Taranis is all written by specialists, you don't get involved in that (well unless you want to and that a whole different ball game). What we do is "program" within an environment they have provided for you - effectively a user interface to the Tx. You are not programming the OpenTx itself. So the guy in the letter having Open Source industrial experience is not really that relevant, because we are not doing Open Source development.

The best way I can put this is this:

We are only using the result of Open Source development by other people - we are not doing Open Source development!

Its important that this myth is debunked because its scaring people off what is probably the most significant new development in our hobby since 2.4GHz came in.

BEB

PS CSB - just to be accurate I didn't say that the letter writer hadn't met anyone who had used Taranis - I said that I "suspected" that was so. Given that currently Taranis is only 5% of users, statistically that's a pretty sound assumption. Especially when allied to the fact that his comments amount the time spent programming it are clearly based on a misconception!

[Rich too]

Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 13/05/2014 09:53:04:

The OpenTx stuff in Taranis is all written by specialists, you don't get involved in that (well unless you want to and that a whole different ball game). What we do is "program" within an environment they have provided for you - effectively a user interface to the Tx. You are not programming the OpenTx itself. So the guy in the letter having Open Source industrial experience is not really that relevant, because we are not doing Open Source development.

just been trying (again) to get to grips with the whole "open source" thing, its not that straightforward! am I correct in thinking that the software is written/developed mainly by one person or "contributor" (source - opentx website)?

The guy in the article has years of experience with open source so I think he knows what he is talking about!

 

Rich

Edited By Rich2 on 26/05/2014 20:09:38

[Rich too]

quoted from the web (eflightwiki.com):

Overview of the System

FrSky is notable for two things:

• Low-cost yet high-performance equipment including telemetry functionality
• Woefully inadequate documentation often consisting of little more than poorly translated leaflets

The former and latter combined make the system hard to understand and to utilize to its full potential, especially by newcomers to the field. This Wiki seeks to serve as a collection point for information gathered from FrSky themselves, various web forums, and users of the system. At this point in the game the FrSky system requires the user to do some research and be willing to experiment. If you want an off-the-shelf-system with proper documentation you should probably look for other alternatives from manufacturers such as Spektrum, Futaba, Multiplex, Jeti, or Graupner/SJ.

Is FrSky For You?

This quote by user "jj604" on RCGroups.com sums it up nicely when he says:

"You have to understand this is a small entrepreneurial Chinese company with an innovative product. When you add the non-English speaking background to the rapid pace of development and lack of any overarching technology roadmap you just have to expect difficulties. This is not Spektrum or Apple territory. [...]

"This stuff appeals to the clever technical folks because of its high functionality to price ratio but the downside is that the documentation is written by engineers who tend to focus on how things work rather than what you have to do to make them work - and is not always slanted at users. [...]

"You aren't going to find it easy going. [...] For example FrSky have obsoleted many of their receivers faster than Spektrum can bring out basic sensors for theirs! [Add to that] the fact that FrSky CURRENTLY have no less than three totally different simultaneously operating data protocols for their telemetry system.

"[...] I can tell you this FrSky system is fantastic quality and very very good value for money. But if you think a Taranis is going to be as simple to set up as a DX5 - it is simply not true. FrSky is the Linux of radio systems. Extremely good value, powerful and elegant but you do have to work at it."

it will be interesting to see how it develops!

 

Edited By Pete B - Moderator on 26/05/2014 20:49:12

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Very good post Andrew - I agree 100%.

Re other posts - sorry but I don't see "eflightwiki" as a particularly authoritative source of information! Likewise "the guy in the letter has experience with Open Source so we assume he knows what he's talking about". Well I have lots of experience with Open Source - as do many people on here - that doesn't particularly equip you to comment on Taranis! How many times do we have to said the same thing before the penny drops? Taranis uses an Open Source developed "operating system"; that doesn't mean Taranis users are writing code for an open source system, or have to particularly understand the inner workings of that system, anymore than Futaba users have to understand the inner workings of how Futaba Tx's operating software works - they are just using the software - that's all! I don't know the inner workings of "winzip", or PowerPoint or any one of a thousand other systems some of which are Open Source and some not - and I don't need to - but I can use them all effectively.

It is true to say that "paper based" documentation in the form of a "manual" is a bit sparse and limited for OpenTx - but that's not how this environment works. There is, as Andrew has said, masses of information (more than you could possibly read) available on the internet. That's how this software disseminates. Furthermore, I would suggest (based on actual experience of using the system rather just assumptions often made by people who have never even held a Taranis, far less turn one on and programmed it) that the nature of this system is such that all you really need is the basic instructions covering the "building blocks" - because you build-up your way of doing things rather than having someone else's way forced upon you. So you don't have to have all the extensive documentation needed to learn someone else's way of doing things. So, once you have these basic elements you can construct more or else what ever set-up you want without extensive reference to "menu options" and "sub-menu-options" etc.

BEB

[Fatscoleymo]

Well said BEB.

After initial set ups I've found that even though I have printed copies of the manuals I rarely refer to them any more. I've found a way to do the things I need / want to and it's stuck in my head. (Unlike most other things these days!). Once you have an aircraft set up you can copy it and use it as a template anyway, and that is the way I've gone. Small tweaks on the new model and any we go.

I'm not very computer literate, and am not really interested it how it works, but I've managed fine with Taranis and enjoyed getting to know it and what it can do. For example - I used to buy commercial on board glow units (about £20) but now by using a £5 receiver controlled switch and setting up another mix line I'm doing the same job. Cheaper, but just thinking 'can I do it' and then getting it working has meant as much to me. It has made me enjoy this side of the hobby more than I ever have, and has enhanced the flying side too.

So much help available on line if you need it.

I say - give it a go. (Futaba and JR kit now sitting on my shelves gathering dust)

Steve

[Rich too]

Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 02/04/2014 22:58:02:

Its really hard to see how the mainstream Tx manufacturers can possibly compete. They can't match the manpower resources of the Open Source development model - the market isn't big enough. All I can see is they either adopt OpenTx (albeit with their own front end) or they go under?

Of the "big four" I would say Futaba are the most at risk - given their extremely conservative attitude to technical innovation in recent years. But JR might not be far behind. Being newer Spektrum might prove to be more fleet of foot? Maybe.

you were the one banging on about open source software. exactly what are the manpower resources? how many guys do they have working on the software?

what's your background in open source software then?

I'd be interested to hear the magazines comments on the letter and why it got the award.

Rich

[Rich too]

I think the open source software thing is a red herring. This thread could have been about DLE and OS petrol engines? I buy DLE, but if I had the money.........

They are banging them out cheap (Taranis) because they are made in China (like everything else these days) - what are their margins? I would bet not a lot.....

Rich

[Josip Vrandecic -Mes]

Mr. Erfolg was saying : '' As for the big 4, just like any brand, many will disappear forever, Pick up any old RC magazine, so many have been and gone, Fleet, Cannon, Macgregor, Space Commander, Stavely Simprop, Sprengbrook,, Telefunken, Waltron, OS Cougar and so on. The same is true for cars, fridges etc. I am not as sure that my brand (Futaba) will be around in 10 years time, yet 10 years back, the very idea would have been ridiculous.''

Quote from 2014.

With all due respect to everyone, Erfolg's version seems correct and possible omen of our small modeling gadgets.

At the very end...... everybody will buy Taranis...

Jo

[Geoff S]

Posted by Rich2 on 26/05/2014 20:08:48:

Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 13/05/2014 09:53:04:

The OpenTx stuff in Taranis is all written by specialists, you don't get involved in that (well unless you want to and that a whole different ball game). What we do is "program" within an environment they have provided for you - effectively a user interface to the Tx. You are not programming the OpenTx itself. So the guy in the letter having Open Source industrial experience is not really that relevant, because we are not doing Open Source development.

just been trying (again) to get to grips with the whole "open source" thing, its not that straightforward! am I correct in thinking that the software is written/developed mainly by one person or "contributor" (source - opentx website)?

The guy in the article has years of experience with open source so I think he knows what he is talking about!

Rich

Edited By Rich2 on 26/05/2014 20:09:38

Well, I had years of experience writing software to drive the hardware I designed. I've been retired nearly 20 years and most of my software was either straight machine code or assembler but I branched into C etc towards the end. Howevr my experience is irrelevant to the OpenTX firmware in the Taranis because it's totally transparent to me. I just use the tools it provides to make my transmitter move the servos etc as I need. It isn't programming, though that term can be used as shorthand to describe what end users do.

The Taransi doesn't need to be difficult to use. It's easy and quick to set up a simple model but there's also a whole lot more potential if you fancy using it. The big thing is, it isn't expensive, the receivers are (almost) 10 a penny and it's as future proof as it's reasonably possible to get because updating is there for the asking - and free.

Geoff

[Bill_B]

Posted by Josip Vrandecic -Mes on 31/05/2015 18:49:57:

At the very end...... everybody will buy Taranis...

Jo

Not unless they make it easy to programme and extremely ergonomic like the Cockpit SX.

[MattyB]

I am a Taranis owner and a huge FrSky fan - the gear is unmatched for the price. However, I do have some worries about the next phase in FrSky's development, and what it will mean for existing users.

Firstly, the recent issues around the ETSI regulations and what it means for the "old" D series RXs. FrSky really made a mess of this; they had years to inform users of their plans, but left it to the very last moment, and the comms have been appalling. Now it appears the D series will no longer be distributed in the EU and all current and future sets will only use the D16 mode that works with X series RXs, though they have not totally ruled out a "D8 EU" mode in the future. For current users with lots of D series this is a major issue - they either have to retire them and buy X series replacements, or flash old RF firmware to their new set, which could cause insurance issues. Not great planning or communication; if they want to compete with the big boys they will need to improve this.

Secondly, the new X9E and Horus TXs. Both have great specs, but are clearly strongly "inspired" by the Jetis and have marmite looks. Some will undoubtedly deride them as "clones" and "knock offs" as a result. Will they sell? X9E (the "Tray Taranis") looks to have a ready made niche market waiting in the form of disillusioned Mpx users, and should do well in Europe. Horus though may have a difficult birth - it is entirely new and unproven hardware, and will be the first FrSky set to use a closed, in house developed firmware (though OpenTX may still become available for it at a later date). A more instantly accessible "canned mixer" approach may be exactly what users of big brand sets (their main target with Horus) are looking for, but will it actually be any good? V1 is bound to have some foibles, and however polished it is the traditional JR/Futaba/Hitec style approach wil disenchant Taranis and OpenTx fans. Those Devs are a big risk for FrSky too - yes there are quite a few of them, but they are all working in their own time to transition the software for the X9E. Goodwill only goes so far, and I suspect FrSky will need to invest in them some more if they want OpenTX for the Horus.

Finally, the transition from young upstart to major player. This is not easy, and many promising companies have tripped up at this point. FrSky have a great chance to become one of the top 3, but to do that they will have to capture a large number of users from the big brands without alienating or losing their existing customers. What's more they have to find a way to start making some money - margins on their existing RXs and the Taranis must be wafer thin, so the new sets need to be much more profitable to pay back their R&D costs. Tricky stuff - I hope they can pull it off.

Edited By MattyB on 01/06/2015 00:04:05

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

A lot of good points there Matty - many of which I'd agree with. Like you I am not sure that Horus is the right path for the Taranis legacy. In fact it isn't really the Taranis legacy at all, its a "new transmitter by the people who make Taranis" in reality.

What I would have liked to see is development of Taranis in partnership with OpenTx that extended their lead in flexible programming even further and given us maybe a quality mechanical, more modern and polished style of Tx.

But its a good position for FrSky to be in - with a choice of development paths. Whether they take what proves to be the "right" path will depend a lot on if they can make the transition from "geek driven small company" to a strategic outlook large company. Only time will answer that question I think.

BEB

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

2 x 8 ch rx's £30.03p delivered to your door this is the clincher for me, are they cheap and unreliable ? well I see no evidence of that, and they sell like hot cakes so there must be a few about. Get a tx out with the feel of a mid range box like the JR 9x or the other brands equivalent and who knows how many they'd sell.

John