Two more FrSky Txs in the pipeline

[MattyB]

Posted by Frank Skilbeck on 30/04/2015 08:12:52:

But doesn't the new X9E cater for the Open Tx guys, wanting improved hardware?

Only if you're a pincher - it might be possible for thumb fliers to use it, but the ergonomics will be deeply suboptimal if used this way (almost none of the switches look to be in easy reach for a thumbs pilot).

Edited By MattyB on 30/04/2015 14:56:05

[Frank Skilbeck]

Posted by MattyB on 30/04/2015 14:55:39:

Posted by Frank Skilbeck on 30/04/2015 08:12:52:

But doesn't the new X9E cater for the Open Tx guys, wanting improved hardware?

Only if you're a pincher - it might be possible for thumb fliers to use it, but the ergonomics will be deeply suboptimal if used this way (almost none of the switches look to be in easy reach for a thumbs pilot).

Edited By MattyB on 30/04/2015 14:56:05

ah, designed for proper fliers then

[Mike Blandford]

Erfolg: Of course, we all think in different ways, so what you might think of as "intuitive" someone else might not.

What could be helpful is a clear description of the sort of user interface you might like to see. Both openTx and er9x/ersky9x started out on the 9X transmitter. This has limited program and data space, so the user interface was also limited.

I have managed to improve the user interface on er9x/ersky9x and I'm continually looking for feedback to improve it further.

We also have programs that run on a PC and may be used to configure models in the radio. If you don't have a Taranis, you can still download and run the PC program, which will even simulate the actual transmitter so you can see what it is like without actually buying one.

A bit of history:

FrSky started out producing Tx modules, receivers and telemetry sensors. They contacted us (in 2011) regarding er9x supporting their "new" PXX protocol to the DJT Tx module. We did in fact do this, and updated DJT modules to use it, but this never went on sale. Instead, FrSky went down the line of developing the Taranis and the XJT module, but actually asked us if we wished to be part of the development so they produced something people wanted. They were intending to ship with their own firmware, but preferred openTx in the end and went with that. Quite possibly, they could see they could get to market faster than completing their own firmware.

They sent us prototypes of the Taranis, and we probably got them running with the open source firmware sooner than they expected. I only had to write a few hardware drivers to get the existing code running! I'd already got similar drivers running for use on the "SKY" board upgrade for the 9X.

Mike.

[Erfolg]

Mike

I think the problem with most interfaces is that they are "Tree Structures" with "sub "Branches". Pretty classic in that there is a certain logic, also early PC Operating systems would often allow you to see the structure, or earlier still, you needed to know the structure and where what feature was located on which branch. Most RC Txs still seem to adhere to the hidden concept.

Looking at the now common Smart Phones and Tablets, they tend to have a home screen, where commonly used functions can be found. Thereafter some continue the visual aspect of selection, although many eventually start using the clunky Tree Structures, to reveal lists at the lowest levels.

Some aspects of "Expert Systems" can be attractive, in that many routes are available to the function you may require, although the flexibility can cause disputes of the most efficient path to the function.

I do find that there is conflict between the concept of open systems which potentially allow bespoke set ups, although attractive to some sections of our community, yet evoke equally passionate responses from many others.

My own thoughts are is that the direction of travel is towards, icon driven visual means of accessing features, which finds broad support with both old, the young, the technically unaware and also techno geeks.

I cannot but observe that in my younger days I did enjoy programming, in Fortran, Pascal, Basic, Visual Basic, for the sake of it. The fact that much of what i did could be done faster by other means , and certainly would have been a massive cost addition to any commercial application, did not bother me, I enjoyed programming. Some of the things i learnt such as writing in binary values, for Numerically Controlled Machines, or my early experiences of CAD systems based on inputted co-ordinates, with no graphics, also formed my opinion. That opinion is that for any interface to be useful, specific education, fundamental knowledge of systems and time consuming reading, will not find universal appreciation. The simpler and more visual a interface is, the broader will the user base become and that user base will often access more of the capability of a product than when it is essentially the domain of those seeking an intellectual challenge.

[Andy48]

Posted by Erfolg on 30/04/2015 18:29:20:

The simpler and more visual a interface is, the broader will the user base become and that user base will often access more of the capability of a product than when it is essentially the domain of those seeking an intellectual challenge.

The model wizard gives a very simple visual interface taking just a minute to set up most common plane configurations.

I find the Taranis far easier to program than my previous Spektrum, its far more logical and intuitive, and as Mike says, the computer program makes it so much easier.

[Mike Blandford]

Well, for er9x, where we just don't have the storage to handle icons, I've currently got the following:

On the main screen you just press the MENU button and you get a popup menu of:

Model Select
Model Setup
Last Menu
Radio Setup
Statistics

You simply choose one of these. As an example, if you choose Radio Setup you get a menu of headings to choose from:

Display......... | Version
AudioHaptic | DiagSwtch
Alarms......... | DiagAna
General....... | Hardware
Controls...... |
Calibration.. |
Trainer......... |

These are supposed to be descriptive of what you find if you select them. I've a lot of positive responses to say this is very easy to use and, for most things, you don't need the manual to find anything.

There is also the problem of designing an ICON that is meaningful for each item.

As I said before, if somebody comes up with a design for a user interface then maybe what we have can be improved, but we need the feedback, otherwise we have to guess what is needed.

Mike.

 

Edited By Mike Blandford on 30/04/2015 19:18:56

[Erfolg]

For the time being I will be soldering on with my Futaba. However i will maintain a watchful eye on developments with the Frsky products. I use Frsky Rxs with Futaba Tx, which i have not only found to be reliable, attractively priced and in the area of the Fail safe being superior.

If i were buying today, it would be a Taranis,

I do appreciate that the introduction of Icons is probably not a realistic proposition. as with many aspects of technology, the issues of cost and technical complexity often change with time. Although icons seem to be the way forward today, tomorrow they could be as modern as the steam engine.

I have pondered how many units are sold world wide, to try and get a handle on what is realistic. Using the World Championships as the bench mark of major RC markets. I believe there are 20 major markets. If the UK is taken as a median modelling population, that indicates about 100, 000 modellers. This suggests a market of about 2M, if the average modeller changes their set every 5 years then the total annual sales is 400,000. Or if every 10 years 200,000. Not a awful lot of units spread over potentially at least 5 brands, say 80,000 each world wide, if shared equally..

Although the numbers do look big, in reality for a mass market product, not large at all. There is a limit to how much can be spent in product development, and all the other necessary activities in supporting a brand.

Perhaps a useful development would be plug in replacement boards, switches etc, to facilitate user repair, rather than via repair depots.

It does look like there is one major brand, the Spektrum, It would not surprise me that Frsky could easily become No.2, with almost the same share.

As all the other current Taranis users, I am looking at that new Frsky products favourably. In my case die to the reliability, performance/features and the favourable pricing point. I am just not sure I want to be bothered learning to set up my Tx.

[MattyB]

So the first X9Es have landed in the UK, and early reports (see here and here) suggest that they have a few firstrun production issues - the Hall effect sensors have been replaced with pots, the tray arms are in somewhat bendy plastic and the "all metal case" is rather plasticky in many places! I still think this looks like a good TX with great value, but those expecting a cut price DC16 are probably going to be disappointed...

Edited By MattyB on 23/07/2015 13:26:01

[Chris Bott - Moderator]

Posted by Erfolg on 30/04/2015 20:05:27:

Perhaps a useful development would be plug in replacement boards, switches etc, to facilitate user repair, rather than via repair depots.

Another tick in the box for Taranis then Erfolg, virtually all parts are available to purchase separately, at very reasonable prices too. This one is intended for user repair.

[Andy Meade]

A bit disappointed on the X9E internals. I was seriously considering it due to the Horus having (what looks like) a large delay.

X9E User manual here ..I guess this is because there is OpenTX online help somewhere instead?

[Foxfan]

These seem to me to be shameless copies of the beautiful Jeti product. I guess if lots of chromed (or more likely spray painted silver plastic) is what you were brought up on, floats yer boat, you'll find these ugly, but for me the Jeti is beyond beautiful and I would indeed put one on my mantlepiece if I could afford one.

There is that old saw about imitation being the sincerest form of flattery and we can't overlook that here.

As to all the "stuff" they do, I don't pretend to understand the bulk of it nor would I need it, but then I wouldn't probably use all a Jeti offers me.

I notice that the sticks have gone from Hall sensors to pots, so they've not ultimately copied that aspect of the Jeti and I can't tell if the case is aluminium or not.

Clearly they have made something people are gagging for who know how to programme it all and at a much lower price than the Jeti, but I think you probably still get what you pay for, so it will very interesting to see what finally becomes the available, in-the-shops-and-mags product and exactly how much it sells for. Unless it was something like half the price of the Jeti, I'd stick with Czech quality.....Provided the Mrs. wins the Lottery<g>

I do, however think this enterprising company are on to something and wish them well. And I hope they prove to be the start of a move away from the Spektrum/Futaba Joe 90 looks that have blighted R/C gear for far too long. I would love to see something like my old Skyleader gear. I tend to trust a lack of frippery and bling over space age plastrickery.

Cheers,

MrTin

[Andy Meade]

It sounds like the hall effect sensors were dropped due to some technical difficulties. The Horus will still ship with them, along with CNC cut alloy gimbals, which will be retro-fittable into the X9E/D range.

[Tom Satinet]

Posted by Andy Meade on 23/07/2015 13:52:56:

A bit disappointed on the X9E internals. I was seriously considering it due to the Horus having (what looks like) a large delay.

X9E User manual here ..I guess this is because there is OpenTX online help somewhere instead?

Do you think HALL sticks would make a big difference to your flying?

[Andy Meade]

No idea chap, never tried them. It was promised in the past to be a feature of the X9E, and came as quite a surprise to the early adopters when they were dropped.

[Tom Satinet]

It makes me laugh people going on about it not being CNC aluminium when it's a £240 quid TX with a strap, metal case, and a 20 quid RX included.

[Foxfan]

Seems odd that they work in the Horus, but not in the (much nicer looking)....other one.

I'll stick with Jeti. It seems to be the whole package. I have no idea what Firmware is or OpenTx, which are being discussed negatively in connection with the FrSky stuff.

Mind you, I have no idea how to program a Tx. Till recently I didn't even realise why Txs had a screen!

I am an aeshete, first and foremost. "Have nothing in your house which you do not find to be beautiful or know to be useful". Ain't that what old Ruskin said? ..more or less.

MrTin

[Andy Meade]

No idea what he said, but I had to Google aesthete

[Erfolg]

I sense that I feel a little about many aspects RC sets in the same way as some others.

Like Tom I do wonder what matters.

I would ask myself what advantage would a CNC case, perhaps with a crystal fascia provide, say compared with a plastic mass market moulded case? Other than being reassuringly expensive.

I feel the same about CNC cut gimbals, are they better than the standard moulded units?

With all things being better needs to quantified if the improvement really matters and does it come with some down side cost.

I am suspecting that the standard Tarnis is good enough for my needs and probably my desires,

It could be that the Huros is aimed at the end of the market, that cars such as the Veyron occupy, OK to drool over, although I not only baulk at the purchase price, the maintenance costs kill any but voyeur interest.

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Posted by Foxfan on 23/07/2015 15:42:42:

Firmware is or OpenTx, which are being discussed negatively in connection with the FrSky stuff.

Nah! All Tx's have firmware and I've not seen any particularly negative comment regarding FrSky's - just the opposite in fact. And as for OpenTx (which largely is the firmware!) - far from being negative - that's the source of all this capability and power!

Another point if I may, earlier it was said "at half the price of a Jeti" - try a quarter of the price and you'd be nearer the mark!

"You get what you pay for"? Mmmm, maybe they just charge you what they think they can get away with!

I don't see transmiters as works of art, or as male jewellery. I buy on the balance of reliability and capability versus price. On that basis FrSky's Tx offerings so far win by a country mile at a canter as far as I am concerned.

BEB

Edited By Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 23/07/2015 16:18:19

[Foxfan]

Can't disagree with any of that, BEB, apart from the openTx thing, which I have read is not being done for the Horus? Because people don't have the time, but I don't really understand all that stuff.

Is it really a quarter the price? Then that makes a difference, of course, as long as it all works well.

I have just looked at some others. Graupner is very similar looking, but a little fussier, though not as expensive as I thought it would be. Multiplex was OK-ish looking, but much more expensive and JR was just daft!

So, speaking aesthetically, the FrSky is damned close to the Jeti and on paper, very capable.

In connection with Erfolg's points, Yes it matters that case and gimbals are beautifully machined in the same way that an Alvis is a hand made vintage car. Or a Frazer-Nash TT has ..."something about it". At least it matters to me.

But as someone who has no problem with replicas, as long as they're well made, I can see the appeal of the FrSky. My son worked for the company that makes complete replicas of classic Maseratis and Willie Green said his 300 S was "the best 300 S Maserati never made". I am not remotely interested in "male jewellery", but when I saw the Jeti, I was instantly impressed with it. Having worked with Czech engineers and designers, I have an unshakable respect for their capabilities. I doubt they'd charge "what they can get away with". I think they make what they charge for.

BUT....if FrSky can do it cheaper whilst almost copying the best elements of the appearance of the Jeti, then they will succeed, no doubt.

I know Nissans to be damned good cars, but I'd rather have an Alvis in my garage than the very capable Micra I enjoyed so much for a year

Cheers,

MrTin

[Erfolg]

Oh Mr Fox! As a one time owner of a Triumph Spitfire, a GT6 and a TR7, you quickly come to recognise that reliability and good engineering matters more than antiquated hand made engineering, and even supposed good looks. Modern cheap mass market cars are far better in every way, than their forebears, even a Micra is probably much better in all respects

I will be honest, totally honest, I find nothing wrong with the look of the Tarnis.

Now I do not have one so have no idea of the ergonomics, but it looks right.

I have actually handled a number of so called up market Txs, although not flown with any. Handling some, I found awkward, and felt like an old time ice cream seller in a cinema. Yet I know that the owners of these devices were ecstatic in there praise, I do believe in at least a few cases, the praise was sincere. There was and is a member in our club who has more RC sets pass through his hands, I guess because of his status, than I have had dinners (well I know I am exaggerating). One of the sets some eulogise over I did find impressive, not because of its then looks, but because of the telemetry that was available, now the scene has changed dramatically.

It increasingly looks that I will be buying a basic Frsky system, because even the basic comes as standard with all the features to which I aspire and I can or am willing to spend. So that will be a Tarnis, on present options.

There is an afterthought, I just want to fly models now, I am not sure that i want to learn a language, so that I can tell my tx that I want 30% exponential on the elevator etc. There was a time when I would have relished the challenge, for the sake of it. Now I simply want to use the RC set, and not have the interface get in the way.

 

Edited By Erfolg on 23/07/2015 17:37:18

[PatMc]

Erf, if you want full telemetry best download "Open TX" & use the virtual Taranis to see if it suits you. If limited telemetry & a good solid basic system that's also very economical meets your needs then best consider "D" series Rxs with either a plug in module, if your current Tx will take one, or a hack module.

[ken anderson.]

erfolg-forget about the rest and consider a Hitec/touch screen set .... one time I would have crawled over a field of broken milk bottle's to get my hand's on a Futaba set...and I used them for 20 year's..... until the 2.4 change over and I purchased an A9 .......... so versatile and user friendly etc......and of course reasonably priced...come join my gang....

ken Anderson......ne...1...hitec gang dept.

[Tom Satinet]

the hitec is a great set and completely under rated. If it said pootaba on it would probably cost 750 quid and sell in large numbers.

The reason I left hitec is because the telemetry is inadequate (the sensor stations totally impractical for gliders).

[Foxfan]

Erfolg,

2 Spitfires, 5 GT6s, three Heralds, 2 1300s, a 1500 FWD and a Vitesse, but no TR7, although my wife likes them.

I chose to drive the last GT6 (with a Spitfire body on it) all over Europe for my work not long ago, so no, I am not one of those quitters who reckons older cars are only good for a local Sunday show.

I am also not blind to modern cars' efficiency. Or their uninvolving tedium. That's the pay-off. A price I'm prepared to pay these days for a "fit and forget" ride, when reliability and a tendency NOT to rot out in the open too quickly is important for a retired chap on no noticeable private or company pension. It's reality. However not long ago our every day car was a Reliant Fox van which I rebuilt at rather too high a cost. So it went to a high bidder and I now have a Focus because the Micra, which I grew to like a lot, allegedly had little floor left at MoT time. I would have another, but that doesn't stop me having a Triumph based and Austin 7 based Specials in the garden waiting for some finishing.

I do respect your wish to see something simpler though. My Super 60 flies (or will shortly) with a set of 35 Meg R/C that I got off ebay for 11 quid + 99p for a Tx. Six channels, if I want them, all works a treat. Last year I splashed out and got a Spektrum dX5e and an Orange Rx for a total of 53 quid. Hasn't been out of the box yet, but will go in an advanced trainer or a Snazzle slope soarer. It has elevon mixing apparently, no exponential, but I'm not sure that's something that can't be sorted out on the linkages like people used to.

I think you have a point about "I just want to fly like I used to". Everything palls in the end, except for the gadget freaks and they're never satisfied, because THAT is their hobby and that's fine and dandy.

I watched a Jeti youtube about programming it and I actually followed it, but doubt I'd ever use the features. But, like the owner of a Kelvin diesel who knows the INSIDE of his fine engine is painted white, I'd be chuffed to know it's there.

I need hardly add that my model boats still use McGregor, MiniHex and Acoms 2 function 27 meg<G>

MrTin