Two more FrSky Txs in the pipeline

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Andy Meade]

Back on topic..

Horus prototype video :

[Foxfan]

Well, that was about as useful as a chocolate teapot!

MrTin

[Andy Meade]

Yeah, doesn't give much away there does it?

[Martyn K]

The on-off switch looks a bit OTT as well

M

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

I assumed it was a neck strap holder?

BEB

[Andy Meade]

I believe from the RCG thread, that it's dual purpose - a safety over the power switch and a neck strap holder, if my memory serves me right.

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

There we go - two for the price of one and everyone is right! Even better.

BEB

[Erfolg]

I personally await with anticipation the day when Frsky, or another brand that introduces an interface that is driven via icons.

I may be creating an impression that i do not appreciate features such as , sub trims, or end point adj and so on. In reality all those features I embrace as very useful features indeed. What I do not want to do is learn a specific methodology of implementing a feature or adjustment. It strikes me that the open programming is just that, a specific method of setting up your tx, to get anything beyond the basics., All beyond the basics requires the user to type in the lines of code for specific features. Being a baby boomer of the 50s, I learnt Fortran and other languages (Pascal, Basic , Visual basic), which all took time to write, in a top down structure, that had to be compiled, then error checked.. If this is the situation with open structures, I am conceptually no fan. Just give me the conventional tree type structure of the Horus far more attractive. Not intuitive, although the structure and relationships and setting options all built in. There being no need to spend hours typing in lines of settings and instructions. Ideally give me a intuitive icon driven inrterface.

Although my initial interests in telemetry were restricted to power drawn during the climb out, then the details of the altitude, relative to time and perhaps rate of rise and fall during flight, relative to time.

Now being an electric sport flyer, I am very more interested in knowing the remaining capacity of my lipo. This would have been invaluable for the "a" test, as I once landed out with a completely flat Lipo. On other occlusions I struggled to regain the field. Not quite the issue now that i fly strictly to a timer, flying for fun. Yet battery info is what I want.

I also do like the information with respect to important information being made available via a voice, in addition to a screen (which is often not easy and convenient to glance at).

All this information I understand the Taranis already makes available at a finacial cost that is attractive.

I know other manufacturers also have these features, but at a significant cost.

For me you can keep your CNC screens and yokes, just give me a icon driven intuitive interface, for setting up. Perhaps it could also be configured to provide user defined on screen data, at a size that is visible at a glance.

Although this is my pie in the sky (for the moment) wish, at this time, the Tarnis will do me. So when the time comes, the Futaba set will be consigned to the bin, the cash spent, at present on a Tarnis, the bling of the Hurus in itself would not be enough.

Edited By Erfolg on 24/07/2015 20:19:24

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Erf, with the greatest respect I think you have got hold of a slightly distorted view of what OpenTx is like to use. The reality is that it nothing much like coding in a computer language at all - unless you want it to be! And that's the beauty of it.

I'll try to explain it as I see it. I think it is possible to divide Taranis users into three broad camps. Noone fits entirely within one camp and in reality most people are a bit of a mixture of all three. But let's think about it that way.

1. The first group are bit like you say you want to be. They just want to fly their aeroplanes and for them the Tx is just a means to an end. For them the Companion software has "the wizard" - it could not be easier! Its very graphical - picture of an aeroplane, glider or heli (whatever you have asked for) and you just pick what type of controls you have (rudder, ailerons etc) just by clicking on and the clever software does it all for you! Programs the whole Taranis, you need to know absolutely nothing about how it does it. It can cope with a wide range of configurations; 3 or 4 channel, vee-tails, elevons the lot. Its a bit like using a conventional Tx - picking a wing type etc - but MUCH easier. So if you want graphical programming this is for you.

2. These are the intermediate users, they are happy to do a bit more. Now a lot of people will tell you that Taranis is hard to programme. In my opinion, and that of many others, this isn't true. What is true is that Taranis is different to program. In its native form it doesn't have drop down menus of ready set mixes - you define them. But 90% of what you do on 90% of models is a sort of standard framework. So, what a lot of folks do is set up the first couple of models with the wizard - then take a look at the programming - figure out the basics and just copy that to set up a new model. Then bit by bit they extend that. But even this isn't really like "computer programming", its really just specifying on a series of tabbed screens what you want to happen by selecting fairly standardised options. Where this type of user really benefits is that no combinations are barred or pre-set, this means you can assign any switch to any function etc., perform any function in any order, make any function dependent on any condition being true or not. All easy once you are into it - and not like programming!

The initial learning with Taranis requires a little thought - but the main reason some people struggle a bit is that they won't let go of their old way of viewing how a Tx is programmed. They are looking for menus that don't exist! You hear people saying things like "where is the expo menu on this damn thing?" - that just indicates they haven't grasped the basic premiss of Taranis - which isn't difficult to grasp - its just different. In fact, I honestly believe that you have to be a lot smarter to program a standard Tx to do something clever than you do with Taranis. This is because with a Standard Tx you have figure out how to combine the pre-defined set-ups to achieve something they weren't intended to do! With Taranis you just define what it is you want to do - no ingenious work-arounds needed!

3. Then there is the third group - these can hack the system about left and right! They can use the system to define intricate mixes on mixes and on mixes. But you don't HAVE to do this if you don't want to - that's part of the flexibility!

So, if you want a really easy to use Tx - get a Taranis and just use the wizard.

If you want a very powerful Tx that is capable of very complex mixes - and where you don't have to spend hours figuring out "how do I get the swine to do that given the limited number of pre-defined options and combinations I have" then get a Taranis.

If you really do want to get right down in the nitty gritty and push the outside of the envelop in terms of what is possible with modern RC equipment - then, yes you guessed it, get a Taranis!

But forget ideas that it has to be like writing Fortran - its nothing like that at all!

BEB

Edited By Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 24/07/2015 21:51:46

[AJ]

I would add another group 4 which *is* real programming, which because it's open source is there for anyone to explore. Now I know this group may be fairly small but the important thing is that it's there so if there is something you can think off that the Taranis really can't do already you have the option to join group 4 and add the new feature yourself.

A

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Fair point AJ. But as you say that is a very small, very skilled and valuable, group! But 99%+ of Taranis users will have never even looked at the OpenTx source code - and don't need to, unless of course they want to! And there's the beauty of it!

BEB

[Eamonn Fahey]

*THIS* has popped up on HobbyKing.com ​ Waiting for a bit more information before making a purchase.

[Andy Meade]

Yes, it's looking good so far for the beta testers. I guess we are still a few months away from the production release though. I saw this on T9's site - it's been a bit under-the-radar, but I may find a place for one in my C17.

[Josip Vrandecic -Mes]

Black version soon :

**LINK**

Edited By Josip Vrandecic -Mes on 02/03/2016 09:20:19

[Dave Hopkin]

To embroider what AJ said.... The Taranis has a free PC based "companion 9x" software which allows you you connect the XT to the PC via a USB Cable, then you can upload/download model definition files (and keep a back up of them on the PC)

The model wizard AJ mentions is within the Companion Software and will create a set suitable for most models

If you want to go a little deeper without getting into code level programming the Companion allows you to create a model or tinker with an existing one to tweak it beyond a generic model level - while its not icon driven it is very simple and also gives you a sumulator that allows you to see what effect the changes you made have on servo outputs, then when you are happy you can download it to the TX

[Andy Meade]

This was on the FRSky site not too long ago - so I thought I'd share for your consumption. Horus X12S user manual.

I've never used OpenTX - and am willing to learn of course - but it's nice to see this menu driven system has a familiar feel to it.

I still want one when they are released

[Andy48]

Sadly it looks like this is back to the "old" style of setting up a model where you mostly have a range of pre-determined options. It lacks much of the flexibility of OpenTX, which will be available for the Horus so I understand. Some of the descriptions are great:

On the interface of this function, the user can calibrate the triaxial accelerometer, please follow the instructions and calibrate it

when holding it as you would during normal use, when calibrated the G-ROLL, G-PITCH channel have a corresponding output signal.

[Andy Meade]

Yes the manual was quickly removed from FRSKy's page after some people pointed out it needed some..."work"..!

I'm not too fussed which system it uses to program, as long as it's easy

Edited By Andy Meade on 27/04/2016 16:16:00

[Frank Skilbeck]

Posted by Andy Meade on 27/04/2016 16:15:40:

I'm not too fussed which system it uses to program, as long as it's easy

Edited By Andy Meade on 27/04/2016 16:16:00

Define easy to program, some prefer a menu driven system that steps them what to do but falls down when the programmer hasn't covered your model/control/mixer configuration and some prefer a system which doesn't predefine how you have to set the model up. I have one friend who doesn't want to use more than 2 switches on any model set up otherwise it's too complicated.

[Andy Meade]

As mentioned 4 posts up Frank - I've always used menu driven systems and find them easy to program as I am used to it. As also mentioned Frank, I don't mind learning a new way of programming my TX. Complexity of model setup wasn't mentioned - just ease of use.

[Andy48]

The OpenTX team have gone very quiet at the moment, they are not even responding to problems identified on Github which is unusual. I am guessing that their version of OpenTX for the Horus is looking so attractive that FrSky will ship the transmitter with that.

For instance there is no mention in that documentation of programming any telemetry, which is a must for most these days, especially those that fly electric.

Check this out, there are more screen shots at the left hand side of the blog:

**LINK**

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

I have no doubt that OpenTx (with new bits!) will be available for the Horus - but I really do doubt that the Tx will ship with it. It will ship with FrSky's menu system - and I think that's a pity.

What I suspect will happen is that those who come from Taranis, and have tasted the freedom of OpenTx, will instantly load the new OpenTx onto Horus. But, new FrSky cusptomers will, in the main, stick with the pre-packaged menu system - and so I think miss out - at least in my view. Personally I see FrSky developing this menu system as a retrograde step.

BEB

[Andy48]

50p on it?

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

You're on!

BEB

PS Can't lose here really! If I'm wrong I get the Horus shipped with OpenTx - which would please me emensely! In fact I'd very happily pay over the 50p for that!!

Edited By Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 27/04/2016 20:49:42