Two more FrSky Txs in the pipeline

[Andy Meade]

Ah well, nothing wrong with my FF9 at the moment, so I can wait. They do look good (imho) though.

[John F]

I've changed my mind. Both of em are ugly as sin.

The X9E has always been an unsightly brick in my eyes but the Horus looked OK with the computer modelled textures. In reality the Horus needs toning down a bit IMO.

[Chris Bott - Moderator]

Quite a radical design, these transmitters, nothing like them have ever been seen before.

[Chris Anthony]

Posted by Andy Meade on 01/10/2014 15:15:15:

In this instance, I am sure it is the same as the designation used on a flight controller :

X +ve, X-ve, rotation about X

Y +ve, Y-ve, rotation about Y

Z +ve, Z-ve, rotation about Z

= 9 DOF

Hehe. That's not how it works. Why not +ve rotation and -ve rotation = "12 degs of freedom"?!

BEB is right, the object's movement in free space can only be defined by 6 DOF, how more? The other measures, from compasses and altimeters, are duplicate measures of what the inertial measurement devices could theoretically tell you, but for practical reasons (as BEB suggested) cannot be relied upon.

I too would like to know what these features will even be used for in a transmitter.

And I think they both look ugly as sin. I have a Taranis, I'm allowed to say that. Hopefully the change in appearance of conceptual sketches to final production items in the transmitter industry is as drastic as in the auto industry.

[Bob Cotsford]

No Thanks. They fell of the ugly tree and hit every branch on the way down. I like the traditional style of the Taranis and I'll be sticking with that. I'd be happy with a slightly sturdier Taranis case that didn't suffer from buttons and trim switches coming loose. A second protected battery input on future receivers would be nice.

[Andy Meade]

Posted by Chris Anthony on 03/10/2014 10:19:33:

Posted by Andy Meade on 01/10/2014 15:15:15:

In this instance, I am sure it is the same as the designation used on a flight controller :

X +ve, X-ve, rotation about X

Y +ve, Y-ve, rotation about Y

Z +ve, Z-ve, rotation about Z

= 9 DOF

Hehe. That's not how it works. Why not +ve rotation and -ve rotation = "12 degs of freedom"?!

BEB is right, the object's movement in free space can only be defined by 6 DOF, how more? The other measures, from compasses and altimeters, are duplicate measures of what the inertial measurement devices could theoretically tell you, but for practical reasons (as BEB suggested) cannot be relied upon.

I too would like to know what these features will even be used for in a transmitter.

And I think they both look ugly as sin. I have a Taranis, I'm allowed to say that. Hopefully the change in appearance of conceptual sketches to final production items in the transmitter industry is as drastic as in the auto industry.

I guess what FRSky can only be aiming at by having these on the TX is so that you can control certain functionality by moving the TX physically. Probably not the best idea for primary control surfaces, but hey ho.

FYI, a quick google revealed that 9DOF sensor set is "

• 9DOF : This is mostly a 6DOF, combined with a magnetometer (compass)." hth.

[Chris Bott - Moderator]

Posted by Andy Meade on 03/10/2014 10:55:10:

I guess what FRSky can only be aiming at by having these on the TX is so that you can control certain functionality by moving the TX physically. Probably not the best idea for primary control surfaces, but hey ho.

Some of my clubmates seem to fly like that's the case already .

If previous experience is anything to go by, we'll be able to assign any shake, tilt or point, to any function we like. Although I expect it will only be sensible to use them to trigger announcements, or cycle through music tracks. etc.

I can see a tilt function as useful in computer joystick mode, but hovering a quad by tilting the Tx? Who knows?

[Andy Meade]

True, I think the Parrot does this already from a smartphone, so might be possible?

I know what you mean about leaning and getting a bit excited with the tranny! :D Have seen some odd sites on the slopes over the years.

I like the idea of triggering announcements etc. Maybe a quick nudge up and down to retract undercarriage? A shimmy sideways for a little more aileron trim perhaps?

[Jim Mchugh]

IMHO these both look fine. The X12D is the better looking of the two, the X9E looks are suffering from using off-the-shelf switches and knobs, not bespoke design ones.

On the X, Y, Z gyro values thing: There are already commercial "toy" quadcopter that use the gyros in your iPhone / iPad for pitch / roll control. Not sure I would like that form of control, I feel it would be a "disconnected" experience.

[Chris Bott - Moderator]

Maybe with the bluetooth and accelerometer functions, we could "throw" a telemetry file from the Tx to our laptop?

I know what you're going to say - "now your getting silly" - and you'd be right. But this can already be done with photos, between some smartphones and tablets.

Maybe with the same device in a receiver, we could just nudge one with the other to perform the bind function. Or nudge another transmitter to connect a wireless buddy or a spotters telemetry handset?

[Jim Mchugh]

Chris: Nice ideas!

There are already mods out there for doing wireless programming on Taranis X9D via serial bluetooth adapter fitted inside the case.

One thing that does trouble me is the 2.4GHz WiFi adapter. Hopefully FrSky will be clever about this and disable the WiFi while flying....

[Dickw]

Posted by Jim Mchugh on 03/10/2014 12:18:30:

........On the X, Y, Z gyro values thing: There are already commercial "toy" quadcopter that use the gyros in your iPhone / iPad for pitch / roll control. Not sure I would like that form of control, I feel it would be a "disconnected" experience.

Model flight using accelerometers in a Tx is already posssible - see here:-

**LINK**

I have also seen videos of indoor 3D models being flown with the same setup.

I am not sure I would try it though.

Dick

[Chris Bott - Moderator]

A camera gimbal in the model would work well from tilt and turn. Or indeed ancillaries like guns and turrets.

[Frank Skilbeck]

They are only prototypes, but it looks like they got their inspiration from Amstrad

But I can't help feeling that FrSky would have been better launching an entry level set with basic programming to get the beginers, a sort of Orange 6 channel tx competitor, maybe the cost of developing even a basic software system is too expensive so they are making the most of Open Tx by aiming for the top end of the market

[Chris Bott - Moderator]

I agree Frank, something at DX6 level would start to tie beginners in to FrSky receivers etc.

More photos have been posted on this RCG page including a shot of the president of FrSky.

More details about the operating systems there too.

We'll have to choose between the FrSky OS that comes with the Tx, OR OpenTx.
The FrSky one does sound pretty comprehensive, so it might be a difficult choice.

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

I'm obviously in a very small minority - but I think they both look fantastic! Honestly, I love the appearance of both of them. Refreshingly out of the normal "run of the mill" where you have to read the label to know who made it!

I don't know obviously, but could it be the fact that they are just "different" that is raising hackles about their appearance? We're not "accustomed to their face" as Prof Higgins might have said - had he been an R/C modeller! Maybe.

Well when I say "different" perhaps that's except for Jeti, but then I suspect that very few of us see a Jeti Tx in the flesh that often anyway!

BEB

[Bob Cotsford]

The X9 I could cope with if it didn't have the telly stuck on top - reminds me of a Hitec Eclipse 7. The tea-tray is ... functional? To my eye the brushed finish is a bit domestic appliance.  And why the external aerials?

Sorry.

Edited By Bob Cotsford on 03/10/2014 21:45:57

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Posted by Chris Bott - Moderator on 03/10/2014 13:07:19:

A camera gimbal in the model would work well from tilt and turn.

Something I've had on my "to play with" list for a while and was actually giving some thought to yesterday. Thanks for the prompt, Chris - I've now explored the programming on my Jeti DS and worked through the intricacies of clone receivers to come up with the basis of a workable self contained system - all I need now is to make or buy the gimbals...

Who will be the first to try an aerotow flying the tug on sticks and the glider on gyros - I'm not volunteering by the way!

Other than an excess of aluminium trim, I must say that the general look is clean and to my eye, rather refined for a Far Eastern product. I was more impressed with the CGI versions in the OP - but these are in development after all. The later JR transmitters looked more like space aliens than radio transmitters to me although some Futaba designs have moved in the right direction, even if they have rather lost the plot where there system compatibility is concerned. There again, as FRSky's inspiration is obviously from my system of choice, I would probably be a little biased!

Edited By Martin Harris on 03/10/2014 22:23:53

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

As Bo Diddley would say "they look like they been whupped with an ugly stick "

I quite like the Ali one though

John

[MattyB]

Posted by Chris Bott - Moderator on 03/10/2014 09:59:47:

So, they've been unveiled in Chicago. It's disappointing though that these are only early prototypes.

I have a feeling that we have a long wait before we actually see one.

Agreed, these look a fair way away from production to me. Other stuff that came from the Chicago fair according to the US FrSky sellers Aloft...

• The Horus gimbals were from the Taranis on these protos; all new gimbals with Hall sensors will be fitted to the final version
• The Horus sticks will move nearer to the outside of the case to allow a more comfortable grip for thumb fliers. They are also gong to look at whether it is possible to make the angle of the gimbals adjustable a la the Mpx Evo.
• The Horus will also be thinner and have the rear mounted sliders moved in order to make them easier to reach for thumb fliers.
• X9E will have the option of switches for the stick tops as per other tray type TXs.
• Price for the Horus scheduled to be ~$500, which in this country puts it squarely in competition with the likes of a DX9 (which can put up a good fight) or a Futaba 10J (which, err.... can't!).

I like the look of these, but do have one major concern - the FrSky OS. It might be good and will probably be easier to get into than OpenTX, but for anyone coming from a Taranis I have a feeling it is going to feel restrictive - after all, OpenTX is just about the most flexible transmitter OS ever made. Sure the Horus is theoretically capable of running OpenTX, but that doesn't mean it will be on release; the community will need to do all the legwork to make that happen. That is a LOT of work when you consider the new screen and touch interface; we could be talking 6 months to a year , and the community could decide it just isn't worth their time and effort. At the moment I would say there are plenty of questions and not many answers - hold onto your Taranii gentlemen, I think they will be in use for a while...

 

Posted by PatMc on 01/10/2014 15:18:38:

The Horus antena/handle arrangement looks very Blue Peter. The antena in particular appears vulnerable to being easily damaged.
Is there any reason that the antena can't be completely routed inside the handle if the handle was made as part of the main Tx body's plastic moulding ? IIRC Phil Green did just that using a hack module in a Futaba Tx.

Apparently the Horus does have an internal antenna for the internal module; the antenna you see in the pics is for a module pased in the secondary slot a la Taranis.

 

 

Edited By MattyB on 09/10/2014 15:12:41

Edited By MattyB on 09/10/2014 15:14:41

Edited By MattyB on 09/10/2014 15:20:22

[Andy Meade]

Some pics from Toledo, taken from the RCG forum :

old at bottom, new at top

A cheesey selfie by jsparky holding the new unit :

I think this is last year's prototype next to the Jeti :

And a final shot of the latest unit :

[MattyB]

Good pics, but your last caption is wrong - that black one in the case is definitely last years unit.

Lots more good pictures emerged on RCGroups recently too...

Edited By MattyB on 27/04/2015 17:29:51

[Andy Meade]

Cheers Matt - I knew I'd get it wrong and changed my mind at least twice when writing it. Doh.

[Frank Skilbeck]

There's a post here from one of the Open Tx team explaining why the Horus won't ship with Open Tx. Interesting comment that the Taranis only went with Open Tx as Frsky couldn't finish their own operating system in time.

[MattyB]

Posted by Frank Skilbeck on 28/04/2015 08:04:22:

There's a post here from one of the Open Tx team explaining why the Horus won't ship with Open Tx. Interesting comment that the Taranis only went with Open Tx as Frsky couldn't finish their own operating system in time.

Yep, there are lots of OpenTX fans getting grumpy in that thread because FrSky have dared to use something other than their favoured firmware. I agree that it will probably result in the Horus being less powerful and flexible initially, but can you really blame FrSky? 95% of their target market currently have menu driven TXs, so they could only ever make so much headway with OpenTX on it's own.