Gary Vinten 1 Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 can I downgrade my tarannis firmware to non eu version and how is it done thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Christy Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 I assume you are talking about the firmware for the RF modules, and not the OpenTx operating system. The two are quite independent of each other! Putting the legal niceties to one side for the moment, its just a question of getting the appropriate firmware from the FrSky site and installing it in the same way as the Eu version. As far as I'm aware, there's nothing to prevent this at present. I know the EU are proposing to force manufacturers to stop you from doing this, but I don't know if its been implemented yet. By the time it is, we may be outside the EU anyway, and what rules will apply then is anyone's guess! (and I'm not trying to start a political discussion here!) -- Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Bran Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 Oh Dear Oh Dear Oh Dear! All 2.4Ghz equipment (inc Model Transmitters) sold from 1st January 2015 for use in the Euro Zone have to use LBT firmware. All 2.4GHz equipment (inc Model Transmitters) sold from 1st June 2016 for use in the Euro Zone has to have hardware that prevents non-LBT firmware being used. There was an early Euro firmware from FrSky that was not LBT and is anyway regarded as inferior in action. To date the law is not retrospective for older equipment. The question is, what are you trying to achieve anyway? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Christy Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 I'm not sure its LBT that is compulsory. You can still use non-LBT, but it is (and has been since the EU rules were implemented) limited to 10% utilisation. That is why it is generally considered inferior. However, equipment sold before the dates you mention can still be used perfectly legally using non EU compliant firmware. Luckily for me, all my equipment predates the new rules, so I can use whatever I want! The rules and regulations are a complete nightmare, and frankly, its all completely unnecessary! -- Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Vinten 1 Posted May 1, 2017 Author Share Posted May 1, 2017 yes is the answer then what do you mean by limited Edited By Gary Vinten 1 on 01/05/2017 19:28:21 Edited By Gary Vinten 1 on 01/05/2017 19:30:08 Edited By Gary Vinten 1 on 01/05/2017 19:31:42 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Christy Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 Hi Gary, That's why I kept my original answer simple, though it would have helped to know the date of your equipment! In your case the answer is a double yes. Yes, it can be done, and yes, it is legal. To be honest, the EU-LBT firmware is just as robust as the international version, and is legal everywhere, as far as I am aware, so I'm not sure what advantages you are expecting to gain. But its your choice, and there's nothing to stop you. -- Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyB Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 Two useful guides - these can be used to flash the RF firmware in either direction... Guide - OpenTX 2.1 or later Guide - Pre OpenTX 2.1 Get a brew, read/watch them closely and work slowly and carefully - you can never completely wreck a Taranis through software updates, but it is possible to get yourself in a big old muddle and waste a lot of time if you do not follow the instructions studiously. Edited By MattyB on 01/05/2017 20:17:19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Christy Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 Gary, Take note of what MattyB says! He is dead right! My preferred method these days is to flash the RF firmware from within OpenTx, but that will only work with versions 2.1.X AND the corresponding bootloader, I believe. This removes the need for a PC, other than as a means of getting the firmware on the SD card in the first place. Don't tick the "EU" box when downloading OpenTx! All it does is remove the option to select D8 and similar non-EU modes from the OpenTx menu. It doesn't actually remove any EU firmware, only the switch needed to select it! Regarding "limited": There are two ways of complying with the EU rules. One is LBT, or "Listen Before Transmit" to ensure a channel is empty before transmitting on it. The other is to transmit blindly, regardless of channel occupancy, but in this case you are restricted to 10% media utilisation. Think of it as only being allowed to transmit for 10% of the available time, and you will get the general idea. In practice, the whole point of spread spectrum is to transmit in a way that is essentially undetectable to any system not using the same spreading code, so adding these restrictions seems utterly pointless. No doubt it keeps bureaucrats somewhere in a job....... -- Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Bran Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Posted by Peter Christy on 01/05/2017 22:38:36: In practice, the whole point of spread spectrum is to transmit in a way that is essentially undetectable to any system not using the same spreading code, so adding these restrictions seems utterly pointless. No doubt it keeps bureaucrats somewhere in a job....... AFAIK it dates back to Cisco trying to grab all possible 2.4Ghz bandwidth for HD streaming video, and it was realised that with so much eqpt from all the disparate uses coming on 2.4GHz, simple rotation would be insufficient alone as the band became saturated. This near saturation could be seen when a lot (and it was a lot) of DSM2 non-spread sets were on at once. With regard why it might be an issue, and why you may want to do it if legal, well there's a lot of ARTF and RTF stuff (esp small multirotors) still being issued for protocols that Euro zone new Tx's do not inherently support, inc DSM2 and FrSky D8. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyB Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Posted by Dave Bran on 02/05/2017 07:37:22: AFAIK it dates back to Cisco trying to grab all possible 2.4Ghz bandwidth for HD streaming video, and it was realised that with so much eqpt from all the disparate uses coming on 2.4GHz, simple rotation would be insufficient alone as the band became saturated. This near saturation could be seen when a lot (and it was a lot) of DSM2 non-spread sets were on at once. With regard why it might be an issue, and why you may want to do it if legal, well there's a lot of ARTF and RTF stuff (esp small multirotors) still being issued for protocols that Euro zone new Tx's do not inherently support, inc DSM2 and FrSky D8. Indeed, and some UK and EU vendors are still selling D8 RXs and modules despite the fact there is no valid certificate of conformity to go with them - I guess the authorities simply do not have the resources to enforce the regs... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Christy Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Yes, I'd heard the "land-grab" theory as well, though when I heard it, it was German car manufacturers trying to set up live diagnostics for their cars, by placing 2.4 GHz monitoring points at regular intervals along the autobahns! Still, whatever the reason, we are stuck with it! One other point, though: Those cut-off dates do have a loophole in them. If the equipment was already "in the supply chain" prior to the cut-off date, it is still legal to sell it! So if someone had a warehouse-full of (for instance) DSM-2 stuff prior to the cut-off date, it would still be legal to sell it! Frankly, the whole regulation is "not fit for purpose" to use the well-worn phrase, and whilst I don't condone breaking rules and regulations, it seems to me to be completely unenforceable. And unenforceable rules are the worst kind, as they simply bring the whole regulatory system into disrepute. I'll get off my soap-box, now! -- Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyB Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Posted by Peter Christy on 02/05/2017 08:36:31: ...One other point, though: Those cut-off dates do have a loophole in them. If the equipment was already "in the supply chain" prior to the cut-off date, it is still legal to sell it! So if someone had a warehouse-full of (for instance) DSM-2 stuff prior to the cut-off date, it would still be legal to sell it! I am pretty sure there was an 18 month time limit on that loophole, but can't remember where I read it - the ETSI standard itself is not that clear on dates beyond the initial implementation in Jan 2015.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Blandford Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 I believe the 10% utilisation also includes reducing the power, so if you transmit continuously, but only at a tenth of full power, then you still meet the 10% media utilisation. It is likely that FrSky D8 receivers comply with the 10% as they only transmit telemetry data every third or fourth (can't remember which) received packet, so their utilisation is quite low. Mike. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyB Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 That may well be true Mike, but irrelevant of whether the protocol is compliant technically it cannot be legally sold without a valid certificate of conformity. The only certificate that has ever been available for the D8 compatible kit is this one on the Frsky site - it explicitly states the earlier RXs were certificated against the 1.7.1 version of the ETSI regulations. From post 1 of the main ETSI thread on RCGroups... A revised version of the ETSI standard EN 300 328 (v1.8.1) has been published and will come into force in Jan 1st 2015. Version 1.8.1 has an effective date of December 31, 2014, so declarations of conformity with the Radio and Telecommunication Terminal Equipment (R&TTE) Directive based on testing against EN 300 328, v1.7.1 would need to be re-evaluated before the end of 2014 for devices going into the EU market after this date. Devices already in the market will be grandfathered in. However, at the same time as the v1.8.1 adoption, a note was added to v1.7.1 in the EU's Official Journal (OJ), stating that part of the new v1.8.1 requirements – medium utilization factors – needed to be immediately implemented and tested. The upshot: Radio modules tested and found compliant to v1.7.1 need to be retested due to the additional requirement – there is no longer a presumption of conformity with the R&TTE Directive. This has caused confusion and headache for manufacturers and some test labs. (Source) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Skilbeck Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 I see Frsky are now launching long range 868 mhz systems with power outputs upto 1W with range in excess of 10km, not sure how this fits in the ESTI directives, but it would seem that if you are concerned about range this might be another alternative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Bran Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Posted by Frank Skilbeck on 03/05/2017 08:30:39: I see Frsky are now launching long range 868 mhz systems with power outputs upto 1W with range in excess of 10km, not sure how this fits in the ESTI directives, but it would seem that if you are concerned about range this might be another alternative. Which just bumps you into Line Of Sight rules........................... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Christy Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 According to Ofcom (ir_2030-june2014), frequencies in the band between 863 MHz and 869.4 MHz are for short range, non specific devices and limited to 25mW power. If the device does not use some form of interference mitigation (ie: LBT) it is restricted to a 1% duty cycle. There is a small part of the band (869.4 - 869.65 MHz) where you are allowed 500mW, but with the same interference mitigation requirements. Neither of these requirements sounds very promising for our purposes, and certainly not for "long range" systems. There may have been an update to these requirements, but that is the most recent I've been able to find at present.... Remember, the UK does not always follow EU band plans precisely. That is why we have 459MHz whilst Europe uses 434MHz in a similar manner. -- Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyB Posted May 4, 2017 Share Posted May 4, 2017 Posted by Frank Skilbeck on 03/05/2017 08:30:39: I see Frsky are now launching long range 868 mhz systems with power outputs upto 1W with range in excess of 10km, not sure how this fits in the ESTI directives, but it would seem that if you are concerned about range this might be another alternative. I would be amazed if this module is marketed by U.K. distributors, but then this IS FrSky we are talking about... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.