Independent tests prove lack of frequency hopping with XPS

[Woketman]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Chris F
	I know others have also stated their credentials to gain credibility, but please let's not start on how much you get paid, it makes you look like something I hope you are not. Convince us with your knowledge instead.

Excellent point Chris!!! About the worst thing that you can do here is tell us that you believe stuff that JD the BS-King has told you! That'll place your credibility in the crapper ASAP!!!

[XJet]

	Quote: Originally Posted by dirtybird
	After many years as an aerospace test engineer, I learned one thing especially. You must be very careful in the determination of your results. It take a big ego to say you know more than the designer of the equipment you are testing. The designer has spent many hours making the item ready for release. He will know more about his design than anyone else.

Umm. let's see...

I predicted (based on my own experiences and knowledge) that the tiny 1/4wave whip originally used in the transmitter module would be in adequate but JD said "BS we've done extensive testing and it's fine". Now all the modules are shipped with an external dipole.

I predicted that JD would have difficulty providing any really useful frequency agility using the XBeePro modules. Low and behold, JD eventually admits that the frequency agility is solely for extending range, not for avoiding interference as originally claimed and even then, despite promising video evidence, he has been unable to deliver any evidence it is agile at all.

I predicted that useful telemetry would be a very difficult (if not impossible task) with the XBeePro modules (although it seems simple in theory). Now, despite promising deliver before the end of June, it's now August and nobody has a complete telemetry system (hardware/software) they can use and JD seems to be working up a sweat trying to make it work. Remember that this was one of the system's *biggest* selling points - and it's still not being delivered.

So you work out who knows more about the technology JD is attempting to use in a role it was never designed for.

JD certainly does know more about XPS but he seems to be sorely lacking in some other very critical knowledge such as Ohms law, RF theory and practice, the strengths/weaknesses of the XBeePro modules.

Throughout my career I've done a *lot* of contract work for other hardware and software developers.

Why?

Because I often have skills, experience and knowledge that they don't have in-house. Likewise, when I'm working on a complex project involving many different disciplines, I frequently employ experts to ensure that the job is completed more quickly and that the results are to a professional standard.

For instance, I design and build jet engines and before I became a reasonably good welder, I outsourced much of my fine TIG welding to a guy who was extremely experienced and good at his job. Yes, I could have done it myself but the results would not have been as good and the quality of the final product would have suffered.

So I said "I really can't weld very well, I don't have the experience or the knowledge that comes from years of practice; it's time to get some help".

If we're talking about "egos" that label goes to someone who believes they know everything about everything and "don't need no steenken help" from anyone else. They'd rather build and ship a product that doesn't meet the company's own specifications and lie about it rather than concede that perhaps it's better to get a little help to fill in the gaps in their own skills/knowledge or experience.

[ricoalonso]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Chris F
	I know others have also stated their credentials to gain credibility, but please let's not start on how much you get paid, it makes you look like something I hope you are not. Convince us with your knowledge instead.

Agree!

[ricoalonso]

Kiwi,
Next time you do your next set of tests (as mentioned earlier), maybe you can also follow the parameters which JD said is necessary to induce a hop. While some (and I agree) says that such hopping algorithm is not that useful in the real-world condition, I am just curious if JD is truthful on those parameters.

Thanks,
Rico.

[dirtybird]

OK Kris I deleted my post now you delete the reference to it and it will be gone.

[Kiwi]

Rico,

I actually think that has been done and video shows it still did not hop. Way back in the early days on this 2.4Ghz thing some had access to some trick test gear and done the slowly rising noise floor test. It just went into fail safe.

But I will try to do and see what happens.

[ricoalonso]

Kiwi,
Yes, I remember Tychoc (the first XPS user who posted a video of his test result) at RCG mentioned that it was exactly (or just about there) he had done but did NOT induce any hop... never got any response back from JD (as far as I can remember). But since you are planning to do another sets of test anyway, I thought I just want to mention that. You know, just to cover everything to minimize the chance of having XPS wasting time to make another test to 'debunk' your test, months later.

Anyway, looking forward to your next set of tests...specially to see how the new comers in 2.4GHz perform.

Thank you for your effort time and sharing your test results.
Rico.

[wildhare]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Kiwi
	How many people here would like to see a data logger for the FASST system so you can see lost packets, lockouts, fail-safe, signal strength just as an example.

Me me me me me!

I'd like to see definitive proof of performance both in the air and on the ground from any radio system. The 100+ pages of controversy here show that without actual proof intelligent people have a hard time arriving at a reasonable conclusion in the face of promotional statements.

And Kiwi, you mentionad a Chinese FHSS system, can you put a name on that system?

I have been exposed to the new Airtronics RSS8000 FHSS system recently, and it appears to be pretty robust. I'd very much like to see that included in your testing. Airtronics is a big (but much forgotten) name. Their system on the face seems to be trouble free, I'd really like to see more in-depth testing to confirm its reliability with something more than "my friend's radio works great".

TF

[Woketman]

	Quote: Originally Posted by wildhare
	Me me me me me! I'd like to see definitive proof of performance both in the air and on the ground from any radio system. The 100+ pages of controversy here show that without actual proof intelligent people have a hard time arriving at a reasonable conclusion in the face of promotional statements. TF

I agree. I would like data logging on FASST too.

[flarssen]

Kiwi, hope you have a Feb. 1. (or newer) version of the Assan system to use in the test.

Fred

[DC Gayhart]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Woketman
	I agree. I would like data logging on FASST too.

I also would like to see a head to head comparison between the different 2.4GHZ offerings. All our favorite systems work until they fail, but how close do we come to the edge of failure every time we fly? An RF data logger gives you real time flight data for evaluation. That would give you a way to compare RF robustness!
Just my 2 cents.

[Dustflyer]

	Quote: Originally Posted by wildhare
	The 100+ pages of controversy here show that without actual proof intelligent people have a hard time arriving at a reasonable conclusion in the face of promotional statements.

The intelligent people I know have no problem whatsoever making a conclusion about XPS. Proof is ample and available with the click of a search button.

Spektrum, Futaba and Airtronics have no need to promote anything on these forums. They have fine products that work.

Promotion via forum is sleazy. Only XPS does it.