Official Futaba 6EX, 7C and TM-7 Service Advisory

[ConRadical]

Guys...

I hate having to see posts deleted.

Lets do please keep this for information purposes only... No need to say anything to each other about who flies what radio... etc. Just keep in on track with information in mind. If someone asks a question how about let appropriate people, futaba/great planes, answer the questions.

[1bwana1]

Boulder/ConRadical,
Now that's the right attitude, Giants style.

Like I said on another thread, if the problem is limited to radios produced with a bad GUID, then Futabas current advisory, and remediation should be enough. On the other hand, if the GUID can somehow be reset by even the most unlikely user action, it is a whole different problem. The precautions in the advisory in this regard cause me concern, and Julez's report seems to add credibility to other reports on this problem. Julez, to be fair, are you working with Futaba to help them verify the reset ZGUID failure? If so, please let us know what you are doing, and how Futaba is responding. This would be very helpful to the community.

[Mithrandir]

I think the idea is for all the FASST 6 & 7 channel guys to do a little Pow-Wow at the event and just check their stuff t'gether... if during the event no one has a Re-Link occurrance..... there will be no problem. That is likely not intended to be a forever procedure.. but until everyone gets a grip on the technical issues.
At events that I run, I have everyone announce their name and frequency at the pilots meeting... then if there are two guys on the same channel.. they can see who each other is... simply another layer of protection in the process.

(These statements are just my own interpretation of the situation but in no way are intended to conflict with official FUTABA statements)

We are all friends here guys... I hate how this becomes divisive!

[1bwana1]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Mithrandir
	I think the idea is for all the FASST 6 & 7 channel guys to do a little Pow-Wow at the event and just check their stuff t'gether... if during the event no one has a Re-Link event.. there will be no problem. We are all friends here guys... I hate how this becomes divisive!

Mith,
I think that is what Futaba intends. I'm not trying to be divisive, but do you think that is an acceptable solution for the long term? Is that in the spirit of the 2.4 protocols, or the reason many are switching to 2.4? For me it is not, and the community should not be asked to do this in the interest of saving a company money. If the GUID is not immutable, then recall the radios, and fix the problem. If they can't identify which radios were shipped with bad GUIDs, then recall the lot, and check them. Don't off load the problem on the customer, and the RC community. It ain't right!

Oh, by the way, I have heard that Futaba is replacing/reimbursing the original reporter of the ZGUID problems plane. That is the right thing to do, I'm glad to hear that they are standing up. I am wondering if they intend to replace all planes lost to the ZGUID issue, or if posting of precautions 1 through 3 gives them an out on that issue....

[Boulder]

	Quote: Originally Posted by 1bwana1
	Mith, I think that is what Futaba intends. I'm not trying to be divisive, but do you think that is an acceptable solution for the long term? Is that in the spirit of the 2.4 protocols, or the reason many are switching to 2.4? For me it is not, and the community should not be asked to do this in the interest of saving a company money. If the GUID is not immutable, then recall the radios, and fix the problem. If they can't identify which radios were shipped with bad GUIDs, then recall the lot, and check them. Don't off load the problem on the customer, and the RC community. It ain't right! Oh, by the way, I have heard that Futaba is replacing/reimbursing the original reporter of the ZGUID problems plane. That is the right thing to do, I'm glad to hear that they are standing up. I am wondering if they intend to replace all planes lost to the ZGUID issue, or if posting of precautions 1 through 3 gives them an out on that issue....

This is in reference to the highlighted portion above,

In any recall, let's use the auto industry as an example, don't they make a public statement to all KNOWN owners of the vehicle in question, telling them to "take the vehicle to the nearest service center", for a free repair of the said issue?

I'm not sure what we're seeing here is any different.

[dick hanson]

Just to lighten it up a bit --
back when-- ProLine had a terrific radio -designed by Jim Fosgate -
problem was that thru a legal involvement - the whole thing went belly up and then for some reason - all the stuf got dumped out in the open - then - got picked up and re introduced into the market -and things "somehow" were not the same
the failure rate on these was - unacceptable
this was all pre internet and some buyers -really got sucker punched
took awhile to clear up that mess-
I Know Jim -so I am not talking out of school- he hated what happened but it was out of his hands .
Anyway -- IF all that had occurred today - the chances of feeding bad radios into the market based on a very strong product name --would have been "nipped in the bud".
Just a bedtime story

[Mithrandir]

I would imagine they are trying to verify whether it is a Serial Number issue or a Part Number issue. (Or the equipment assigning the GUID??)
I am sure that in the interest of maintaining the World Leader in RC Radio Systems status, FUTABA is going to do the right thing. I have heard of 4 or 5 cases of problems, World wide... that is hardly an epidemic! They have stated they can not get the systems to ZGUID in their own labs... What do they do if they can not get this fault to happen themselves... take the word of a couple guys on an RC Forum???

I have no insider information on this... I just know that FUTABA is a reputable corporation and has been the Paragonic Manufacturer of RC Radios since about 1980.
They have issued an advisory with precautions.... and I can't myself imagine they themselves expect this to be a long term solution. That would simply not be economically feasible... (IMHO)

	Quote: Originally Posted by 1bwana1
	Mith, I think that is what Futaba intends. I'm not trying to be divisive, but do you think that is an acceptable solution for the long term? Is that in the spirit of the 2.4 protocols, or the reason many are switching to 2.4? For me it is not, and the community should not be asked to do this in the interest of saving a company money. If the GUID is not immutable, then recall the radios, and fix the problem. If they can't identify which radios were shipped with bad GUIDs, then recall the lot, and check them. Don't off load the problem on the customer, and the RC community. It ain't right! Oh, by the way, I have heard that Futaba is replacing/reimbursing the original reporter of the ZGUID problems plane. That is the right thing to do, I'm glad to hear that they are standing up. I am wondering if they intend to replace all planes lost to the ZGUID issue, or if posting of precautions 1 through 3 gives them an out on that issue....

[dubd]

If Futaba was not able to find this issue on their own with the 6 and 7 channel radios, how do they know that the issue does not exist with the 14 channel module? There are less people who own the 12/14 channel module, so the issue may exist, but has not reared it's head. This does not give me confidence in converting my 14mz over to FASST.

It's sad that the issues with Spektrum was that you could knock yourself out of the sky because of the voltage issue and with FASST someone else can knock you out of the sky. Seems like these two companies should get together and figure this out.

[1bwana1]

Boulder,
Close, but not the same.

1.) The auto industry tracks each part in each vehicle by ID number, so they can identify each individual car that has the problem. If Futaba is testing their own inventory by hand, that means they don't know for sure what radios are affected. Thus requiring all users to show up and be tested.

2.)They send out letters to the owners, as well as advertise so that people they can't find have a chance to learn about it.

3.) Most importantly, they don't replace the defective part with the same part, with the same potential defect, This may be the case here, if in fact, the GUID can change after manufacturing for any reason.

4.) Even the auto industry wouldn't be so brazen as to propose a huddle before you drive solution.

If we want to use the auto industry as our model, I would prefer that Futaba do a better job than the auto industry. It is well known that the auto industry does financial calculations that weigh the cost of lawsuits from injured/dead customers, against the cost of a general recall, and decide which way is cheaper. Do we want Futaba to make a similar calculation about the loss of our planes?

[DA2000]

It usually takes more than one truck to blow up before they make a move, too. I used to park my Ford truck far away from the house.

[1bwana1]

Hey Mith,
It looks like we agree. The steps outlined in the Advisory do not represent a good long term solution. They admit there is a problem with the GUID. They are unsure if it happens only at time of manufacturing. But they are still wanting to ship the product now, only offering to check their current inventory before they ship, and advising you to check for problems each time before you fly. The GUID is core to 2.4 systems, I cannot imagine a more fundamental problem. They should not ship product until they are sure, simple as that. These half measures are designed to reduce the economic loss to them, not protect us.

[dick hanson]

	Quote: Originally Posted by 1bwana1
	Boulder, Close, but not the same. 1.) The auto industry tracks each part in each vehicle by ID number, so they can identify each individual car that has the problem. If Futaba is testing their own inventory by hand, that means they don't know for sure what radios are affected. Thus requiring all users to show up and be tested. 2.)They send out letters to the owners, as well as advertise so that people they can't find have a chance to learn about it. 3.) Most importantly, they don't replace the defective part with the same part, with the same potential defect, This may be the case here, if in fact, the GUID can change after manufacturing for any reason. 4.) Even the auto industry wouldn't be so brazen as to propose a huddle before you drive solution. If we want to use the auto industry as our model, I would prefer that Futaba do a better job than the auto industry. It is well known that the auto industry does financial calculations that weigh the cost of lawsuits from injured/dead customers, against the cost of a general recall, and decide which way is cheaper. Do we want Futaba to make a similar calculation about the loss of our planes?

Wow-- when I was working on a particular liability case - one of my associates had recently completed his work on the "3 wheeled Suzuki fiasco. Suzuki of course -claimed they were perfectly safe -- if used correctly .
The key phrase here is obvious.
however , the trikes were -as those who ride outdoor fun vehicles know, run up n down hills sand hills - off jumps -you name it
It was a very tough "advance to the rear " defense.