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

[Judge]

My basic premise is that at this point in time we are trying to determine what future actions may be necessary without really knowing what the end result of Futaba's solution will be.

As far as stonewalling you Dick, I suspect that the people with the answer are busy actually trying to solve this issue. Besides, it would be a full time job tracking your innumerable posts across multiple forums on this subject. Why not give them a chance to fix this?

[Judge]

	Quote: Originally Posted by sweetpea
	Exactly Judge- My puny contest means nothing to this situation and I appreciate your offer of help, no matter how sarcastic or sincere it is.

First, your contest is by no means "puny" and I did nothing to make it seems so. I know full well what it takes to run a contest the size of yours, probably better than most people do. And yes, my offer was partially sarcastic, but only in the sense that with respect to your contest I think you are worrying about things that will not manifest themselves as real issues.

	Quote:
	But had I not brought up my tiny contest......CD's and flyers of events like the ETOC where people come from all over the world may not have thought of some of these scenarios and may not have even looked at the internet like we Americans do.

I suspect that the CD of the ETOC and the Indoor e-Flight events are going to be fully up to speed on this issue. And they are FAR more likely to be effected by this than an IMAC contest is.

	Quote:
	I have not once said that the Futaba or FASST is crap and stay away.

No, you have not. Nor did I say that you did.

[sweetpea]

	Quote: Originally Posted by dick hanson
	Well- based on some of the answers provided 1- you are making a mountain out of a molehill 2 - you are trying to may Futaba look bad 3 - Give em a break - the problem is really nothing. 4 - They are working on it -an an acceptable fix is just around the corner I asked about the #2 switch activation caveat noted-- so far -complete stonewalling.why? Now I will set back and see what transpires. the reason can't be a trade secret.

My point exactly.

1 instance of radio conflict at my contest when I'm in charge is a Mountain.....not a mole hill. When I charge $$$ for someone to come fly at my event I expect them to fly with piece of mind.

For example.....

-We check impounded dial-a-crash radios (or scan select or synth....whatever you want to call it is fine with me) every time its impounded to ensure its on the correct freq

-we used a borrowed hobbico scanner to check each radio operated on its channel prior to impound

-we instituted no flying of anykind until the last plane is grounded.

-I even impounded 2.4 last year, just to be safe (though I did not deconflict it)



All the Futaba "Fanboys" need to stretch the orange shirts a little. I really don't care what plane, radio, servo etc anyone flys. They are all good to me. We all have our choices. I'd have asked these questions of any manufacturer. What I do find funny is the thread on XPS can go on and on about how bad it is for your plane, but you can't even voice a few little concerns and situations where the temp fix for now can fail and someone shoots down another plane. The thread about Spektrum low voltage is the same deal......on and on about your own loss is fine........but an actual shootdown on 2.4........shhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

[gareth.ky]

The cost of a radio is at least 50% software and its not field upgradeable. Any radio over $300 that doesn't have a USB port to do upgrades is really unacceptable. We should demand a better product. I'm speaking to all radio manufacturers. These are safety critical systems and the ability to fix software in the field is vital to maintain safety. Bonus: it might keep egg off your face when users discover the bugs. I'm as guilty as anyone else for buying a radio without this feature but I wont do it again. It doesn't matter what the brand is, that feature is a requirement.

[sweetpea]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Judge
	My basic premise is that at this point in time we are trying to determine what future actions may be necessary without really knowing what the end result of Futaba's solution will be. As far as stonewalling you Dick, I suspect that the people with the answer are busy actually trying to solve this issue. Besides, it would be a full time job tracking your innumerable posts across multiple forums on this subject. Why not give them a chance to fix this?

100% agreed Judge.

I do think that Futaba is working the issue as priority #1. I also know they don't have the time to sit here and check forums and answer questions all day long.

Some of the solutions presented by others and me will work for the time being, but they are not fool proof If folks are aware that the current 3 stage process have some flaws where a larger group of FASST (only the effected models) gather.

That is all I'm trying to say. We don't have enough information as the user yet. There are still ways to be shot down even with the best intentions of the flyers on the 2.4 effected models.

So if more users and CD's are aware the risks should be very small, but the risks will still be there (small as they can be) until Futaba finds a way to stop a duplicate Guid.

[Mithrandir]

	Quote: Originally Posted by gareth.ky
	The cost of a radio is at least 50% software and its not field upgradeable. Any radio over $300 that doesn't have a USB port to do upgrades is really unacceptable. We should demand a better product. I'm speaking to all radio manufacturers. These are safety critical systems and the ability to fix software in the field is vital to maintain safety. Bonus: it might keep egg off your face when users discover the bugs. I'm as guilty as anyone else for buying a radio without this feature but I wont do it again. It doesn't matter what the brand is, that feature is a requirement.

Well... interesting comment regarding "Field Fixable"... but I know a lot of modelers... and Software guys they ain't... so unless the "Fix" is an update issued by the OEM, as is typical with the Futaba "Z" series systems, I DON"T WANT Joe RC Dude getting into the software of his system. That can be dangerous... and really... "Fixes" oughta be done at home or the shop... not the field.
I do think that we are on the verge of being able to downlad data from the Tx and Rx for inspection/review. Several 3rd party products already exist....

[gareth.ky]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Mithrandir
	Well... interesting comment regarding "Field Fixable"... but I know a lot of modelers... and Software guys they ain't... so unless the "Fix" is an update issued by the OEM, as is typical with the Futaba "Z" series systems, I DON"T WANT Joe RC Dude getting into the software of his system. That can be dangerous... and really... "Fixes" oughta be done at home or the shop... not the field. I do think that we are on the verge of being able to downlad data from the Tx and Rx for inspection/review. Several 3rd party products already exist....

Well I don't know about at "the field" but anywhere there is a PC with USB. That could be the shop or your home or on a laptop at a contest. If there is a bug in some version and you could check that at the contest and have a laptop on hand to upgrade the radio as needed. Even chargers and ESC's do this and they cost HUNDREDS less.

You can do updates in a way that the radio will only load software signed with the OEM's private key. The device can be reasonably secured against tampering or hacking in much the same way as modern game consoles are. This has all already been done and is well understood. The user need not even be aware of how it works. They just plug it in and click "Update".

[qmulus]

I currently fly with a 6EX FASST that I have flown with since they came out early last year. So far, I have had zero issues, including some flights where another 6EX FASST was in use right next to me. The exact nature of this issue are not very clear. My concerns are this:
1. Assuming that I get my TX checked and it does NOT have the ZGUID issue, does that mean that my system is not at risk of being interfered with by a system that has the ZGUID issue? If not, then I have some concerns, as I can never be sure that I won't get shot down by an affected system that has not been checked. Is the risk ONLY for two systems concurrently used that both have the issue?
2. Does this also imply that my system will not interfere with a ZGUID affected system?
3. Is there/will there be some sticker or other indicator on the "safe" systems to signify that they are OK once checked? If not, then it would seem that at any event these systems would need to be impounded as with 72mHz systems.
4. Is this issue limited to the TX, or is my stock of now obsolete R606FS RXs at risk so that they could be affected no matter what TX they are used with?

[Mithrandir]

	Quote: Originally Posted by gareth.ky
	Well I don't know about at "the field" but anywhere there is a PC with USB. That could be the shop or your home or on a laptop at a contest. If there is a bug in some version and you could check that at the contest and have a laptop on hand to upgrade the radio as needed. Even chargers and ESC's do this and they cost HUNDREDS less. You can do updates in a way that the radio will only load software signed with the OEM's private key. The device can be reasonably secured against tampering or hacking in much the same way as modern game consoles are. This has all already been done and is well understood. The user need not even be aware of how it works. They just plug it in and click "Update".

It would be cool to have the guy at Tx impound say... "While I have your radio... should I load the latest drivers?"

lol

[sweetpea]

	Quote: Originally Posted by qmulus
	I currently fly with a 6EX FASST that I have flown with since they came out early last year. So far, I have had zero issues, including some flights where another 6EX FASST was in use right next to me. The exact nature of this issue are not very clear. My concerns are this: 1. Assuming that I get my TX checked and it does NOT have the ZGUID issue, does that mean that my system is not at risk of being interfered with by a system that has the ZGUID issue? If not, then I have some concerns, as I can never be sure that I won't get shot down by an affected system that has not been checked. Is the risk ONLY for two systems concurrently used that both have the issue? 2. Does this also imply that my system will not interfere with a ZGUID affected system? 3. Is there/will there be some sticker or other indicator on the "safe" systems to signify that they are OK once checked? If not, then it would seem that at any event these systems would need to be impounded as with 72mHz systems. 4. Is this issue limited to the TX, or is my stock of now obsolete R606FS RXs at risk so that they could be affected no matter what TX they are used with?

As I understand the post from Futaba.....

Have your radio checked ASAP to ensure you are not on the Zguid

Once its been determined you are not on Zguid you are safe as long as 2 things don't happen.

1) you don't have an unbind happen. (this means your radio could've gone to Zguid or it may have just unbound. You will need to have it re-checked to be sure)

2) you don't cycle your powerswitch fast. (right now Futaba says this is a problem but not what the problem is). To err on the safe side I would have your radio checked if you did this. [note: my opinion only here]


So far you can only be shot down if both radios are on the Zguid.

[DR10044]

Does the ZGUID actually display. I don't have my transmitter in front of me, I shipped it to be checked out, so I can't look for myself. If it does not display how do you know it has been set to zeroes? Or is the transmitter / receiver losing their bind, which would be a different problem? This is not clear to me reading this thread. If the ID is not displayed are we just speculating on what the issue is?

Based on the post below, I assume Julez can see the ID displayed, my manual does not show this code anywhere, or he and the other parties referenced below rebound their systems and where then able to cross control each others receiver. Otherwise the system just lost its bind, which is a problem, but not nearly as bad as causing a conflict with come one elses system. Am I missing something?????

	Quote: Originally Posted by Julez
	Well, two of three german users who let their batteries run down were affected. I was actually the third one, and my radio simply lost its code after I switched it on exactly the same way as I did hundreds of times during the last 6 months. Again, the main error is not that a radio has the ZGUID, but that it has the ability to get the ZGUID all by itself. If this main error will not be corrected satisfactory, Futaba has a reputation to lose, as described here. Weak phrases like "we are not able to reproduce the problem" simply won't cut it. While it is nice to hear that the inventory wil be cleared of ZGUID TXes, this is not the main problem. When XPS, Spektrum, and even ASSAN are able to keep their GUID, it would be very sad if Futaba was not able to manage the problem. Who can guarantee me, that my TX will not lose its GUID the next time I switch it on, like id did yesterday evening? I would hate the thought that I would have to worry about each and every switching process.