Kiwi's XPS test results are up.

[GBR2]

One of the main reasons I purchased XPS equipment in the first place was for frequency redundancy.

JD orginally posted this:
“We are the ONLY 2.4GHz system that has the ability to monitor the available frequencies in the 2.4GHz range and change as necessary, in real time. This means that the plane as well as the transmitter can make the change occur. If you flew your plane over a school with a huge 14dbi external 802.xx antenna, that would likely be cause for switching to a new frequency (away from whatever channel that 802.xx was on.”

and this:
JD from November 2006:"If there was a burst at a particular frequency or range, we would just hop to something that wasn't an issue. Now, if you had some other competing 2.4GHz radio... you would be in trouble."

I don't know how others might read this but to me it says that if interference starts to show up on the XPS channel in use, BAM, the system can hop away. The videos Tychoc and Kiwi did clearly show this not to be the case.

I don't know about the "ethical thing to do" but one of the nice things about the FASST, Airtronics and Spektrum systems is the built in frequency redundancy which we don't have with 72MHz, and a more secure RF link was one of the things I wanted that 2.4GHz could deliver. I thought I got that with XPS but as far as I can tell, I did not. The system obviously works but then again so does the Assan system but I never would have bought it (and didn't) because I knew it didn't have built in frequency redundancy. My original purchase might not have been bought for "ethical" reasons but it certainly was done for greater safety, or so I thought.

[Simpleton]

capgains, the thing is - You are using it with great success in rural Oregon. It'd probably work where I live. If RC Report was only sold to modelers in remote rural areas, there might indeed be no cause for alarm. But RC Report is sold to modelers who might not live in a rural area. It's not fair (or ethical, or wise) to promote a system that passed itself off as a spread spectrum, frequency hopping device to unsuspecting modelers who will believe it is (and therefore works) based on a magazine review.

I'm positive RC Reports wouldn't intentionally give a thumbs up to a system that didn't do what it was advertised to, but Gordon has stated before that he distrusts (or tends to not use/rely on) information gathered from the internet. Well, that's where the non-hopping proof is located. Would Gordon know that XPS doesn't hop? Who knows, he might even pass on a review if he knew it didn't perform as advertised. I don't know what type of 2.4Ghz activity is present where RC Reports reports from, it might fail on them and be a moot point.

The point is, if all you had to go on was the manufacturer's claim that it was a spread spectrum, frequency hopping device, and you had no way to verify this, and the system worked in the location where the review was done, you could very well say that it worked as advertised and be dead wrong.

[XJet]

	Quote: Originally Posted by capgains
	As for the ethical decision model, and flying R/C planes.... Aw come on. When was the last time your bought an R/C product because you thought it was the ethical thing to do? (not Saftey reasons, you are infering accountability)

Gosh, I must be the exception then.

I have a 2.4Ghz system without failsafes. I use it on my .40-sized profiles but I won't use it on my larger planes because it has no failsafe.

I figure that no large model should fly without failsafe, so I use a JR PCM system in my 30% Extra.

Failsafes won't save my Extra from becoming a pile of dust if I get hit but it does mean that if somethin ggoes wrong, at least I know the engine won't be at full throttle and potentially tearing the flesh from people's bones.

That's the ethical/moral perspective and one that *I* take into account.

[capgains]

Simpleton,
You pretty well hit on it... intention. IMHO, RCR does not intentionally say that a thing is good if they know it isn't. (Once again I wince at the magazine that is owned by a MAJOR mail order company that said the Kyosho Gee Bee Z was a great ARF) What you guys are calling for is long term testing, and endurance testing. Out of the scope of a review. One of the great things about the internet, is that we can communicate with each other. But there is also content that must be taken with a grain of salt too.

Xjet, ethics was not the motivation to buy that 2.4 radio. You bought it because it was cheap. Once you had it, you realized that you didn't trust it. And you can kill someone with a .40 sized plane as easily as your big Extra. So if Ethics and the protection of fellow man were your motivation to buy the 2.4 radio... you would have never purchased it.

However, your sense of responsibility and safety is quite admirable. If you indeed follow your policy on using failsafe on your equipment, then that shows you take accountability seriously.

The real truth is nobody is buying 2.4ghz systems because they think they are safer, and you will never see that in an advertiser's claim.

People buy 2.4ghz systems because:

They don't want to wait for a frequency pin
They don't want to get shot down by another radio
They don't have issues with metal to metal contact or igntion noise (within reason)
Many of them can operate at one time

That's about it.

[tadawson]

	Quote: Originally Posted by capgains
	People buy 2.4ghz systems because: They don't want to wait for a frequency pin They don't want to get shot down by another radio They don't have issues with metal to metal contact or igntion noise (within reason) Many of them can operate at one time That's about it.

Not to forget:

Everyone else got one, so why not? (Lemming theory . . . follow the herd, at times without any thought involved . . . ).


- Tim

[alfred]

	Quote: Originally Posted by tadawson
	Not to forget: Everyone else got one, so why not? (Lemming theory . . . follow the herd, at times without any thought involved . . . ). - Tim

True And also lots of us are techno buffs. Doesn't mean we just follow the herd.

[Tin man]

	Quote: Originally Posted by tadawson
	Not to forget: Everyone else got one, so why not? (Lemming theory . . . follow the herd, at times without any thought involved . . . ).

Yea, I mean 2.4 GHz is so ubiquitous that it's all you see at every flying field.

Or not.




--
Mike

[capgains]

	Quote: Originally Posted by alfred
	True And also lots of us are techno buffs. Doesn't mean we just follow the herd.

I'm loving the ease of using 72mhz anymore. Went to a big meet in the end of May, where in past years had to wait sometimes hours to get my channel. This year I was only one on that channel, and there were several channels that had only one regestered pilot per channel.... some were empty.

2.4 has been good for everyone... even those that didn't buy it.

[seattle_helo]

	Quote: Originally Posted by capgains
	The real truth is nobody is buying 2.4ghz systems because they think they are safer, and you will never see that in an advertiser's claim.

The primary reason I went SS, and Spektrum in particular, was for safety. Many of the guys I fly with have also moved on to 2.4Ghz specifically to avoid the risks (and safety liability) of potential shoot downs.

nick

[tadawson]

	Quote: Originally Posted by alfred
	True And also lots of us are techno buffs. Doesn't mean we just follow the herd.

Just keep in mind that in a lot of cases, newer is not necessarily better, just more profitable . . . .

- Tim

[XJet]

I suspect that the 2.4GHz craze came as a big relief to the big RC makers.

Let's face it, China was making huge inroads into the lucrative market for 72MHz FM receivers and pushing prices way-down.

Without a shift to 2.4GHz, radio sales would likely have continued to stagnate -- after all, just making a new "facelift" radio each year with a couple of extra channels isn't going to convince existing customers to trade up.

When 2.4GHz came along Futaba and JR saw the chance to sell new radios to people who previously would have been happy to keep using their old 72MHz gear for may more years.

And, even better (from an RC manufacturer's point of view) it was the ultimate opportunity to lock customers into a brand-specific receiver.

No more buying a cheap Chinese FM receiver to use with your expensive JR/Futaba radio. No. Now, if you've got a JR 2.4GHz radio, you have to buy a JR-brand receiver and if you've got a Futaba 2.4GHz radio, you have to buy a Futaba-brand receiver.

I really think that RC makers are laughing all the way to the bank and breathing a sigh of relief that (for the time being) they've dodged the bullet that cheap "made in China" compatible products represented.

[easytiger]

" Gordon has made it very clear that all of the products they review are purchased by the magazine without the manufacturer's notice. "

That's a bald-faced lie.