Independent tests prove lack of frequency hopping with XPS

[exeter_acres]

	Quote: Originally Posted by XJet
	Full details to follow.

[Dizzane]

My question is why would anyone even look at the XPS system? Hum... trust your plane to some guy, that doesn't have a good background, or JR and Futaba that have been doing this for years? I guess for me the XPS system never did make sense to me. It looks as if this guy is doing all his testing on his customers.

[RadiMani]

Is Graupner's IFS completely same system as XPS? Or is any improvement inplemented for Graupner IFS? If not, why Graupner adopt XPS? Big question...

[Leseirf]

	Quote: Originally Posted by RadiMani
	Is Graupner's IFS completely same system as XPS? Or is any improvement inplemented for Graupner IFS? If not, why Graupner adopt XPS? Big question...

IFS is rebadged XPS. Only difference is a change in the default country code.

	Quote:
	My question is why would anyone even look at the XPS system? Hum... trust your plane to some guy, that doesn't have a good background, or JR and Futaba that have been doing this for years? I guess for me the XPS system never did make sense to me. It looks as if this guy is doing all his testing on his customers.

As a satisfied XPS user I'm following this thread closely. Lots of good info and potential to cause improvents to the system. Posts like this threaten to turn it into a typical XPS bash. I really hope that doesn't happen.

Mike

[Julez]

	Quote: Originally Posted by brn2fly
	It hops 500 times a second so jamming should not be an issue. Heck the military use a secure radio system that frequence hops too.

No, it does not. At least not according to the tests I did.
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showt...49#post8099349

But 125 hops per second are not too bad, either

Cheers,

Julez

[Frosty 4]

Any new technology is paid for by those that have to have the latest thing. 2.4 is still evolving and probably will for a few years. The nanowire batteries will be another item that will evolve. The way things are going 72mhz will die off once the FCC sees the swing to 2.4ghz. Or cut the number of channels .Some LHS don't even stock 72 systems any more.
F4

[aviti]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Frosty 4
	Any new technology is paid for by those that have to have the latest thing. 2.4 is still evolving and probably will for a few years. The nanowire batteries will be another item that will evolve. The way things are going 72mhz will die off once the FCC sees the swing to 2.4ghz. Or cut the number of channels. Some LHS don't even stock 72 systems any more. F4

This is definitely true. Hobby shops see the 72 stuff just sit there while the 2.4 sells. That's likely because most people "sticking with" 72 have their favorite system already whereas anyone new to the hobby or wanting a new Tx doesn't want to buy something that could be on it's way out. Kinda like people who still use their VCR. They might use it until every last tape is worn out and you can no longer get anythong on that format, but how many people go into an electronics store looking for a VCR now?

So you say, that's not apples to apples because DVD's, Pay-per-view, etc are clearly better than VHS tapes. Well it's only a matter or time before 2.4 or something else is superior to 72 in every way. Once you get a taste of flying without worrying about someone turning on your frequency, it would be very hard to go back.

Just like anything other new technology, there will be bugs and fixes. So far users have discovered potential problems with XPS and Spektrum and they are being improved. Futaba was not immune to issues with their new G3 receivers so it's certainly possible that FASST may have some bug too.

The more people discover problems and test independently, the better we all are.

[sweetpea]

I'll be very interested to see how FASST does without Satellite RX's. I know the RX has longer antennaes but they are not as long as satellites.

Once more and more start putting it in GS we will see.


I think if your flying .40 size planes........all 3 systems are fine. Its once you start having gear in the way and complex battery/servo draw combinations

[JAS]

Here's the Futaba 14ch 2.4 Rx (6014) in my Comp-ARF 3M 260. Plenty of carbon and electronics to go around. 100 paces on the low power setting (range check) with motor running, nose pointed towards me and I was between the Tx and plane. (The Spektrum Rx in the pic is my friends and I was too lazy to remove it. Besides, he's getting the plane after this weekend so he can continue flying it on his radio)

[Cracky]

Jason, is that what you call piggybacking a receiver?

[sweetpea]

JAS---Get that puppy in the air and let us know!

[jonkoppisch]

Nice!!! Are you going to send one to xjet for testing?

[JAS]

Been flying it. Had it "thrown" in my Exhila for some quick park testing. When I landed one of the antenna's was in the motor compartment, oops. Then I "stuck" it in my Calypso for some long range testing and took it up to a speck, even touching antenna's with Don Lowe's 9303 2.4 for fun, and it passed. My brother and I flew it in my Integral from the Worlds during the Tangerine contest a couple weekends ago and was locked on for all flights (1st and 2nd to boot ). Now it's in my 260 and 5 flights, no issues. Have flown it in low cloud cover (actually up into the clouds, not visible, and never went to fail-safe) and have been rippin and roaring (literally as the guys at the field tell me my prop is too loud) with it. Airshow on Sunday and more flying tomorrow.

[sweetpea]

great news.

[dick hanson]

	Quote: Originally Posted by JAS
	Here's the Futaba 14ch 2.4 Rx (6014) in my Comp-ARF 3M 260. Plenty of carbon and electronics to go around. 100 paces on the low power setting (range check) with motor running, nose pointed towards me and I was between the Tx and plane. (The Spektrum Rx in the pic is my friends and I was too lazy to remove it. Besides, he's getting the plane after this weekend so he can continue flying it on his radio)

I enlarged the pic and found where the satellite rx was plugged into the primary rx- using latest photoshop
(Ahem)