Independent tests prove lack of frequency hopping with XPS

[flarssen]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Kiwi
	OK guys, Last night I finished the testing of all four systems in the exact same environment. The results are not unexpected. The tests used an ASSAN 8 channel system, FASST 7 channel, XPS 10 channel and Spektrum 7.

Thanks for sharing! Did you test the latest version of the Assan system?

Fred

[jonkoppisch]

	Quote: Originally Posted by XJet
	Well it seems that the truth hurts and JD has threatened me with being banned if I dare to post to the XPS group at RCG again. Of course that's his privilege, given that this is a support group that he (supposedly) pays for. However, it does indicate that the strain of having his claims for XPS debunked is beginning to show. I have offered to help him with the task of repositioning XPS in the market and restating its capabilities, so as to better reflect reality, and I'm genuine in that offer. Somehow I doubt he'll be taking me up on it -- but I'd love to be pleasantly surprised. Who knows.

Join the club Xjet!!! I received the same pm a couple of days ago...

Somone told me the other day that we're thinking about jd wrong.. We're thinking that with enough proof etc he will do the right thing, that's he's a reasonable guy, and it just isn't going to happen! They said that the only way that things can be corrected is if he's sued/made to..

[jonkoppisch]

BTW..
According to the Federal Trade Commission the Proof is the responsibility of the manufacturer

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/...s/ad-faqs.shtm

What truth-in-advertising rules apply to advertisers?
Under the Federal Trade Commission Act:

• Advertising must be truthful and non-deceptive;
• Advertisers must have evidence to back up their claims; and
• Advertisements cannot be unfair.

Additional laws apply to ads for specialized products like consumer leases, credit, 900 telephone numbers, and products sold through mail order or telephone sales. And every state has consumer protection laws that govern ads running in that state.

What makes an advertisement deceptive?
According to the FTC's Deception Policy Statement, an ad is deceptive if it contains a statement - or omits information - that:

• Is likely to mislead consumers acting reasonably under the circumstances; and
• Is "material" - that is, important to a consumer's decision to buy or use the product.

What makes an advertisement unfair?
According to the Federal Trade Commission Act and the FTC's Unfairness Policy Statement, an ad or business practice is unfair if:

• it causes or is likely to cause substantial consumer injury which a consumer could not reasonably avoid; and
• it is not outweighed by the benefit to consumers.

[USN_POPS]

Interesting and informative. But somebody that has had a serious problem with the product must be willing to jump in and make a complaint, and it will most likely take a lot more than one complaint before any action will be taken.
I jumped out of XPS, but on a high note, never had one problem not caused by me in the year I used it. So for me to complain would not work.
And to be honest are we trying to put JD out of business, or just have him get things straightened out. I for one would just like to see things straightened out.
The product has great potential.

[jonkoppisch]

Well, for me, The misinformation has already been told and quite a few have paid the price! I can deal with paying the price for the product (although there's no reason that I should be out of that either) and being out of that but see no reason why I should be out the price of the items that I lost.. I think that there should be a very harsh penalty for the deception!

Once again, from the information given above..

Advertisers must have evidence to back up their claims

We've done it the other way around! Information has been given by the consumers that proves the product doesn't operate to specs...

[canavanbob]

Jon;
What has your lawyer said about this?

[jonkoppisch]

I was asking a few guys about lawyers the other day..

I may try the FTC first...

I asked him at one time just to help with the repair costs but was laughed at...

[XJet]

	Quote: Originally Posted by RichardCorby
	And to be honest are we trying to put JD out of business, or just have him get things straightened out. I for one would just like to see things straightened out. The product has great potential.

Exactly my perspective as well -- which is why I made a genuine offer to help him sort things out -- but obviously he's not the kind of guy to ever admit that there is a problem and for them there can never be any help.

It's a shame -- not so much for JD but for all those folks who have bought or who will buy XPS thinking it's every bit as good as Spektrum or FASST.

I've suggested that perhaps the AMA ought to get involved as a service to members.

If the AMA submitted samples (taken from the field rather than supplied specially by manufacturers) to an independent testing authority then we'd all have irrefutable evidence one way or the other as to whether XPS (and the others) live up to the claims made for them.

I'm not saying that Kiwi's tests are definitive -- but in the eyes of many, privately conducted tests will never hold the sway they need to make them authoritative and JD can always claim that they were flawed (as he has already done).

If a suitably accredited lab or university comes to the same conclusion then JD will have no option but to fix the problems or change his claims -- and that's good for everyone.

Given that US modellers pay a good sum to the AMA each year and the AMA is charged with the role of representing the interests of modellers, I would expect that organizing and funding such testing would fall well within its mandate.

But this won't happen unless AMA members lobby for such testing to be done.

Is it worthwhile? I don't know -- but what does worry me is the insurance aspect.

Insurance companies are notorious for using any technicality or loophole they can do dodge liability for claims. If an XPS system does cause significant damage, injury or death and the insurer is called on to cover that event, what happens if they now cite these tests and say that using XPS in a fast/large model was an act of negligence and therefore they refuse to pay out?

I think it might be good to resolve such a potential problem *before* it becomes necessary.

[1bwana1]

It is not likely that the AMA will do anything that could be construed as approving or disapproving a product. Nor should they, that would be a very slippery slope for them.

[XJet]

	Quote: Originally Posted by 1bwana1
	It is not likely that the AMA will do anything that could be construed as approving or disapproving a product. Nor should they, that would be a very slippery slope for them.

It's not asking the AMA to approve/disapprove of anything -- simply organize the testing for the benefit of all those members considering the shift from 72 to 2.4GHz (and there must be a *lot* in that category).

People (and the insurers) can then make their own decisions based on the results of those independent tests.

Of course, if the insurers say "we're not covering brand X when used in this type of model" then that's a good thing to find out *before* someone makes a claim -- isn't it?

[KrisW]

Does JD even open a XPS booth at trade shows any more?

If so. . I'm sure he would get swamped by irritated people instead of potential buyers.

[sweetpea]

They were at Toledo, so the answer is yes. And I never heard on any site about one single person that raised a stink there in front of everyone.

[Woketman]

Well, hopefully that will change in the future... it sure ought to. The way we were all lied to.

[Dustflyer]

	Quote: Originally Posted by 1bwana1
	It is not likely that the AMA will do anything that could be construed as approving or disapproving a product. Nor should they, that would be a very slippery slope for them.

Ibwana1,

Hey man, I be wanna be in La Jolla you lucky SOB!

You poor guys, so much great weather you never have time to build, too busy flying. Must be horrible! Tough life!

OK, ok, seriously now. The AMA pays premiums to their insurance carrier. The insurance carrier doesn't want to pay out, they only want to take in. If there is any chance they might have to pay out I am guessing they would lean on AMA pretty hard. I would be surprised if someone in the risk end of all this is not monitoring what is going on with XPS. If not they probably should be. Either that or they've figured that even with a questionable control system the risk of loss is still small.

[Dustflyer]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Woketman
	Well, hopefully that will change in the future... it sure ought to. The way we were all lied to.

Woketman,

I wish this was an original thought but I must admit it came from a much smarter RC flyer than me. I never made the connection until he pointed it out...

Ever notice that most of these XPS promoters/defenders/Kool-Aid drinkers all seem to come from the same place: Arizona?

Might be nothing. Might not mean anything. Probably just coincidence. Just thought I'd mention it.