Independent tests prove lack of frequency hopping with XPS

[Toumal]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Kiwi
	**Kiwi, at least you understand the limitations of your testing as some others do not. It was not a test to see if XPS would hop since you did not have the parameters under which it would hop.** Seriously your pulling my leg with that statement right.??

Quite frankly, I'm beginning to suspect that the modus operandi here is to keep repeating the manufacturer's statements over and over, until they are "true". In case of video evidence, everything is done to scare people away from looking at it. Look at the XPS glitch video thread, what responses are posted there? "Don't download, contains a virus!"

I guess when these tactics don't work anymore, the next step will be legal threats. Still, I might be wrong and these are really just forum users who post without reading.

[XJet]

As Carl Sagan put it:

"Extraordinary claims require extra ordinary evidence"

So far, JD has been able to supply absolutely no evidence at all and even those guys from Boeing who allegedly made it hop are not prepared to put their names to those claims.

It's all anecdotal.

When I claimed it didn't hop (right back at the start of this *very* long thread, I was told that I would need to provide *proof*.

Now, even after Kiwi's efforts delivered that proof, the FBs are claiming that their anecdotal evidence renders that proof invalid.

Yeah, right!

The sad thing is that if JD has gone back to DigiChip and had the XBeePro firmware modified to allow for things it couldn't do before (support receiver diversity and agility etc) then he may well end up with a product that's worth buying and really does work (more or less) as-advertised.

However, his deceit, BS, ongoing demonstrations of tech-ignorance and arrogance to date, means that now nobody will believe him, even if his claims are eventually turned into reality.

[Woketman]

	Quote: Originally Posted by capgains
	What the hell is a FanBoy?

An XPS religous zealot!

[JEFFRO503]

	Quote: Originally Posted by capgains
	What the hell is a FanBoy?

A fanboy , is someone that sticks behind a certain product they bought , or are using , or maybe a certain baseball team , a favorite boxer....whatever it is they stick up for it no mater what anyone tells them. A fan boy can be one guy out of a thousand people that swears by something , when the other 999 people will tell him he's wrong. Which in this XPS thread.....those numbers are pretty close i believe.

The sad thing here is.....these guys that are standing up for XPS are modelers just like you and me , and are probably cool as hell to hang around with , fly with and shoot the ***** with. But they WILL NOT listen to reason when something is proven to be bad , if they own it or support it.

Even if it is one of the "fanboy's" airplanes that bites the dust because they we're using XPS , i feel really sorry for them. They are going to be out of a lot of money when that aircraft goes in , or more importantly , ( I pray to god it doesn't happen ) they drive their aircraft right into someone else!

I guess it'll take just that.......someone getting hurt by using it to change that persons mind. But that'll be just "That one" i believe......they other XPS guys , will still swear it hops and it's the safest system to use!

It's been proven that it works very well ( XPS) in a low noise enviroment , but i still wouldn't trust it in anything above a foamy.

I've said this before , and i'll say it again......I HOPE that jim gets his FHSS system going , since he is supposed to be working on something. And FOR THE LOVE OF PETE.........please jim.....show us a damn video of this thing hopping with witnesses standing around. ANYONE......PLEASE show me this thing hops......anyone?

OH...and one more thing XPS guys , answer me this......

I remeber some time back on this very thread , someone mentioned about thousands of happy XPS users......hhmmm??

Why is it then.....only a few handful of guys support it then? Why are there so few on here or anyone else that supports it........far from the 10's of thousands JD talk about.

And don't give me that line of crap that all the XPS users don't post.........what , they don't have computers? I guess only Futaba and JR guys have computers.

[Panzlflyer]

	Quote:
	I have teams of developers working for me and I can guarantee you that if any of my people were only producing 5 - 7 lines of code an hour, they would be looking for a new profession... Period...

Anyone can write code but does it work?
It used to be that small was beautiful.
Now youve got people who churn out millions of glitch ridden code and think its great, I guess thats one way to not get fired.

One word...bloatware

[Dustflyer]

A FanBoy is an individual who, in spite of indisputable evidence to support the faultiness, defectiveness, unreliability, and unpredictability of a falsely advertised product named XPS continues, in the face of all common sense and reasonableness, to defend it.

Anyone up for theories?

Ever notice most FanBoys hail from Arizona? I think there are several possibilities:

1) All are the same person, different screen names.

2) All are really JD, different screen names.

3) All are the remains of a hardcore group who received free XPS equipment in exchange for becoming so-called "beta testers" under the further assurance that JD would cover the damages for any crashed airplanes. These individuals, with their unfailing loyalty, are simply fulfilling their end of the agreement.

4) At this point, with all the videos, tests, and crashes supporting the faultiness of XPS, you pretty much have to fit one of the above criteria or just plain have no "..fill in blank here.." to continue to use XPS in anything.

5) Either that or, like the guy who bought my Hangar 9 33% Cap, you simply have no idea about any of this. Then again, if that were the case, you wouldn't be on these forums, would you?

[zoomer260]

	Quote: Originally Posted by skubacb
	Interesting video. Considering I have over 20 XPS RX and two TX modules, I have never seen this. Might even have been the servo which I have seen do this with just a servo tester. Second if there was a problem with XPS it has a life time warranty and he sends you a new unit. Had a guy here get back a unit he sent into Futaba. They sent a bad unit back and because he forgot to test it in a cheap aircraft he lost a $7000 aircraft. Point: Futaba does send back the same units. Hitec did the same thing to me except I did some testing before using itl People have lost planes with Spectrum and Futaba 2.4 ghz systems and are still doing so. So lets be straight. I figure if anyone is concentrating just on just one system they have an agenda. Toumal: Duh of course you have a variation in the reception level at the RX. That was the whole point. We are talking coverage not a characterized antenna pattern which is normally done at -3db. I don't know where you decided that the dimple was significant since the Boeing engineers that tested XPS said it was not. It still doesn't matter spherical coverage is still spherical coverage even if you want to call it a cow.

I think ya should read the name of the thread. Note key word "hopping". I know it's a small word and easy to miss. Does not and will not as JD has proven himself.

[skubacb]

	Quote: Originally Posted by zoomer260
	I think ya should read the name of the thread. Note key word "hopping". I know it's a small word and easy to miss. Does not and will not as JD has proven himself.

As JD has proven himself? <img> humour, humour, humour. This besides being funny may even be delusional. I don't claim to have read everything he has said but this is certainly not correct. One last time; for the intellectually challenged: The XPS system will only hop under specific conditions. Apparently, Kiwi's 'test' did NOT provide those conditions.

As a number of XPS owners have stated, their system does hop (I haven't attempted to see it). Some people say it does not. Let me see. With some logic here, if one person has seen it hop then it hops. No matter how many times you do not see it hop, if it hops once it disproves the negative.

Now you may not like that, feel free to be negative, but it is a fact. That Kiwi's test did not test for hoping is also a fact.

Roll it all together and if you don't want to use the XPS system then don't. It seems rather sick to feel such an obligation to Futaba, Airtronics, or Spectrum (JR) that you must decry a competitor, about hoping, with no facts to back it up. That is specially true of the posters that have never even owned the XPS system.

Why not have some fun and buy a Fasst, etc. then start complaining about their failures. Start with the failures, for QQ, in front of an audience.

Since I lost 4 aircraft in 250 flights with Spectrum (2 to known park flyer problems), I would really like to know what is going on. It less and less, seems to be just the low voltage glitch as we were told.

[Toumal]

	Quote: Originally Posted by skubacb
	That Kiwi's test did not test for hoping is also a fact.

Alright, you lost me. Kiwi's video shows an interfering 2.4GHz transmitter jumping to the same frequency as XPS, and XPS stops working, and once can clearly see on the 2.4GHz spectrum analyzer screen that XPS' carrier signal doesn't jump to either side of the spectrum, where there would've been plenty of free and undisturbed channels. Nothing was saturated, the band was pretty much clear except for XPS and the interfering transmitter. There was interference on the XPS channel, and XPS did not hop despite the fact that there were plenty free channels left and right. That is what Kiwi claimed, what Kiwi proved, and what is the problem.

I believe that XPS does hop - if the interference raises slowly, and the XPS RX has time to tell the TX to switch channels - and that's what I call a "benchtest scenario". You gotta assume the worst in real life, which equals to a guy flipping a switch on his 2.4GHz video transmitter right next to you. Spektrum keeps working, Futaba keeps working, XPS does not. Simple as that.

The people who bought XPS bought a system that hops to a free channel when it encounters interference on the currently used one. XPS didn't advertise with the words "hops to a free channel on slowly rising interference". That there may be some scenario in which XPS actually does hop is irrelevant. You got interference on your channel, XPS could survive if it'd hop, but it doesn't because the link is severed in both directions. That's it, and no amount of arguing or denial changes that.


Man, I feel like in the Argument Clinic here....

...or maybe like in this show:

YouTube - Monty Pythons - How to contradict people

[RH1N0]

And now for something completely different

Meet the Blue Sniper. The gun can scan and attack Bluetooth devices from more than a mile away. The first version of the gun showed up at Defcon 2004, a hacker convention held annually in Las Vegas. While the early version was held together with tie-straps and rubber bands, this newest version has a much more professional look. The team at Flexilis in Los Angeles learned a lot from making their previous gun, and have made many improvements. The gun is now bigger, stronger and more durable and the antenna is almost twice a powerful as the older model. It also has a small computer which eliminates the need for lugging around a heavy laptop just to gather data. The parts for the gun are easily available for a few hundred dollars. You can make this gun in a long afternoon.

Not specifically designed to shoot down RC planes but....

[BaldEagel]

	Quote: Originally Posted by skubacb
	Apparently, Kiwi's 'test' did NOT provide those conditions. As a number of XPS owners have stated, their system does hop (I haven't attempted to see it). Some people say it does not. Let me see. With some logic here, if one person has seen it hop then it hops. No matter how many times you do not see it hop, if it hops once it disproves the negative. Now you may not like that, feel free to be negative, but it is a fact. That Kiwi's test did not test for hoping is also a fact. Roll it all together and if you don't want to use the XPS system then don't. It seems rather sick to feel such an obligation to Futaba, Airtronics, or Spectrum (JR) that you must decry a competitor, about hoping, with no facts to back it up. That is specially true of the posters that have never even owned the XPS system. Why not have some fun and buy a Fasst, etc. then start complaining about their failures. Start with the failures, for QQ, in front of an audience. Since I lost 4 aircraft in 250 flights with Spectrum (2 to known park flyer problems), I would really like to know what is going on. It less and less, seems to be just the low voltage glitch as we were told.

Its a long time since I saw so many discrepancies in one post.

Kiwi's test proved it did not hop, my own in flight tests in a real world environment also proved it did not hop in a flying interferance prone area. To belive that getting it to hop once disproves the negative is very nieve.

QQ fly's JR/Spektrum has never flown Futaba or FASST, his failier was a power regulator that could not take the load from the 9 Digital servos he was using, and caused a power out on the RX.

Lots of posts on the so called Brown out if you must use inferior batteries of low capacity what do you expect. I have not used a 4.8volt pack in the last 14 years, lots of people using the park flyer Rx's in non park flyer planes and wondering why they loose control?

Mike

[jonkoppisch]

What's hilarious is the fact that xps users point to the incidents like the brown out with QQ as a spektrum problem but use the EXACT SAME CIRCUMSTANCES TO SAY THAT IT'S NOT A XPS PROBLEM BUT A POWER SUPPLY PROBLEM WHEN IT HAPPENS TO XPS.....

If you have a problem with xps the FIRST thing they point to is batteries or switches....

Unlike kiwi's video which uses the same standard (same circumstances) to check each radio, they use 1 standard for xps and another for all of the other brands...



http://www.flyinggiants.com/forums/f...tml#post269282

	Quote: Originally Posted by skubacb
	bodywerks: Did you check that you had the power properly connected. In the XPS forumns they have something about it functioning but not fully if the power is connected 180 degrees off. What were the battery voltages after the crash? etc. etc.

[jonkoppisch]

This is interesting... Here we have a video and the other, someone telling what it does (no test or anything, just saying it does). Which one is false?

http://www.flyinggiants.com/forums/f...tml#post502188

	Quote: Originally Posted by Kiwi
	... Just to reiterate so the facts don't get lost in the jungle of comments here..... NOTE!!! Exact same conditions. The noise was not ever dumped in a solid burst on any one channel. If you look at the scanner you can see the spread was wide enough that as the noise transitioned across the specktrum each channel was slowly exposed. It was never hit with a solid burst such as a video transmitter etc would do. XPS stopped functioning every time....

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showt...90#post8941390

	Quote:
	skubacb Again it is a twisting of the facts. The jumping is preemptive. IE it looks ahead to see what channels are clear and IF the noise floor is increasing it WILL jump to a new channel as necessary. What you are getting is a twisting of the facts. The system works exactly as we were told it would. I accept what Jim has told us about the system because what he has told us is what the system does.

[jonkoppisch]

1 more thought. Since xps users and jd put a large emphasis on the test done at the Boeing plant (not verified etc) and are using it for justifying that xps does hop. Someone should contact the Boeing facility to see if the test is valid. Since their using Boeing to justify it, then they're bringing in the facility. You can't say, the boeing engineers tested xps and it hopped but you can't check or ask about it... You just have to take our word. That's not a credible source... Of course, that's the same thing that xps says.. It hops, take my word for it....

[wrightme]

Hardly anyone except you and others with your vendettas are even talking about that test. Obsession is an unhealthy pursuit.

	Quote: Originally Posted by jonkoppisch
	1 more thought. Since xps users and jd put a large emphasis on the test done at the Boeing plant (not verified etc) and are using it for justifying that xps does hop. Someone should contact the Boeing facility to see if the test is valid. Since their using Boeing to justify it, then they're bringing in the facility. You can't say, the boeing engineers tested xps and it hopped but you can't check or ask about it... You just have to take our word. That's not a credible source... Of course, that's the same thing that xps says.. It hops, take my word for it....