Are you using Xtremelink (XPS) and why

[buttface]

Sweetpee, I didn't loose my plane. I barely recovered it to a smooth landing.

4*60, And as far as the ZGUID problem ,its been addressed and taken care of.Futaba FASST is the best one out there at the current time.
I always ask the guys at my club if any one is using XPS as soon as I arrive.So I know if I gotta watch my back that day.

I'm gonna order the 14MZ with 2.4 and fagetaboutit! lol Atleast Futaba will stand up and replace your plane if you where a victim of the ZGUID problem.Thats more than I can say for XPS.

[khedge]

Buttface,

Why are you so hard on XPS? When did you lockout happen? I have not had any problems with my setup. Am running a xps receiver on a power expander, with a fromeco d-up to back it up.

I don't understand the 2.4 battle.

Anyone flown with futaba's FASST Setup.

My thing is cost and the xps has the best price not to mention that its firmware can be updated.

[buttface]

I am hard on them.
I am a "hard man..."

[buttface]

I am hard on them because my plane could have killed someone when it locked out by picking up ignition noise from a bad ignition.A friend of mine crashed his jet in front of lots of people and Jim just basically said "sorry about you bad luck".XPS dose NOT hop frequency like Futaba dose.The FASST would have hoped past the ignition noise.Jim dosent' realize peoples lives are at stake.I am just saying it could have been designed better, so it actually dose hop like he advertises. If it hopes like he advertises then a bad ignition would have never affected it by going in to lock out.Allot af the bad things that are said about XPS are deleted off of hear and swept under the rug.I cant wait for the frequency hopping test to be finished just to have some solid proof that it doesn't work as advertised and is dangerouse.People need to know.

[sweetpea]

That is just not true.

You do not know that FASST/Spektrum/ASSAN or any other 2.4 would have "hopped" past the ignition noise or been unaffected. If it was electrical in nature and was feed back through your wiring it will have locked out all RX's.

Even if in your case hopping would have solved the problem.........This particular system not hopping would have been no worse than 72mhz/36mhz/50mhz RX's which are all extremely prone to RF noise. And there are currently far more people flying GS and Jets on 72mhz.

I understand your frustration with the company. I also understand if you wish not to use them.
Your logic why is a little off is all. This system is no more dangerous than any other. Failures are going to continue on all the radio systems. That is part of R/C.

The worst part of your issue........had you not switched to XPS........I'm 95% sure you would have had the exact same issue on whatever you were flying before. So how is XPS more unsafe than that?

No argument you can give can give that away. Every person flying R/C should setup their plane --no matter how small-- as if its going to fail. This includes placement of electronics, wires and general maintenance of the plane. It also goes into how you fly....no passes straight at the crowd, no high energy in the pits and using failsafe when your radio is able. There are 1million reasons a plane can fall out of the sky and to think that because any manufacturer advertises it is bullet proof.......I'm sorry but if you or anyone else believes that I've got a bridge I'll sell you!

[buttface]

It doesn't hop like everyone thought.Its no doubt 72mhz would not have stood a chance in this case.I do believe FASST would NOT have missed a beat during the ignition failure.I would bet money on it bro!I wouldn't hesitate to put the bad ignition back on the plane with the FASST .I am confident it would hop past the noise, unlike XPS.The worst that would happen is a dead stick landing.This wont' be on my list of things to do any time soon though.

[khedge]

Sweetpea I agree with you,

and Buttface I understand your frustration.

[RH1N0]

A couple of people have described similar failures and have commented that they "could have killed someone".

Has anyone lodged a formal accident/incident report with the AMA or their local governing body?

[sweetpea]

So far all the faults of 2.4 are no worse than any fault of 72mhz.

The only difference is in percieved preception of the buyers on how bulletproof the systems are.


The AMA could waste their time and money going after the companies for "misleading" advertising but I suspect they don't have the money for those type of battles. And really the advertising is no different than what I see on late night info-mercials.

[RH1N0]

	Quote: Originally Posted by sweetpea
	So far all the faults of 2.4 are no worse than any fault of 72mhz. The only difference is in percieved preception of the buyers on how bulletproof the systems are. The AMA could waste their time and money going after the companies for "misleading" advertising but I suspect they don't have the money for those type of battles. And really the advertising is no different than what I see on late night info-mercials.

If one particular product has a higher then acceptable probability of causing injury or death, would it be reasonable for the AMA to intervene to ensure public safety and reduce insurance implications.

Legal action against companies would have no immediate impact on safety. But a governing body could provide restrictions or recommendations on the use of known high risk products under particular circumstances. Or even some formal direction on manufacturing hype versus reality.

But how would a governing body collect failure and trend data if not by formal reporting. "The plural of anecdote is not data".

[bosshoss]

Guys , you better pull back on the reigns on this one.

If you get ANY agency in determining what is safe or not, we are all done.

Let the legal eagles/hawks sort it out if an incident occurs.

It is our responsibility to fly in the safe zone at our field, that is the best insurance of no one getting hurt.

Sweetpea, I agree with you, sometimes perceptions can be misleading. We all base our perceptions on differnet things....with me...it is time and past failure rate.

Independent testing, lots of it, static and in the air, is the only way.

TIME is on our side to get it right...and as close to bulletproof as possible. The only X-factor is ...who is going to be brave enough to risk thier planes for development's advance?

Apparently there are quite a few.

[khedge]

Bosshoss,

you said it then,

not to dis anyone but I agree how the receiver is placed comes into a play. By that I mean it should not be within 2 inches of any metallic , carbon fiber, or have servo leads going across the antenna. This in the xps manual. Many people have setup xps rx up this way like me and don't have any problems(knock on wood) and others have done it a different way and it still works. My point is the setup of the plane and placement of electronic components is important.

[zayzay1]

i had heard everything about placement and battery voltage and such before therefore I :

-placed the receiver up against the windscreen of my 40 size cub

-used only standard servos

-used a 4.8 v battery with a good discharge rate and 2500mah that I would cycle to check at least once a month

-did several range checks every time Jim changed his mind about how to do them

still the plane went down, I am pretty sure it was an xps issue because the batteries tested fine on a load right before this and this was the first flight of the day after months of several non-issue flights.

I believe xps is a necessary danger so that there is at least some competition from a non rc'er instead of just the big guys. !sarcasm! yeah right hopefully no one gets hurt.

if i ever see someone with xps at the field I will call it a day and head home because I dont want to be Jim's first casualty.

I have never lost radio signal from a model before and never have again.
anyone want an xps module for futaba hitec 25 bucks shipped.

[khedge]

Well to each is their own,

[craven morehead]

	Quote: Originally Posted by khedge
	Buttface, Why are you so hard on XPS? When did you lockout happen? I have not had any problems with my setup. Am running a xps receiver on a power expander, with a fromeco d-up to back it up. I don't understand the 2.4 battle. Anyone flown with futaba's FASST Setup. My thing is cost and the xps has the best price not to mention that its firmware can be updated.

I have been flying a fasst system in my 9zap wcII since last fall in a DA 50 powered ship with all 8611's on control surfaces using a nimh 5 cell for power. Has always worked perfect. BTW I did take it in to be checked at one of the local shops last weekend. Checked out fine.