Kiwi's XPS test results are up.

[tadawson]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Pale Rider
	Your kidding right ?

Not in the least. I see a lot of things that are true, and a lot more that are simply nitpicking due to different interpretation of the definition of words. I have no vested interest in any 2.4 system (Frankly have yet to see the need, but am watching) so am trying to look at things in an objective, non emotionally clouded way, which is something I can't say is true about a lot of the folks posting on this topic.

And yes, avoiding conflicting signals is a very good way to maximize range . . . no grey area there at all . . .

- Tim

[Pale Rider]

	Quote: Originally Posted by tadawson
	And yes, avoiding conflicting signals is a very good way to maximize range . . . no grey area there at all . . . - Tim

Yes in that regard I agree with you--Im a happy DSM user but am still interested in the discussion..
It does seem JD does a LOT of double-talking so Im very skeptical of anything he says at this point.

[XJet]

	Quote: Originally Posted by tadawson
	And yes, avoiding conflicting signals is a very good way to maximize range . . . no grey area there at all . . .

But the problem is that (as the tests prove) it *doesn't* maximize range under the conditions that count -- strong on-channel interference.

It only optimizes range at extreme distance where the increasing distance produces that slow 11-second ramp-up in the background noise that JD refers to as the trigger for frequency hopping.

Quite frankly, I don't know why anyone would care if their 2.4GHz system will operate over 5 miles rather than 4 miles when the model became too small to see at 1.5 miles anyway.

The *real* reason people want frequency agility is so that they don't get shot down by a sudden burst of noise on the system's operating frequency.

JD has very clearly told us (now) that his hopping doesn't address the interference issue, it's only been there for range-enhancement.

But... strangely enough, up to this point he's sold it on the premise that it will hop to avoid interference -- such as flying over a strong WiFi transmitter.

Be honest, you must see that he's rapidly backpedaling to avoid getting into big trouble in Europe where they actually issue very stiff fines if you make false claims about your product.

[jonkoppisch]

So you have to start loosing control for 11 seconds before it will do anything..... By then, it's too late! Even if you're flying a cub

[ricoalonso]

'tychoc' at RCG just mentioned that he did just that in the first test he did but there was no 'hop'... oh well.

	Quote: Originally Posted by tychoc
	Jim, When you say +/-15 Mhz of the frequency, do you mean on either side but not on top? Also, is this part of the new algorithm you've just added or part of the existing code? My original benchtest did try to ramp up the noise over 20 seconds within the +/- 15Mhz range but didn't induce a hop? -tychoc

[KrisW]

	Quote: Originally Posted by easytiger
	Except...I made a post HERE last night and it sure looks like it was deleted by Flying Giants. Which is now, as I understand it, just another subsidiary of RCgroups, which is in the pay of XPS...

In which forum did you make the post. . from May 13 to the 25th you made no posts on FG, according to your log.

[Simpleton]

He penned this tome last night (I guess it was technically this morning).

[Woketman]

That "tome" sums it up pretty accurately!

[SmoothFlying]

A123

[easytiger]

	Quote: Originally Posted by KrisW
	In which forum did you make the post. . from May 13 to the 25th you made no posts on FG, according to your log.

And yet, the post you said I did not make, that dissapeared, has reappeared.
Not sure what to make of that.

[Simpleton]

I think it's been there all along. A guy quoted part of it just a couple hours after you posted, and both posts have been there all day.

[easytiger]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Simpleton
	I think it's been there all along. A guy quoted part of it just a couple hours after you posted, and both posts have been there all day.

I went to look for it before, and it was gone.
At any rate, it's back. Enough said. I'm sure it's just a big konspiracy involving Jim Drew and Area 51.

Xjet...there is really not much point in continuing to refute Jim Drew's claims, one by one. At this point, either people realize he lies all the time, or they do not.

[Kiwi]

Tiger,

All's well mate but honestly something we cannot do is delete a post then reinstate it. Not even Max's wizardry was capable of that.

I suspect we had some kind of glitch or it was something with your PC as that post has been there all the time, I mean physically anyway.

Thanks a lot anyway for your input and comments. I'm sure that there are those that will never believe facts no matter how you present them and that is problem belong em. (Taken from my very poor remnants of Pidgen English learned in Papua New Guinea many years ago)

[KrisW]

	Quote: Originally Posted by easytiger
	And yet, the post you said I did not make, that dissapeared, has reappeared. Not sure what to make of that.

It's been there every time I've looked at this thread, since it was posted.

Check your glasses, dude.

[seattle_helo]

	Quote: Originally Posted by tadawson
	Not in the least. I see a lot of things that are true, and a lot more that are simply nitpicking due to different interpretation of the definition of words. I have no vested interest in any 2.4 system (Frankly have yet to see the need, but am watching) so am trying to look at things in an objective, non emotionally clouded way, which is something I can't say is true about a lot of the folks posting on this topic. And yes, avoiding conflicting signals is a very good way to maximize range . . . no grey area there at all . . . - Tim

If you have no direct experience with 2.4Ghz systems, what basis do you have for making your observations? I'm curious why are you defending his idiotic claims after all that has been revealed? And an awful lot has been revealed indeed. It has been very well demonstrated that what he has claimed in the past is not true. He is now doing his best to "adjust" his terminology and essentially rewrite history to put himself and his products in a better light in lieu of this ever increasing scrutiny. If you have read this entire thread, which I acknowledge takes quite a bit of time, and yet you still think that his statements are clear, truthful and logical then we're definitely not going to agree on this.

nick