Kiwi's XPS test results are up.

[aramsdell]

Hi Boomhauer, I fly regardless. Foamie Cap 232 in the front yar this am. The club field is all snow, but flat, and needs another freeze after thawing today for the first time in WEEKS and then it'll be good. I'll be out this weekend weather permitting.
The bickering is more like stabbing. There are some Axes being ground here. Mine is still sharp. No malice here.

[Boomhauer]

That is what I like to hear, I am ready for the indoor events myself. I really dislike flying in the cold.

[KrisW]

	Quote: Originally Posted by skubacb
	These so called experts are so boring. Remember how they stated that you must have antenna diversity, two antennas, or the system wouldn't work. Well, now others such as Hitec, Futaba, and Spectrum have RX with only one antenna. Seems they are catching up with XPS. So much for the "self proclaimed experts". Guess they aren't so expert after all. Every old claim they made has been disproved. But they childishly continue to beg for attention.

Anyone ever seen a new Spektrum that was not DSM2? Or have two Antennas on one receiver assembly? Lets cut through the intentional misinformation here and make sure everyone knows that Spektrum is DSM2 (dual channel with proprietary ID for the TX-RX pairing and binding), and that the ONLY Spektrum receivers without satellite receiver capability are the "Park Flyer" designs, which are expressly designed for SHORT RANGE applications inside 1000' range. They are labelled that way, advertised that way, and although they seem to work fine in larger models with longer ranges, I will not use them in a big 30-40% plane, simply because I can fly a half mile out and still see the plane.

Futaba is FAAST . .always changing frequencies, so lockout chances are severaly reduced, if not totally done away with. . and HiTec's AFHSS offering are frequency agile and change frequencies as needed on bootup (when the feature is selected), and uses DUAL antennas/receivers in a receiver assembly for its top line 9-channel receiver, as well as having antennae that are long enough to place them well away from the receiver and associated wiring tangle.

I dont care how good the XPS system gets, or what improvements are made. . .its going to be SPEKTRUM for me on 2.4 ghz. The long history of doubts, problems, unresolved crashes and questionable customer relations with receiver related crashes has thoroughly answered any questiosn I may have had about XPS . ..

[JimDrew]

No matter how much you don't want to believe it, there are well over 100,000 systems in use and nothing you say or do is going to change that. Every time threads like this pop-up, our website tracker shows sales generated by someone coming from these threads that had not yet heard about the system and they buy it. So, for that, I thank you.

[youngflyer]

^wow what a tool!

[skubacb]

Ho Hum, experts should be wise enough to look at the various offerings out there before they post. I think carbon fuse sailplanes with only one antenna sticking out would count. And sailplanes get flown at extreme distances. There are other offerings with only one antenna. Somehow people other than XPS are getting one antenna to work just fine. I have a sailplane with a FASST single antenna in it and I can fly it to the limits of my vision. Just like I can with my XPS single antenna RX. Dumb to keep saying the world is flat.

This vitriolic obsession with trying to shoot at XPS without good facts is lame. Yes, I know any rumor that you like is fact and anything positive, you claim is a lie. Also, you take a test for one thing and try to turn it into results for something else. Boring. After how long you still can't get it through your heads that all the RXs we have out there have spherical reception. Otherwise we couldn't maintain control of our aircraft. Spherical coverage does not mean isotropic antenna patterns. Take one of your 72 mhz rxs. Rotate your plane in a spherical manner and guess what. You have spherical RX coverage. No magic. No smoke. So stop calling people liars when the spherical coverage can be demonstrated. Arguments like that reveal an inability to reason on a par with ........

I'll take a look at this thread in another 6 months and the loudest people will have rehashed the same stuff they have rehashed for the last two years.

[Chris F]

	Quote: Originally Posted by JimDrew
	Every time threads like this pop-up, our website tracker shows sales generated by someone coming from these threads that had not yet heard about the system and they buy it. So, for that, I thank you.

What a joke!

[KrisW]

	Quote: Originally Posted by JimDrew
	No matter how much you don't want to believe it, there are well over 100,000 systems in use and nothing you say or do is going to change that. Every time threads like this pop-up, our website tracker shows sales generated by someone coming from these threads that had not yet heard about the system and they buy it. So, for that, I thank you.

snicker. . . . . . . .

[KrisW]

	Quote: Originally Posted by skubacb
	Ho Hum, experts should be wise enough to look at the various offerings out there before they post. I think carbon fuse sailplanes with only one antenna sticking out would count. And sailplanes get flown at extreme distances. There are other offerings with only one antenna. Somehow people other than XPS are getting one antenna to work just fine. I have a sailplane with a FASST single antenna in it and I can fly it to the limits of my vision. Just like I can with my XPS single antenna RX. Dumb to keep saying the world is flat. This vitriolic obsession with trying to shoot at XPS without good facts is lame. Yes, I know any rumor that you like is fact and anything positive, you claim is a lie. Also, you take a test for one thing and try to turn it into results for something else. Boring. After how long you still can't get it through your heads that all the RXs we have out there have spherical reception. Otherwise we couldn't maintain control of our aircraft. Spherical coverage does not mean isotropic antenna patterns. Take one of your 72 mhz rxs. Rotate your plane in a spherical manner and guess what. You have spherical RX coverage. No magic. No smoke. So stop calling people liars when the spherical coverage can be demonstrated. Arguments like that reveal an inability to reason on a par with ........ I'll take a look at this thread in another 6 months and the loudest people will have rehashed the same stuff they have rehashed for the last two years.

A LONG time ago (back when i was wet behind the ears and we rode dinosaurs to school) I discovered something ..

When the story CHANGES. . . when excuses are made . . .when fingers get pointed instead of problems rectified. . . SOMEBODY is lying.

Are the 100's of people who have had problems with XPS lying. . or is the owner of the business doing a CYA move??

The huge number of refuted claims. . changed designs. . problems noted and proven. . .and dissatisifed people who KNOW what they are doing yet still lose aircraft when using XPS. . . point to a problem with the product, and the company/owner.

Anyone else remember all the weird excuses for WHY XPS was delayed? "Plastic unavailable". . . . "Mold problems". . . .and other various and sundry things. . . and the long discussioins of supposed "Theorretically perfect" antennas that were impossible to design and put into the REAL world. . 2.4ghz and electronics experts refuting the claims of the design and being proven right. . . .then when they arrived people started losing planes. .then there was a fix. . and fingers pointed due to "operator error" claims. . then the wiring had to be X number of inches away from the "spherical radiation" antenna . . then promised fixes that took a long time to appear. . and people still lost planes. . . .then more fixes, a change of design .. promises of antenna redundancy.. . promises of frequency hopping. . . Frequency hopping that NEVER occured in testing. . . Frequency hopping that NEVER occured in the real world. . . claim after claim after problem after solution after new problem after finger pinting after lost aircraft and mad flyers and still more claims and finger pointing and STILL XPS has problems to this day. . . . . .and 2+ years later we are still at it.

The term "Total Debacle" comes to mind. . . .

[JimDrew]

Let's see if I can address your list of concerns:

Plastic -

Yes, this was difficult. We wanted to keep this product 100% made in the USA. Everything from the circuit boards to assembly is done in the U.S. After several months of some serious consideration we opted to use an off-shore plastics house. The reason was $140,000 for tooling in the U.S. vs. $20,000 for tooling in China.


Spherical Antenna -

The manufacturer of the 2.4GHz technology that we use calls their antenna radiation pattern "omni-directional". We call it spherical. Annecoic chamber testing did prove it is omni-directional.


Installation -

Yes, you must have any wires 2" away from the antenna. Go read the installation instructions for Spektrum, Futaba, and Hitec. You might be surprised at what they say! You must also provide proper power. Most people have not been using proper power with 72MHz system for decades. We will be releasing a product next week that is going to be a real eye opener for those using fancy power systems that are actually not providing the proper power they think they have.


Fixes -

We have never had any "fixes" ever.


Frequency hopping -

Yes, it hops. After milking this publicity for everything we could, we finally had to provide proof to the MAAA and other insurance bodies. Video proof was released to the public, including how the video (which started this thread) can be duplicated by simply swamping the front-end of our receiver. Moving the receiver a few feet away from the noise source yields a perfectly working receiver.

Much like our competition, we don't have issues with the system when it is properly powered. Do a search of "Spektrum Lockout" and you will find the root of the problem is almost always power related, no different than our system, Futaba, or Hitec.

The reality is that for nearly 4 years we have been selling the best 2.4GHz technology available, and we continue to do so on a daily basis.

[youngflyer]

^ than how can you explain the testing process and the results of this thread

[KrisW]

	Quote: Originally Posted by JimDrew
	Let's see if I can address your list of concerns: Plastic - Yes, this was difficult. We wanted to keep this product 100% made in the USA. Everything from the circuit boards to assembly is done in the U.S. After several months of some serious consideration we opted to use an off-shore plastics house. The reason was $140,000 for tooling in the U.S. vs. $20,000 for tooling in China. Spherical Antenna - The manufacturer of the 2.4GHz technology that we use calls their antenna radiation pattern "omni-directional". We call it spherical. Annecoic chamber testing did prove it is omni-directional. Installation - Yes, you must have any wires 2" away from the antenna. Go read the installation instructions for Spektrum, Futaba, and Hitec. You might be surprised at what they say! You must also provide proper power. Most people have not been using proper power with 72MHz system for decades. We will be releasing a product next week that is going to be a real eye opener for those using fancy power systems that are actually not providing the proper power they think they have. Fixes - We have never had any "fixes" ever. Frequency hopping - Yes, it hops. After milking this publicity for everything we could, we finally had to provide proof to the MAAA and other insurance bodies. Video proof was released to the public, including how the video (which started this thread) can be duplicated by simply swamping the front-end of our receiver. Moving the receiver a few feet away from the noise source yields a perfectly working receiver. Much like our competition, we don't have issues with the system when it is properly powered. Do a search of "Spektrum Lockout" and you will find the root of the problem is almost always power related, no different than our system, Futaba, or Hitec. The reality is that for nearly 4 years we have been selling the best 2.4GHz technology available, and we continue to do so on a daily basis.

Methinks thou doth protest too much.. . . . . .

[Chris F]

	Quote: Originally Posted by JimDrew
	Yes, it hops. After milking this publicity for everything we could, we finally had to provide proof to the MAAA and other insurance bodies. Video proof was released to the public, including how the video (which started this thread) can be duplicated by simply swamping the front-end of our receiver. Moving the receiver a few feet away from the noise source yields a perfectly working receiver.

You are crazy if you thought that was good publicity. If you had of proven your system at the start instead of ducking and weaving I have no doubt you would be as big as Spektrum and FASST. The proof of your "clever" advertising strategy is that you are now a small player compared to Spektrum and FASST. As long as you post such rubbish about bad press being good advertising it is hard to believe a word you say.

[flyinlow]

I purchased one of these systems at the 2008 Joe Nall to install in a 33% edge 540 but got to busy with life to assemble the plane and it has sat on the shelf since. I had plans to purchase more receivers for my other planes and this was the 2.4 system I planned to use. What turned me off to this system (and company) was the charge to upgrade my equipment. This equipment was about a year old and all of the sudden there is a upgrade for this equipment to make it better and I have to pay for it?! Shipping, OK, but for software upgrade, that should have been done for free to support your customers. As a company if you can make the equipment better and more reliable you take care of the customer.... (if you take care of your customers the business will take care of it's self) So then I wasn't sure if I purchased newer receivers if they would work with my "older" equipment, so I purchased a DX7 spektrum system. One of the guys at the club I fly with has flown the XPS system and has lost two planes. One a third scale cub at our field and one at the 2008 Joe Nall. He was flying at the 3D flight line and was in a inverted flat spin and the system locked out. We thought maybe low battery but when we checked it (li-on on a reg) it checked good. After seeing KIWI's test results I now think it was just swamped with other 2.4 systems signals and locked him out (as 99% of the people flying around him on three other flight lines were flying 2.4.) I now have a 200+ dollar 2.4 system that all I will do is look it because I have no faith in the equipment or the company! XPS, if you think negative publicity will help you, you are only fooling yourself.

[JimDrew]

The upgrade we offer is new firmware with more features. It certainly is not required by any means.

We were at the Joe Nall 2008, and nobody reported to us any crash there... but we saw numerous Spektrum and one FASST systems crash.

Power is key to successful flights with 2.4GHz. Do a search on RCU for "Spektrum Lockout" and then go look at the majority of the reasons for the crash. You can also find information on what happens to the Spektrum system if it chooses two frequencies that are located next to each other and someone turns on a FPV system. If that had happened in Kiwi's test, it would have shown that unlike our receiver being swamped and control restored by moving it a few feet away from the noise source, the Spektrum would stay locked out.

We can not preach power enough. People who purchase all of these name-brand, wiz-bang, power expanders and boxes really need to use a device that tells you the lowest voltage obtained. We have such a device, and there are others. Look at this lockout thread about FASST system. The last message shows a video of what happens when you use some type of electronic switch assembly:

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_86..._4/key_/tm.htm

If we are considered a "small player" after selling millions of dollars worth of radio systems over the last 4 years, then I am perfectly happy being that small player! With the exception of a small banner Ad on RCGroups, we have not spent a single dime in advertising to get where we are today.

We were the first company to release 2.4GHz aircraft modules, long before Spektrum or any other company. Our customers are typically people using 8UAP, 9C, 8103, 9303, Stylus, Vision, Multiplex 3030/4000/EVO, etc. These are all old radio systems and many of these people are still trying to use their original 600mAh Nicad pack with their receivers (and modern servos). This is one of many reasons why we have the fastest reboot time of any 2.4GHz system available, and we also have a low voltage warning system - which some people refuse to believe after spending hundreds of dollars on fancy regulators and other bandaides. When we released our v3.0 firmware which included a low voltage warning, 8 out of 10 customers reported the warning indicator coming on. This indicator occurs when the input voltage to the receiver drops below 4.4v. Although our receivers do not reboot until the voltage falls below 3.2v, under no circumstances in R/C, should the receiver voltage ever fall below 4.8v. Unlike 72MHz systems, 2.4GHz receivers have computers that need power full time or they will reboot. During this reboot time, you have no control. 72Mhz receivers can run on fractions of a volt, and only "glitch" when the power falls nearly to zero volts, with no "reboot" time required.