Open TX 2.3 with replacement ISRM (ACCESS) module D16 not binding

[Kilrah]

If you swap them that often, flashing a receiver is no problem at all ha ha ha

Get to the field with one radio, realize model was bound to the other and you can't rebind, how fun.
When I DIY something it's to be fully free of doing whatever with it, not to have some stupid restriction.

Anyway maybe some people don't care.

[jhsa]

well, one of the ancient radio control rules is, make sure everything works before you leave home. what about if you break a prop, what about if you forgot to charge your lipos, what about one thousand things that you might forget or stop working? That for me is no excuse. I even went to the field a few times only to realize I forgot the radio at home, or the batteries. or some wings.. So, taking the wrong radio can happen, and it is not the fault of a restricted project, it is YOUR fault because you didn't take care of your stuff prior to going to the field.
But anyway, as I said, this project is not for everybody, it is for those who really want it, and can do it.. I know that such a good project being restricted is going to p```some people off but who cares??
If you are too lazy, or can't solder, than it is not a project for you. if only some can build it, so be it. All the info is there for people to build it, it is up to you to decide if you do it or not.
Exactly the same as with the telemetry mod on the 9x radios.. People always found a way to do it.. And they flashed the radio every time er9x was released, so, what is the problem?
It doesn't matter, at the end of the day, no one is telling you to build it. I did. and it was well worth it No regrets here.

João

[Kilrah]

and it is not the fault of a restricted project

But it is the fault of the restricted project that I cannot easily rectify the situation becasue of a restriction that brings me nothing.

Just like I said recently regarding FrSky's recent mess a protection is a good thing but only if it has no detrimental impact on legitimate users, to which it provides no advantage.

[jhsa]

and it is not the fault of a restricted project

But it is the fault of the restricted project that I cannot easily rectify the situation becasue of a restriction that brings me nothing.

Just like I said recently regarding FrSky's recent mess a protection is a good thing but only if it has no detrimental impact on legitimate users, to which it provides no advantage.

But in this case, it is not a product. You are free to build it or not to build it.. No one is forcing you to.
And being restricted doesn't make it a bad project. Many people also use software demos that are restricted. And that is not the main reason why people wouldn't build it anyway.. The proof lays with the other DIY receiver, which is also brilliant, not the version that is sold though. The one that is DIYed with antenna diversity is very good. I have it in most of my models. This one didn't have limitations, and still many didn't build it. The reason is, they just can't solder.. That is the main reason. All the other guys that are right now building the new DIY receiver are ok with the fact that they will have to flash it if they attempt a 3rd bind. The idea is exactly to make it less attractive to people that would copy it and sell it..
If you want to build it or not, I wouldn't care less, but that doesn't change the fact that it is goooood...

João

[ChrisMMarshall]

I have tried to download the latest nightly using the nightly build companion, but I get an error message "Invalid Board" It seems happy if I do not check the "internal access" box in the profile settings, but then I do not get the correct firmware. I can't see anything else that needs changing. I really just want to check that these modules are OK, I'm then going to swap back to the original ones for the time being until there is a stable build that works with them.

[pafleraf]

Gentlemen,

here is an important update on the issue: https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showpos ... ount=13540

In a nutshell: the authentication mechanism has been implemented in a very poor way, which can now really become dangerous, even with the right firmware and authentication code installed.

[pafleraf]

I have tried to download the latest nightly using the nightly build companion, but I get an error message "Invalid Board" It seems happy if I do not check the "internal access" box in the profile settings, but then I do not get the correct firmware. I can't see anything else that needs changing. I really just want to check that these modules are OK, I'm then going to swap back to the original ones for the time being until there is a stable build that works with them.

We have blocked download of this feature to protect the users until FrSky publishes a firmware update of the module that is safe enough.

[ChrisMMarshall]

I have tried to download the latest nightly using the nightly build companion, but I get an error message "Invalid Board" It seems happy if I do not check the "internal access" box in the profile settings, but then I do not get the correct firmware. I can't see anything else that needs changing. I really just want to check that these modules are OK, I'm then going to swap back to the original ones for the time being until there is a stable build that works with them.

We have blocked download of this feature to protect the users until FrSky publishes a firmware update of the module that is safe enough.

Ok that makes sense. It might be useful to include a note about it in the warning note of the 25th.
I will swap back to the ACCST only module for the time being. Is it safe to leave the PARA module in? I will not be using it for now anyway, but as it is a SM soldered module it is not something I want to be doing too often, even with the professional tools I have at work.
I had no intention of flying with the ACCESS module until things were properly sorted.
Thanks guys.

[pafleraf]

We have blocked download of this feature to protect the users until FrSky publishes a firmware update of the module that is safe enough.

Ok that makes sense. It might be useful to include a note about it in the warning note of the 25th.
I will swap back to the ACCST only module for the time being. Is it safe to leave the PARA module in? I will not be using it for now anyway, but as it is a SM soldered module it is not something I want to be doing too often, even with the professional tools I have at work.
I had no intention of flying with the ACCESS module until things were properly sorted.
Thanks guys.

I believe the PARA module to be safe and should not influence anything necessary for flying a model. Just leave it inside, no problem.

[ChrisMMarshall]

Thanks pafleraf. I will try leaving it in. I have emailed the local supplier who is really just stuck in the middle, and doing his best. I've asked him to convey my feelings to FrSky about this situation, and to exert what pressure he can to get them to resolve it ASAP.

[pafleraf]

Thanks pafleraf. I will try leaving it in. I have emailed the local supplier who is really just stuck in the middle, and doing his best. I've asked him to convey my feelings to FrSky about this situation, and to exert what pressure he can to get them to resolve it ASAP.

Thx a lot! This is helping quite a bit! Only users will make FrSky change it's position on this.

[ChrisMMarshall]

Thanks pafleraf. I will try leaving it in. I have emailed the local supplier who is really just stuck in the middle, and doing his best. I've asked him to convey my feelings to FrSky about this situation, and to exert what pressure he can to get them to resolve it ASAP.

Thx a lot! This is helping quite a bit! Only users will make FrSky change it's position on this.

No problem, it's the least I can do to help. I love OpenTx, it's exactly what I would have created had I been writing it, In my mind I outlined a Tx OS a few years ago, so I was delighted when OpenTX appeared!

[superbogz]

I apologize if this has already been discussed. I have upgraded the ISRM and PARA modules on my x10s. Everytime I try to download the driver that includes internalaccess I get a prompt that says "Invalid Board". Any ideas?

[ChrisMMarshall]

I apologize if this has already been discussed. I have upgraded the ISRM and PARA modules on my x10s. Everytime I try to download the driver that includes internalaccess I get a prompt that says "Invalid Board". Any ideas?

Yes if you read through this thread (ignoring the off topic stuff about open protocols) you will find the reason. Basically we have to wait for Frsky to sort it out. I have heard from the supplier that they are working on it but the OpenTX guys can't do anything until Frsky come up with a fix for the problem. At the moment the problem renders it dangerous in some circumstances. Best thing to do is swap the module back for now. There seems to be no need to swap the Para-module although I don't know if the wireless buddy box will work with it with earlier firmware. That is what I have done for the time being with no problems so far.

[superbogz]

Any news yet regarding a fix to the access upgrade problem?

[Kilrah]

Nothing's been posted by FrSky so far.

[ChrisMMarshall]

Any news yet regarding a fix to the access upgrade problem?

If you haven't already done so, I suggest you ask your supplier to relay a strongly worded complaint to FrSky, asking that they fix this with all urgency.

[Thoemse]

I also bought this module to upgrade my X12S and it is unusable now. I could install the ACCST module again of course but I think I'll write to the seller of the upgrade module instead. This was a poor decision by FrSky.

[ChrisMMarshall]

I also bought this module to upgrade my X12S and it is unusable now. I could install the ACCST module again of course but I think I'll write to the seller of the upgrade module instead. This was a poor decision by FrSky.

I have two of the modules sitting doing nothing at the moment.
Yes write to the seller and request that he puts pressure on FrSky to sort this out.

[Thoemse]

I complained to horusrc where I bought the module.



This is what I wrote:
I have bought this module in your online shop. The module is not in a working state on my OpenTx Horus because FrSky added an authentification method that leads to signal loss and erratic behavior. OpenTx removed support for the module for that reason.

Do you have a timeframe for this issue to be resolved by FrSky?
If not I'll have to send the module back.

With kind regards

This was the response. I hope it is true because it sounds like good news:

Dear Customer,
Thanks for your great patience.
We have checked with Frsky team and they suggest you to flash the file enclosed.
They will update the ISRM program in this week and then opentx system will recover.
Sorry for your inconvenience.
Please inform us for any points and check the file enclosed.
Thanks & Regards,
Have a nice day.

[ChrisMMarshall]

I wonder what they have sent you. I am going to wait until the OpenTX guys confirm that the problem is fixed and release a new version. I would expect new firmware to appear in the Frsky downloads for the module. Maybe that is what they have sent you but it won't be any use until you can download OpenTX with the option enabled. That is my understanding at the moment. Maybe one of the OpenTX people can confirm?

[Thoemse]

I wonder what they have sent you. I am going to wait until the OpenTX guys confirm that the problem is fixed and release a new version. I would expect new firmware to appear in the Frsky downloads for the module. Maybe that is what they have sent you but it won't be any use until you can download OpenTX with the option enabled. That is my understanding at the moment. Maybe one of the OpenTX people can confirm?

It's a bin file named firmware-x10-access.bin. No idea if it is the ISRM firmware or not but as you say I don't see a use for it right now.

[ChrisMMarshall]

You can probably tell by the size. The module firmware is something around 200k, the transmitter firmware is more like 2M. If it's the transmitter firmware it must be the FrSky OS. Either way not a lot of use! I hope that their statement "They will update the ISRM program in this week and then opentx system will recover." turns out to be true.

[Kilrah]

Actually it's an OpenTX binary that was supplied to them for internal testing and not for flying in any way. And now once again they go distribute that kind of stuff to customers to "appease" them...

[ChrisMMarshall]

Actually it's an OpenTX binary that was supplied to them for internal testing and not for flying in any way. And now once again they go distribute that kind of stuff to customers to "appease" them...

Irresponsible of them to say the least. Why couldn't they have just said that they were at that stage of testing.
Thanks for the clarification.
That just confirms my assertion that the thing to do is wait until there is an proper release of OpenTX which has been properly tested.
I assume that there will be new firmware for the module which will need flashing and that OpenTX can now do that, no need to revert to FrSkyOS. Is that correct?

[3djc]

That depends on FrSky. OpenTX can assuming they release the fixed ISRM firmware as a .frsk or .frk. They might decide otherwise.

[ChrisMMarshall]

That depends on FrSky. OpenTX can assuming they release the fixed ISRM firmware as a .frsk or .frk. They might decide otherwise.

Thanks. I hope they do I don't want to have to send the modules back again!

[Thoemse]

I just got an eamil from support. There is a new firmware out.
https://www.frsky-rc.com/access-upgrade ... -x10-x10s/

I wonder if this fixed the issues for OpenTx?

[ChrisMMarshall]

Within that zip file there is a .frsk for the module dated 15 Nov, so it probably is. We need to wait for OpenTx to confirm that it is safe and then release a new build of the OS. Having seen the behaviour first hand of the module with the problem, I am in no hurry to use it and will wait until OpenTX are certain it is fixed.

[Thoemse]

Within that zip file there is a .frsk for the module dated 15 Nov, so it probably is. We need to wait for OpenTx to confirm that it is safe and then release a new build of the OS. Having seen the behaviour first hand of the module with the problem, I am in no hurry to use it and will wait until OpenTX are certain it is fixed.

Allready happened. I am going to test it with a foamie next week. Bench testing looks good.