Frsky updates

[jhsa]

Yes. But I `m flying nor of them, I`m flying FrSky.

Exactly, if the others do it is ok..
But you are right, they messed up they are really bad now, so time for you to stop flying the frsky protocol. I bet you won't do it. Or, do speak like that about them, but will still use their protocol on the multiprotocol module, the DIY RX, etc??

1, As far as I know it was very- very - very long time ago. But once more: their business.

And, it doesn't count that they did it??

2, I think they forgot their beginning:

Or perhaps someone stepped on their toes?

because of public HUB protocol description, because of support of large community of DIY hobbyist, because of OTX community job they`ve made high reputation. But it`s quite easy to lost customer`s trust...

I would say, you have the good link you have now, you have the good telemetry system you have now, because of frsky, not the other way round. Frsky had one of the best "Cheap" RF system at the time, and they still have one of the best. And that is why YOU are angry, because they are locking it from you if you don't use their products. That is your problem. Actually you are angry because of what they might lock in the future. Your words, not mine The poor guys are being bashed for something they still didn't do ha ha ha Laughable..

Oh, and it was only the OTX community JOB (work) that made their reputation??
Hey Mike, apparently according to our friend here, it looks like your work and the Ersky9x community didn't help frsky's reputation.. Perhaps Mike should remind us of what he did..
But I wouldn't bother if I was him, this conversation already smells bad, and he has nothing to prove anyway, and has probably better things to do.

I think that frsky lost trust on the so called OTX community, hence all this little children's war

João

[rcNetfan]

after openTX the next step should be an open Source rf-protocol

[RCJohn]

after openTX the next step should be an open Source rf-protocol

Suggestion: Open RF Protocoll, enabled on-chip data-whitening and enabled on-chip CRC, without FrSKy compaitbilty.
HW: MPM and Midelic receivers.

[oldgazer]

after openTX the next step should be an open Source rf-protocol

Suggestion: Open RF Protocoll, enabled on-chip data-whitening and enabled on-chip CRC, without FrSKy compaitbilty.
HW: MPM and Midelic receivers.

But you forget the with an open source protocol to be viable you also need to come up with receivers that are compatible with this new protocol. You need to make sure the receivers support S.Bus, iBus, and several other receiver to device (FC, Servo, what ever) protocols.

These receivers need to be robust, with long range, antenna diversity, air tight data correction algorithms, and lets not forget telemetry.

Products like Craft & Theory Fight Deck and open source projects like Yaapu telemetry have major followings (Including yours truly) in the Taranis/OpenTX and ArudPilot ecosystems. FrSky/OpenTX telemetry also has a rather large following (myself included) in the BetaFlight community. You cut these people out and you new protocol is still born..

[RCJohn]

It would not be my interest to cut out other products.
It just would be an interesting alternative for the DIY community and should not be used for commercial puposes.
So just present MPM and Midelic compatible receivers, with simplified, reliable FW.

[midelic]

I start thinking that Frsky might shot themselves on the foot big time with new version.
Let's say we take old D16/LBT that frsky just "abandoned"(honestly I like it a lot for different reasons than what was presented).And we modify like you said HW crc and data whitening,what comes out is another D16 that is not compatible with old and new Frsky, basically new protocol That along with normal SPORT signal telemetry(uninverted signal- I understand that SPORT inverted signal is patented).And these modifications are so, so easy to do.\
So we have already the community protocol.

[antlerhanger]

Would we be able to flash the protocol to a existing x8r or even a s8r to work with the MPM , Or would it be for diy only receivers ? I have a large amount of x8r a nd s8r receivers . Obviously I have not updated to the new Frsky Protocol .

Thanks
Allen

[midelic]

yes I flashed already X8 clones.
https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthr ... e-firmware

[jhsa]

we have a receiver.. we just need a new protocol Midelic, you want to make it??

João

[Kilrah]

(uninverted signal- I understand that SPORT inverted signal is patented)

That's very certainly bullcrap. They're by far not the first to connect TX and RX together, actually Futaba SBUS2 is exactly the same, including polarity, just the data is a different format.
That's what they want - for third party stuff not to be compatible on a protocol level on the telemetry line either.

That's why everyone is annoyed. For years it was "here's our stuff, do what you want with it", and now the tone has apparently changed. But so much was developed around their stuff that now making an alternative requires lots of work again. If you make the telemetry incompatible then to be attractive when you make a new system you have to also update the radio firmware and the dozens of other projects that now support S-port. OpenxSensor, betaflight, ardupilot and many others...

But it's what we need, to have stuff that's not controlled by a single company that can decide to change their corporate direction on a whim.

[jhsa]

Then, as I have been saying for at least 2 years, we need our own protocol. NOT open source though, otherwise it will be a complete mess. There are things that should not be allowed for everybody to mess with, as it can be dangerous.

But when I suggested it a few years ago, the answer was, nahhhh why would we do that when we have Frsky? Well, we now have our answer don't we?

João

[antlerhanger]

Then, as I have been saying for at least 2 years, we need our own protocol. NOT open source though, otherwise it will be a complete mess. There are things that should not be allowed for everybody to mess with, as it can be dangerous.

But when I suggested it a few years ago, the answer was, nahhhh why would we do that when we have Frsky? Well, we now have our answer don't we?

João

Are you boasting or just " Hey guys I tried to tell ya " ..Just kiddin..I'm willing to invest some if needed..(like furnish some beer
) Because I believe that a man that drinks beer makes the best protocol.That is what happened to Frsky , They got a little power and started drinking wine instead of beer

Allen
P.S João I really was kidding

[jhsa]

I know Allen.
They should leave that wine alone..

João

[TomasJ]

yes I flashed already X8 clones.
https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthr ... e-firmware

You mean Jumper R8 receiver, which isn't clone...(you cannot flash frsky firmware, nor you can flash your firmware to frsky X8R...) Jumper R1 is clone to RSXR.

[jhsa]

You mean Jumper R8 receiver, which isn't clone...(you cannot flash frsky firmware,

I believe you on this one, because that receiver is bad as it has flaws. To have it working with some of the telemetry, you need to modify the voltage divider as the person that designed it doesn't seem to know how voltage dividers work and it has to be flashed with Midelic's code. It seems they fixed some issues on some new version though.

nor you can flash your firmware to frsky X8R...)

Not sure, but you might be able to flash it with Mike's firmware.. If not, I think that at least Mike was working on it.

João

[midelic]

If was about diy protocol not the original.The original you cannot flash it on a clone.
JUMPER_R8 is 95% pin out compatible with X8 ,which is an imperfect clone.
yes I can flash my firmware to an X8R.
Give me one and I will prove it to you.Mike flashed it own firmware to D8R and D4r.
If you do you cannot go back flashing the original.

yes I flashed already X8 clones.
https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthr ... e-firmware

You mean Jumper R8 receiver, which isn't clone...(you cannot flash frsky firmware, nor you can flash your firmware to frsky X8R...) Jumper R1 is clone to RSXR.

[antlerhanger]

So I think I have this straight.. If I update my x9d plus internal xjt module to 2.01, I can only bind to updated receivers..But I can slap a multimodule in the bay and bind to d8 and d16 non upgraded receivers or tiny whoops or whatever..I can't however slap my multmodule in a 9xr pro and bind to updated receivers..but I can slap a updated external xjt module in my 9xr pro and bind to updated receivers....geez is you head spinning also ?

Allen

[jhsa]

You are correct. I would wait before updating though..

João

[antlerhanger]

You are correct. I would wait before updating though..

João

For sure , I may never update..I've had zero problems .

Allen