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

[ChrisMMarshall]

I have just replaced the Rf module in my Horus X10 with one of the new ISRM modules to provide the new ACCESS protocol. I have downloaded and flashed OpenTX 2.3.1 In the companion radio profile I selected: lua, eu, and internalaccess. I have found that with an RX6R and a RX8R Pro (with ACCST EU firmware) that they will not bind. (In the model on the transmitter select ISRM and D16) I have re-flashed the RX6R with ACCESS firmware and that will successfully register and bind with the radio using the ACCESS protocol, so I know the module is functional.
Has anyone else had this problem, or have any idea what I am missing?
As I have several receivers for which the ACCESS firmware is not yet available switching completely to ACCESS is not an option for me at the moment.

[Kilrah]

Apparently all the upgraded modules they've shipped are FCC.

[ChrisMMarshall]

Kilrah, thanks for the quick reply.
Yes, that would make sense. Do you know if the ACCESS protocol itself is LBT? If it is not then they really shouldn't be selling these modules in Europe at all until there is suitable firmware. I am assuming that it will be possible to make them work in LBT for both ACCESS and ACCST given suitable firmware. If not I need to talk to the supplier about returning them as they are essentially unusable by me here in the UK

[ChrisMMarshall]

I have now confirmed that it is an FCC module by loading a receiver with FCC firmware. It then binds in D16 immediately with no problem. Obviously I cannot legally continue to use it in that state.
What I now need to determine is whether the ACCESS protocol as implemented in this module is legal in the EU, and specifically for me in the UK.

[Kilrah]

You need to change the module to EU mode. It's not supposed to be possible, but in their latest FrOS release for the X10 FrSky (mistakenly?) included the script used to set region.
So you can temporarily flash the latest FrOS, use the script to change module, and flash OpenTX back.

Or return the module and tell them to fix their stuff and supply you the correct one.

[ChrisMMarshall]

I think that I might have bricked the module. I heard from the supplier that there is a lua which allows you to set the region. I got that from the FrSky downloads, but when I tried to run it it just hung. I thought maybe it is a firmware thing so I downloaded the module firmware from the same place and loaded it to the module using Open TX 2.3.1 The lua still hung and now the module is not found by the main firmware, i.e. there is nothing found in the system page, and it will not bind or register with any receiver, regardless of firmware.
Do you think that FrOS could recover it? I am more tempted to send it back as you suggestfor them to fix. I am reluctant to go anywhere near FrOS as I have never used it so it will be a new learning exercise for me to find out how to flash it and then flash back to Open Tx. (Perhaps it is more strightforward than I am imagining?
To be honest I am on the point of cutting my losses and sending the modules back permanently. (I have two sets as I have two transmitters) I love OpenTX, it is what I would have written had I designed a system myself from scratch, and I like the FrSky hardware, it is good quality and excellent value for money. Bu their documentation and general information is dreadful. And I say this as a professional Electronics engineer with over fourty years experience.

[Kilrah]

The region lua is only for FrOs, it cannot run in OpenTX.

[ChrisMMarshall]

OK thanks. Presumably that is the one I need to run in FrOS to make the switch. I think I am going to put the whole thing aside for a day or two until I can summon up some enthusiasm and determination to sort it out. Back to work tomorrow where things are normally much easier than this!

[ChrisMMarshall]

Good News. I heard today from the distributor from whom I bought the modules. FrSky have admitted their mistake and are sending replacement EU LBT modules to exchange for those I have. Thanks To Richard at T9 for sorting this out.

[ChrisMMarshall]

Back to despair again. The replacement modules arrived. I have fitted one and while it will now bind with a receiver in D16 EU LBT mode something is not functioningcorrectly. initially all channels are outputting the correct pulse widths, but after a few seconds they have a large offset applied, but can still be varied by the sticks etc, but with the offset. After maybe ten seconds they revert to the correct values. This alternation repeats indefinitely. This happens with a couple of RX8Pros and an SR6. I have not yet tried the ACCESS mode, as I need to recharge the Tx battery (and will need to flash a different receiver)

[pafleraf]

The OpenTX version you have is missing the authentication code. FrSky has brought the code to OpenTx very recently. It has been merged into 2.3 this morning, so it should be in the 2.3.2 nightly build which will be available tomorrow.

[Kilrah]

FrSky have decided last minute that they would add measures to prevent their modules from working with anything else than their own radios. So they have replaced the original modules by some that require authentication, becasue it's better to put users in danger by having their servos and motor do random stuff instead...
Since that's been done last minute there is no support for it yet. It will be in OpenTX 2.3.2, and as pafleraf said preliminary nightly builds of that including the authentication feature will be available for testing starting tomorrow.

[ChrisMMarshall]

Thanks pafleraf and Kilrah- you guys are Ace!
Presumably that would explain why it is also not working properly with a GRX8 loaded with ACCESS firmware. I'll try again when I see the 2.3.2 build has been updated.
I'm relieved that I'm not going to have to send the modules back again!
This is much too much like being at work for me. After a days design work and troubleshooting I like to do something different to relax. Doesn't seem to be quite working at the moment!

[Carbo]

Sounds like a lot of fun. Can we get a special function in OpenTX to switch authentication randomly on and off? Or is this already realised in FrSkys firmware This will be a good exercise for responsiveness.

[ChrisMMarshall]

Seems to me that they are going overboard with protectionism. When there is a crash with a genuine setup this is likely to get blamed, whether it is responsible or not. Their competitors will have a field day. I sympathise with their attempts to protect their investment, which I suspect is what the ACCESS protocol (with encryption) is mostly about, but this is possibly going too far. I personally would not use any cloned equipment anyway, it just does not make sense at the price point that FrSky stuff is at, but I know there are a lot of people who will. Just the experience of others with Orange stuff was enough to convince me and I was a cautious convert from JR. Also as a professional electronics engineer I know that you will never get something for nothing, just on a good day you might actually get what you have paid for.

[Kilrah]

Yep.
My stance is that protection measures ARE necessary, but rule n°1 is that they must never have any measurable effect on your own users. In the past 6 months all those they have put or tried to put in place affected/restricted their users so much that in the end it actually has the opposite effect, it encourages people to move to the clone which doesn't have such BS.

[ChrisMMarshall]

Completely agree with that.

[jhsa]

Clone won't have their latest protocol though, as far as I understand..

João

[Carbo]

The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of developing an open source RF protocol.

Mike Blandford showed here, how versatile this could become: https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthr ... st42583371

[Kilrah]

Clone won't have their latest protocol though, as far as I understand..

No, at least not for now, but the necessity/advantages of the new protocol are debatable. Yes there are useful things, but no "must haves". A lot of FrSky customers have already expressed not even wanting to try it until it's settled for 6-12 months since there was so much broken / changed stuff at release.

[jhsa]

Kilrah, you are obviously biased If frsky didn't do what they did, you would be saying that the new protocol was the best thing in the world, and that everybody should have it. [emoji14]

@carbo, I have been speaking about a new open source protocol since years. But no one really listened because of the frsky fever.


João

[Carbo]

@carbo, I have been speaking about a new open source protocol since years. But no one really listened because of the frsky fever.

FrSky hardware is still OK for me, only firmware and bunker mentality suck more and more. Mike's approach, to flash it's own firmware on it, was very convinceable. Of course there are some regulations to consider, but it should be possible. Hardware is no problem, technology is already wide open.

[jhsa]

Yeah, i have been building my own Compatible receivers (Midelic's project) for a few years now. never had a range problem or a failure, knock on wood.
At this moment there is a DIY D16 compatible receiver being developed, and it is working really well. it has more features than the original receiver..
No, the Chinese will not copy this one it is just for the lucky ones that can solder a chip to a PCB.
I say they won't copy because there is a firmware limitation that should make it unattractive as a product. It is limited to 2 binds only and on 3rd bind it stops working. Unless you flash it again. This is not a problem for a DIYer, but it might be for those who wait for the projects to be copied and sold And that is what the developer wants to avoid. here is the link to the project thread.

https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthr ... 9-receiver

João

[Kilrah]

I say they won't copy because there is a firmware limitation that should make it unattractive as a product. It is limited to 2 binds only and on 3rd bind it stops working. Unless you flash it again. This is not a problem for a DIYer

Even as a DIYer I would definitely not want such a limitation. Makes the project uninteresting.
What exactly do you gain from that? That only 10 people are going to use it?

[jhsa]

You wouldn't, that doesn't mean others wouldn't. it is a small price to pay for such a nice project.
and how many times do you bind a receiver if it is installed in a model? Yes, probably never again unless you crash it.
A real DIYer doesn't mind flashing a receiver. But that makes it unattractive as a commercial product.
if only 10 people will build it, it means that 10 out of those 10 can solder a processor to the board, not because of flashing the receiver..
The receiver is NOT open source as the source code is not available for obvious reasons, one of them being safety. The developer wants to share it with the community, but he doesn't want others to make money with it without his approval. Is that wrong? I don't think so, I would do the exactly same thing. wanna have one, build it. Don't know? learn, or ask a friend to do the soldering. There are ways.
I find really nice of him he is sharing the project with the public, so we can build it. Otherwise I would have been the only one (apart from him) having a DIY X receiver

João

[Carbo]

I would prefer industrial produced hardware. I like to DIY, but not with RX. An open design, with open firmware. Faster telemetry with less overhead, combining the advantages of FPort and passthrough telemetry. TX and RX with UART interface. Identical design for RX and TX module.

[Kilrah]

and how many times do you bind a receiver if it is installed in a model? Yes, probably never again unless you crash it.

A lot, I often swap between 2 radios depending on what I do.

[jhsa]

I would like to build it. we already have the multiProtocol (I built 3), and the receiver can be also built.
The thing is, if the developers are ok with it, I don't see anything wrong, specially if they want it that way. as long as people can also build it themselves.
But I do understand if a dev doesn't want his work produced by anyone else.
This DIY receiver for example has more features than the original X8R receiver.

João

[jhsa]

and how many times do you bind a receiver if it is installed in a model? Yes, probably never again unless you crash it.

A lot, I often swap between 2 radios depending on what I do.

Then you would have to stop being lazy and flash your receiver.. If you swap them that often, flashing a receiver is no problem at all ha ha ha

Anyway, the project is there. no one is asking you to build it.. But there are people building it..

[dot]

Hey,

I have a question about this:
The corresponding pull request https://github.com/opentx/opentx/pull/6981 does include a binary blob into a GPLv2 (or GPLv3) licensed software - which results in a potential license break if the source code is not available (on request).
Is this the first binary blob inside OTX?

I had a look into this pull request by the way because I feared that my X-Lite Pro could be affected by this problem too.

Bernhard