Really interesting test, you see some phone doing the same thing you suggested by hand a RF window
Hell, even my GT2b I can manage to make it drop if I cover with my body (hand on the remote and touch the bottom in my body, making a partial flesh faraday cage
fatty
Yes this behavior is expected, but ultimately I just think it’s a poor design trade-off to introduce non-RF transparent material near the antenna when the payout is mainly aesthetics, plenty of fiber reinforced plastics can offer the structural resilience needed in such applications. It’s probable they would have significantly less reported dropouts had they respected this constraint.
Nice! The shape of the case seems very simple to 3d model, if someone creates a model it can potentially solve these connectivity issues.
Was thinking about the wand performance against other nrf remotes and had a thought. Has the output power been reduced?
This is completely a guess but I if I was developing a remote that run of non rechargable batteries and I wanted to make claims about long battery life then you can bet your ass I would be turning the broadcast power down to the bare minimum I could get away with. The ble chip may be capable of 600m but I doubt it’s configured this way for an application where power usage is important.
For remotes with rechargable batteries the power consumption is less of a concern and so probably run at higher power levels.
If this is what’s been done then it might be possible to add a software option to up the power at the cost of some battery life.
If only we could see that source code . . .
Thanks a lot for sharing that video. Shows exactly what some of us are thinking about the metal case design choices and their affect on the signal.
No one noticed the Unity like dual ESC successor in the video yet?
Ugh, dual
Full power. BTW, my AAAs are rechargeable.
It really is tho…
I mean after feeling Andrews $90 thumbwheels doesn’t everything
Kinda. But I still love my GT2b trigger. It’s been my workhorse over the last few years with no issues until OSRR came around.
I is interesting to see how much opinion differs.
From has to work inside a Faraday cage to pretty wide open housing shields signal
As concluded earlier: transciever in closed CF envelope is no good design choice, no matter of radio type.
As long as the transciever isn’t shielded, there are no issues.
You pointed it out: every remote can be shielded by hand and body. However, we have no dropouts riding our boards and that’s what counts in the end.
It can’t! There are plenty of trampa riders who have put the wand through tough testing for months, and not a single one said it looks shitty. lmao
Trampa riders rank trampa products 10/10
For the NRF52840 module reducing transmit power does not drastically improve the consumption. You get some savings but nothing incredible. The best way to save power is to reduce packet size, then the radio is put to sleep any time it isn’t used and so it’s only pulling current relatively infrequently.
15 mA vs. 10 mA for 8 dBm less is pretty terrible, considering it’s like 1/6th the transmit power.
My guess is they burn the most battery through the OLED.
I doesn’t look shitty to me. I like how it looks. But it feels sooooooo cheap and the throw is absolutely horrible in my opinion. I expected so much more from a Trampa product. It’s actually why I don’t have and won’t have a wand in my collection. Love all of Trampas other products though.
It isn’t an opinion. I’m trying to explain some basics of theory here, your remote has what’s known as a link budget, with a transmit power of 8dBm and a receiver sensitivity of -103 dBm. Every detrimental thing happening between the two transceivers subtracts from this budget, and when you run out, the link drops. Some things which can negatively impact this budget:
By placing metal around your antenna, by design you take a chunk out of this link budget that could have otherwise been used to tolerate sub-optimal receiver placement. Not sure why it is hard to admit that this isn’t the best design choice.
Where users put receivers and what is around them is something that’s difficult to control. What disturbances are in the environment is out of your control completely. The design of the case is entirely within your control, and thus should be designed with respect to RF constraints accordingly.
Name of your new sex tape? 
Can we just put some lithium battery like civilised people and not worry about the power consumption? xD
I was just referring to people who think it’s appropriate to 100% CF envelope a transciever. It’s obviously not.
For us real life testing is always priority 1.
So far we have had no issues with any NRF remote tested.
Luckily we run a relative big team, so lots of feedback is always helping us in the process.
We had two models. One was a full plastic remote with no display in front of thumb stick. The Oother model was a full aluminium mote with display. In all our real life tests we have seen no differdnce in reliability. We destroyed some plastic motes though. The guys all ride like crazy…