Make a better remote! FFS. I don’t understand how anyone can pay 150 bucks plus the cost of the receiver and be ok with substandard performance. It’s ludacrous.
3 Likes
@Trampa I have no skin in the game as I’ll continue to use $20 mini remote and check stats on my phone, but I’ll say this: it is definitely cleaner solution to house all the electronics inside enclosure. CF is a commonly used material for enclosure and it should be a part of your design criteria. The way I would do is use an nrf module with external antenna that can be placed outside through a hole in CF enclosures. I think it’s a simple enough solution.
I am sure you have already ordered a lot of the populated PCBs so that’s why you are reluctant to make changes, but I think you could offer a slightly higher priced model with external antenna especially for people who will use it with CF enclosures.
If it doesn’t make business sense to provide that option, that’s fine too. But just make it clear on the product page that there will be connectivity issues when placed in CF or metal enclosures and you are protected from criticism.
4 Likes
Really wouldn’t be funny, it would be very useful. More experts testing things and providing feedback with strong justifications in engineering principles is invaluable. Why would I ignore that even if it made the unity look bad? I would be stoked to see vedder come on here and point out potential directions for safety improvements with the unity, looking at design flaws and listening to people with expertise is critical to developing great products. No one person can do everything correctly regardless of how intelligent.
I don’t know why you think I’m trying to bad mouth your product it’s really frustrating that you’d say this. I’m trying to point out non-optimal design practices for later improvement, from you or anyone else that wants to design a remote and thinks putting metal around the antenna is acceptable in a safety critical wireless link.
PSA don’t use a closed carbon fiber box either, everyone should use every tool at their disposable to promote a strong healthy wireless link, not brush it off as inconsequential from anecdotal testing.
I really believe in all your testing you haven’t had many dropouts, but the one time someone does have one it might make you wonder how it could have been prevented.
24 Likes
Right, and do you have any verifiable data to show that the wand is any worse than any other NRF based transceiver? We dont actually know any measurable reference do we? Not yet at least? I mean so far all we have is the remote doesnt work from 10 meters away if I put my body in front of it or if I am significant distances and I point the top of the remote at the board. We think it performs worse than a PMW remote and it doesnt perform too well encased in RF blocking material. That is good to know but it’s not really usable without knowing do other NRF based remotes do the same thing. @DerelictRobot am I correct in thinking that your remote is based on the same technology? Would it be a fair test to pit the OSRR and wand against each other?
5 Likes
I really wish you would quit it with the misdirection/ deflection.
This is not a conversation about the Unity. I’d actually be interested in that conversation and your testing, but when you bring it up here it’s clearly for the purpose of misdirection.
This doesn’t help the topic at hand at all and only hurts your position.
7 Likes
It’s actually entirely different tech in the current beta hardware. Different radio technology entirely.
1.0 hardware design is closer to Wand in regards to radio tech/MCU for cost reduction. More powerful radio setup though.
1 Like
Damn. Is there another remote on the market I can use to measure it against?
No it would not. Unless the question is: which remote OSSR or WAND has the better signal?
There seems to be a whole lot of talk and not enough data on this thread.
It seems remotes currently have to work even with the receiver inside a metal box and thrown in the ocean, otherwise they are not fit for purpose…
Edit: So far my WAND has been working just fine but I would like a better feeling potentiometer.
6 Likes
Ok but you see what I am trying to do here right?
We need a control, something similar we can measure the wand against. I can measure the wand and NRF dongle in a scientific manner and produce RF propagation plots but currently we have no benchmark
4 Likes
if they use dual receivers on model airplanes why not esk8?
2 Likes
Ugh… You really sound like a dickhead here Frank. Why the fuck would you work with an OPEN SOURCE project and then talk shit about projects coming out behind yours (Ben Vedders actually)? That’s the fun of open source. For example, look at Ubuntu and how many flavors there are. People love options.
But anyways. Looks like you guys made some dumb decisions with this remote.
5 Likes
Guys everyone remove yourselves from your entrenched positions and ask yourself this, if I could have my remote link be more impervious to external interference, would I want that? And what would it cost?
The answer is obviously YES and the cost is very little. That’s all I’m trying to say. Simple tests can demonstrate the truth behind this and the theory supports it.
It’s impossible to say what levels of interference riders will see on the streets, so if there’s a nice easy way to get a big boost in signal integrity why wouldn’t you want that?
13 Likes
That is not relevant to the point I made. What I’m trying to say is that the wand is a retail product, released for retail use, not a beta. And yet there are multiple accounts of disconnects, cutouts, and previously freezes.
The OSRR is a beta product, and from my personal experience has 0 cutout or disconnect issues when placed beside a focbox, within 2 in of phase wires, in a CF enclosure, on a deck with a layer of CF on the top.
It is obvious to anyone that doesn’t have an agenda or doesn’t specifically want this trampo product to succeed that there are issues. Those issues contain disconnects and cutouts which makes them dangerous. That is absolutely unacceptable In a retail released product. I have no doubt had any other manufacturer, such as FlipSky or a Enertion or Maytech, release the product with this many flaws to the retail market the same people that are screaming that “Trampa’s gear is awesome” would be grabbing their pitchforks.
I applaud your desire to gather data and create a quantifiable result, I think your labeling issues as resolved is skewed. Clipping a receiver to the outside of a board is absolutely not a fix. It’s a guarantee that the receiverw will eventually be damaged.
I will repeat what I said earlier. if you can put a mini or nano in a specific position on a specific board and it works, then replace it with another receiver in the same position on the same board and it doesn’t work, the problem is the receiver/remote. That should be obvious to everyone.
2 Likes
I know what you mean Lee.
However I am really disappointed in the direction this thread is going.
@mmaner I would not be so quick on the trigger on the title changing.
1 Like
I didn’t make the title change, someone else made the title change, I simply put it back.
You know what I mean Mike.
The title was fair as it was, your edit was not. At least not right now.
1 Like
I have no clue what you mean, I know what you said. I disagree that it was fair, it is a fact that there are issues with the remote, regardless of how many people want to cover them up. They are documented and present in this thread should you care to read them.
I’d consider a lot of it just sub-optimal design as opposed to an actual issue. The second I get a dropout that would change but still getting my new child built at the moment.
5 Likes
This is all well and good a but again I call for DATA mike.
Please tell me, what data do you have? Currently we know of 4 RF issues in 165. That’s not to say that’s all the reported issues, it’s what we know, ergo, it’s the data we have.
Now I am going to say this and then I am not going to post in this thread anymore until I have data to contribute with. I am not a Trampa Fanboy, I dont think you are going to believe me due to all the digs you have dropped in here about agendas and cover ups but that’s the fact. I have both praised and criticised trampa products, on video. I have argued with Frank here on the forum and when I went to see them I criticised the wand to both Frank and Ted. I couldnt give a damn what Trampa think of me, I will review things how I see and I will comment based on my experiences. I know that you will do the same too and that’s cool but so far you have zero experiance with the device personally and you are giving your opinions based on what you are reading on the internet, which is never a good thing to do.
Please stop questioning my integrity, I wont have you allude to me being in any way biased, I make great efforts to be neutral and you saying things like this is really pissing me off, I call for a civil discussion and I have tried my hardest to do that so far.
I am now leaving this thread alone until I come back with some data.
16 Likes