Is FrSky only good for cheap foamies?

[rclad]

I've been using FrSky products exclusively since 2016. I successfully competed in IMAC and pattern events using a Frsky X9D+ transmitter and X8R and X8R Pro receivers. I've placed in pattern events and won three regional championships in IMAC. I love OpenTx and all the telemetry options, and everything worked great. Until it didn't. I experienced the Uncommanded Servo Movement (USM) bug twice during a contest in 2019. I didn't know the cause at the time and was fortunate to land my plane safely. Once the USM fault was documented and a firmware fix was available I upgraded my transmitter and all of my receivers - twice - since the first patch also had a bug in it. I went to the FrSky website for the firmware and documentation to make the upgrade, and to Aloft to verify that I wasn't missing any steps. I used the attached document for that. (Original PDF too large to attach.)

Unfortunately for the consumer, the documentation was incomplete. A critical step - to re-bind the receiver after a firmware update - was left out by FrSky, and it was only mentioned by a few people who seemed to know more about the ACCST protocol than FrSky or Aloft. And this key missing piece was buried in various user forums. There was no email alert to consumers; no recall warning that a USM event was still possible until a receiver was re-bound to the transmitter.

So in October 2020, on flight #220, flying on ACCST D16 v2.1.0, my largest and most expensive IMAC plane went down at a fun-fly event due to a USM event. That was a $5K investment and a year and a half of work customizing this plane to compete in the Advanced class in IMAC. All lost in 3 seconds.

Now I'm reluctant to fly anything other than a foamy.

The manuals for the planes I fly all warn the consumer up front that THIS IS NOT A TOY! So why does FrSky and Aloft not treat their products with the care and attention that automobile manufacturers do by sending out recall notices when a defect is found? Why do we have to search third party support forums for key information to keep our models flying safely? Will it take someone getting killed by a 200 mph jet to get the RC hobby industry to take more responsibility for their products?

What is FrSky and Aloft doing to build trust in their products and the use of those products in anything other than a cheap foamy?

 

[getsuyoubi]

The simple answer is that you do not have to register your radio with the manufacturer, the FAA, or the FCC, so there is no sure way to reach you in case there is an issue that needs attention. Because of that, it is the consumer's responsibility to keep on top of things. Even if Aloft alerted their customers via email, that would not work for those that bought there radio used, for example.

 

[Konrad]

None of our toy RF equipment has the reliability to be thought of suitable for life critical systems.

That is to say all our RF equipment will fail with less that a million to one probability.

I will say that many of my gliders are in the $3k price range. I trust my ACCST v2.1.xx with a much higher level of confidence than any of my DSMX radios. In fact I only use DSMX for foamies and this the smaller UMX.

I fly with the idea that I might loose the RF link at anytime. Meaning I don’t fly at the pits or over spectators.

But I Agree FrSky has been horrible with their software implementation, documentation, and basic customer interface! Aloft has been way ahead of FRSky when it comes to customer support. For example they are one the drivers for the “Uni ACCST “ code. This is even more robust than ACCST v2.1.xx!

I too have suffered with a high probability (95% or greater) at least 4 data packet lock ups. And I’ve also had probability just at many RF link issues that I attribute to this USM, but with a confidence level down about 80% as to being the data packet issue.

The truth is if you can’t afford to loose an airframe from time to time this is not the hobby for you.

Again ACCST is the most robust RF protocol I’ve ever used. I’ve been flying RC since the late 70’s even used the Ham bands pre 2.4 ghz. I do have some radios on ACCeSS but I haven't been flying that protocol long enough to make any reliability claims.

P.S.
Prior to the German amateur RF team finding the data packet issue. The few RF issue I had with ACCST I had atributed to Vss issue or sporadic noise on the servo leads. After all the RX didn't go into a failsafe setting nor do we use shielded servo leads.

 

[thenated0g]

Sounds like a specific issue with your gear or setup. I have been flying Frsky only since 2014. I probably have 20 rx's. never had any problems with them or heard of anybody i know having that kind of issue.

 

[HornPlayer]

I can feel a heap of sympathy for loss of such a beautiful model. However I am in the process of upgrading everything to ACCST 2.1.0 or UNI-RX and in the absence of step by step instructions for rebinding I automatically included that step at the end of the process with each receiver as it just seems to be good practice or common sense to do so. I was actually surprised to find that my S6Rs were still bound on powering up after installing ACCST 2.1.0 on them. Even the receivers upgraded to UNI and bound to my TX running pre V2 FW still worked once the TX was upgraded to 2.1.0. - but a rebind was included to finish off the upgrade. Binding is such a simple step and a cautionary re-bind adds to peace of mind.

Flashing FW is rewiring the "brain" of an electronic device and the end results should not be taken for granted. I found that out with at least 2 corrupted model setups when I upgraded my QX7 to ACCST 2.1.0. which affected channels 9 - 16.

 

[rclad]

Thanks for the replies.

The idea I'm suggesting is simple: companies that sell RC products should maintain an email registry for their electronic products. A simple check box would suffice: [] "Please notify me of any updates to this product."

If you can register a toaster, why not a device that controls a 200 mph jet? More to the point, Aloft and many other RC resellers, already maintain an email registry to notify customers when a product will be back in stock. This would be no different but many times more beneficial.

Forums like this are great for sharing tips and new ideas, but they are no substitute for good customer support.

 

[Wayne]

On the Aloft side of the equation, over the years we have discussed the USM bug and placed a STRONG suggestion that people upgrade to V2 for basically anything more than a small foamy. We have had countless emails and forum discussions here and on RC Groups on the subject and our main voice is our newsletter. (We do not SPAM people with our newsletter!)

If that was not enough, we managed to talk the BEST programmer in the hobby to replace the FrSky firmware for ACCST for a number of popular D16 receivers. That is our UNI firmware. It CURES pretty much every bug in the ACCST firmware, and fixes annoying things that really were not bugs. Mike has done an AMAZING job. I think it is very safe to say it is the most tested protocol and refined out there at this point. And then we gave it away for free! (This upset some of our partners, but we felt it was the right thing to do.)

We do not abuse our mail list. It is our primary contact point with our customers. As mentioned we only do a newsletter a couple of times a year. We always have some FrSky info in there, and we talk about things we are excited about. It is not a ton of advertising filling your mailbox with junk 3 times a week like most other shops. We really try to be informative and have a conversation with our customer's via the newsletters.

I can't and will not speak for FrSky. They do their own thing, but they do give us amazing hardware. Might I suggest you upgrade the Taranis to one of the Tandem radios? I'd say you are the exact pilot that the tandem was designed for. With a dual frequency system you are going to be much safer. Then add a redundancy bus and you are able to see some important data from the aircraft that can help to identify issues before they become failures, and should a failure occur, it may isolate the problem to a single channel rather than taking out the entire power system in the plane.

To further matters, do we know your crash was the result of a radio issue? If you are running V2, it has a well proven record to cure the USM. Are you sure something else in the plane didn't cause issues? This is where the owner really needs to dig in and inspect and search for the cause.

In the end, Is FrSky an amazing company? No, I'd say they have major weaknesses, but I'd say they are one of the best we have. They make mistakes, they do not communicate well, etc. But they are very good at fixing things and upgrading firmware is pretty constant. Some other brands have weak RF systems, some brands have known bugs and they will never be fixed. I'd suggest checking FrSky's website once a year for firmware updates. When you install a new firmware, write it down on the product so you will know what version level it is at in the future.

Like all companies, the more complex the product and the newer the product, the more likely it will have issues that need to be addressed. These radio systems are getting VERY complex. VERY!! The wide selection of products that work with our radios today is crazy. In the old days you had a couple of transmitters that all did about the same thing just more channels. Then you had 2 or 3 receivers you could pick from. I just counted 21 different receivers from FrSky in current production, and more coming. YIKES!! Now you start to understand why we don't have all of the answers here at Aloft.

Also, please keep in mind, Aloft is a small company. Yes we have been selling FrSky longer than anyone else in the USA, and yes we do service and repairs, etc. But we are a tiny little business trying to keep our heads above water.

And I hate to say it, but has Spektrum ever contacted their customers about safety concerns or do they just sweep them under the carpet? So yes, I think FrSky has done a lot more than their competition.

 

[rclad]

Thanks, Wayne. I appreciate your response. My last post on this subject back in April, at the end of another thread, was met with crickets.

When I upgraded my firmware in June 2020 it seems there was some reluctance among users in this forum to do the same. I understand for anyone who hadn't experienced any issues why they would want to keep what they had.

I made the upgrade starting with a cheap foamy and worked my way up to the big Extra that crashed. All of them were thoroughly checked on the ground, range checked, then tested in the air. No issues.

Was it the radio? I'm still flying with the same radio, Taranis Plus, and haven't had a single issue since the crash. But I re-bound the receiver in every plane that I have flown since then, once the reason for that was explained.

The crash happened at a fun fly event with the pits full of planes, pilots and radios. There were at least two other planes in the air. That was the busiest frequency environment I had been in since the 2018 Nats. Here's the timeline:

There was a sudden increase in amps from the SBEC to the servos at the time of the uncommanded roll. The spike doesn't correlate with my stick inputs. That indicates a servo movement that my radio had not commanded, or a sudden load on the servos from turbulence or some unknown event. But there was nothing out of the ordinary. No loud bang, crack or pop. Just an instantaneous uncommanded roll.

Here is a brief narrative of the timeline shown on the graph:
16:02:40 Left turn and descent at the far left end of the field, then throttle to max
16:02 :44 Leveled off at about 133 feet AGL
16:02:46 Roll right to knife edge and hold with left rudder
16:02:49 Spike in amps to the servos (anomaly; correlates with uncommanded roll)
16:02:50.7 Left rudder input reduced to correct for slight climb
16:02:51.4 Left aileron input to counter uncommanded roll to the right (plane was inverted in an instant and rolling fast!); left rudder goes to neutral
16:02:52 - 16:02:55 Plane is unresponsive to inputs, possibly due to accelerated stall (snap roll)
16:02:55 Impact

The Uni-Rx sounds great (it wasn't available in 2020), but I'm about due for a new transmitter and moving on to ACCESS. I'm interested in purchasing the Tandem, but not until there is a better system in place for notifying pilots when some new fault (or feature) is discovered in the future. It doesn't have to be a mandatory registration! Just add a check box with the option for the purchaser to be notified when a bug (or new feature) is found.

These are complex systems! That's the whole point of my initial post, and why this hobby will implode if every electronic purchase requires a PhD to understand all of its features and failure points, or hours combing through forums just to find an answer or read about a new firmware update, or if systems become so complex that companies don't fully understand their own products.

And if you can point to any documentation on why a re-bind was necessary I would really appreciate it. Was it left out of the procedure because it's "common sense"? Can anyone here explain why a receiver that is currently bound to a transmitter and working - after a firmware upgrade - needs to be bound again?

 

[rclad]

Here's what was on board my Extra. I removed the electronic canopy locks and replaced them with manual levers about two months prior to the crash. I had overhauled the plane (new motor bearings, fixed a bad solder joint, etc.) one week prior to the crash, so everything was working well.

 

[gnichola]

Certainly, the messaging from FrSky about that issue could/should have been better.

I have signed up on their sight and I do get emails notifying me of updates. I haven't paid enough attention to tell you how often the emails go out, but they do, and if you go to their homepage, the various versions are listed. Ethos Suite, though it doesn't notify you, a quick plug in of your transmitter will tell you what is out of date.

FrSky Top Rated RC Hobby Radio, Receiver and RC Model - Lets you set the limits

FrSky main rc hobby product lines include rc radio, receiver, modules, flight controllers, sensors and various areas of tele-communication, RC model.

www.frsky-rc.com

 

[rclad]

Thank you.

 

[sande005]

rclad - for my own information, do you still have links to the sources that advised a re-bind was necessary, especially if they have reasoning to back up their conclusion? I'm in no position to judge their conclusions, or any desire to "re-litigate" them (especially this long afterwards). But I find it informative to read discussions about "how the magic happens". Thanks in advance!

Ted

 

[rclad]

RC Groups - View Single Post - Important Firmware Update ACCST D16 2.1.x

RC Groups - the most active Radio Control model community: electric and fuel rc airplanes,rc helis,rc boats and rc cars. Features discussion forums, blogs, videos and classifieds.

www.rcgroups.com

 

[rclad]

I posted a link above. Should appear once approved by the moderator. Here's another - but no reason given - posted in this forum one month before my crash:

Urgent firmware update to all X receivers and RF modules (ACCST D16) just released

My bad. Just a guy who loves to fly trying to figure this out. It's all good, we are all trying to get down to the root problem.

forum.alofthobbies.com

 

[gnichola]

One other note. I have a buddy who's into his Spektrum (iX20) and he went to a jet rally a couple weekends ago and was saying how popular "Frisky" was. There was a sales rep there selling them, and a good number of the flyers were using them. The jets are certainly not "cheap foamies"

 

[rclad]

I certainly did a lot of free advertising for FrSky over the five years I competed in IMAC. I really enjoyed my radio and all of it's capabilities, and I especially liked rubbing it in (in a good natured way, of course) with my competitors who were spending ten times as much on expensive Futaba radios.

I still enjoy my radio, but I have doubts about using it on another expensive plane. I'd like to move up to a larger jet, but feel it may not be safe to do so without a notification system in place for newly discovered bugs.

I posted a couple links as requested this morning. They're still waiting for moderator approval.

Greg

 

[Wayne]

Sorry the site will not let to post a link when you have a low post count. This is just to control spam that is constantly trying to attack us here.

It is a full time job for more than a few employees at FrSky to sort through reported problems, test and report back, etc. As a Service Dealer I can see a fair amount of this going on and do watch it closely. It can be overwhelming to try and keep pace with it. This can be simple stuff or complex stuff. Regardless of how much testing a manufacturer does, once released into the world people find new and interesting ways to use the products, sometimes well outside the intended purposes.

Developing the UNI firmware has been eye opening to see the complexity involved. When you think about a receiver firmware, what does it have to do? Receive the commands, make sure they are correct, and pass them onto the output ports. Right? Not at all!! There is much much more going on, things I never even imagined. As a simple example, Mike is currently working with the vario sensors in the glider receivers, here is a quote from last night:

I've added the 2nd order correction for temperatures below 20C and -15C, and also improved the conversion from pressure to altitude when the pressure is between 875mBar and 1200 mBar. This conversion is non-linear, but I've added a correction to take account of this. Below 875mBar (absolute altitude of 1200m) I still use a linear conversion, but I will look to improve that as well.

I have been blown away with the work the crew has accomplished with UNI, and this is just receiver firmware. When you start to think about the entire eco system for FrSky and then the third part items out there for it, you start to get an idea of what all goes into our radios.