Wiki protocols update - please help

More
07 Jul 2016 03:11 - 07 Jul 2016 03:13 #51381 by mwm
It's started to become a regular occurrence on the forum for people to ask for help picking a receiver for their first quad build as they move up from RTF aircraft. Kudos to DeviationTx for helping people grow in the hobby.

Given the long list of protocols supported by Deviation, a request for help isn't unreasonable. But the list can be seriously reduced by the requirement for a stand-alone receiver of some kind. So I've expanded the add a column to the supported protocols wiki page about whether or not you an buy such a receiver. Since "with telemetry" is a common second requirement, I added an answer column about whether or not deviation supports telemetry, whether the protocol does or not. Even with that, a request for help isn't unreasonable, but it helps narrow things a lot!

Telemetry I could check by looking at the sources, so there I'm right. Except for the WK2801, as it uses the devo implementation, but I'm not sure it actually has telemetry. Whether or not an Rx is available I set to No unless I knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that that was the case (Devo, FrSky and DSM). I set the WK2x01 to "No" because they may be hard to find and you should probably be using Devo anyway, so little loss.

If you know of a Protocol for which you can get stand-alone Rx's that isn't Devo, FrSky or DSM that we support, could you please edit the page appropriately?

And while I'm asking, could someone document the MJXq and MT99xxx protocols?

Do not ask me questions via PM. Ask in the forums, where I'll answer if I can.

My remotely piloted vehicle ("drone") is a yacht.
Last edit: 07 Jul 2016 03:13 by mwm. Reason: add wiki link

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
07 Jul 2016 07:58 #51387 by FDR
Replied by FDR on topic Wiki protocols update - please help
Thanks!
I corrected the old Walkeras to "No more", because they all have receivers, but you are probably right , that they could be hard to get...

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
07 Jul 2016 09:18 #51388 by Fernandez
Replied by Fernandez on topic Wiki protocols update - please help
Could than also add some tech specs overview of the protocols? As sometimes is not so clear for outsiders what the protocol brings.
FHSS hopping over 10channels or DSSS 2 chanel etc. Latency or update rate 20ms or 50Hz or 100Hz etc, nr of channels, Telemetry features, RSSI, Volt Rx, Volt ext etc
Link to the development topic in the forum.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
07 Jul 2016 10:09 #51390 by FDR
Replied by FDR on topic Wiki protocols update - please help
Yep, that's why I created the protocol names as links. Their pages do not exist, but it is easier to create them this way.
Don't be shy to write a protocol page if you know enough about it! ;)

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
07 Jul 2016 10:19 #51391 by mwm
Replied by mwm on topic Wiki protocols update - please help
The information about telemetry and number of channels available will vary depending on the reciever or model, so isn't appropriate to add to a list of protocols. And if you look, the best majority of protocols don't do telemetry, so it would be a wasted column most of the time. Max channels might be interesting, but do you list the max the protocol supports (16 for DSMX and FrSkyX) or the max that deviation supports (12), as nobody had asked for more so we haven't tried raising it. Yet.

The tech details I'm not sure about, as the point is to allow you to quickly eliminate protocols, and those you listed all seem to be things that would affect behavior in noisy environments, out range, or other quality issues - and in practice it isn't obvious which is which, as DSM2 can outperform DSMX in some conditions. And again, many of the details aren't relevant to many of the protocols.

If you wanted to start a "supported receivers" wiki page, both would be appropriate for that, as well as notes like "won't bind with more than 6 channels" or similar.

One thing that would be appropriate would be whether or not that protocol confirmed to the latest EU regulations. Users suffering under those might well choose to eliminate non-confirming protocols from consideration. This is not information I really have, though.

Do not ask me questions via PM. Ask in the forums, where I'll answer if I can.

My remotely piloted vehicle ("drone") is a yacht.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
07 Jul 2016 11:12 #51395 by Fernandez
Replied by Fernandez on topic Wiki protocols update - please help
I am not looking at the RX, but more the tech specs capability of the protocols, over the air, what ever RX is used protocol is same.
So f.i.the Frsky x protocol has 16 channel etc. We could indeed mention deviation only use only the first 12. That it is FHSS over x nr of hops etc. Does not need to be in a table, just some summary might be interesting for many.

OFF Topic/
Deviation indeed only sends 12ch, maybe it is time to consider also go up to 16?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
07 Jul 2016 12:39 #51399 by mwm
Replied by mwm on topic Wiki protocols update - please help
This is also true for DSMX. I raised the issue for FrSkyX, and it was scheduled for after 12, telemetry, etc are all working right.

And yes, a technical discussion not in the table would be good. I think it ought to go on a different page, though. Feel free to start out and add a link to it to this page.

Do not ask me questions via PM. Ask in the forums, where I'll answer if I can.

My remotely piloted vehicle ("drone") is a yacht.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.044 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum