FGA was doing this with Baseflight a year ago, so it's not really new. It is very cool though:
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthread.php?8246-Warpquad-Build-Log
Snarls 250 Summer Quad - Performance ZMR Build
FGA was doing this with Baseflight a year ago, so it's not really new. It is very cool though:
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthread.php?8246-Warpquad-Build-Log
One thing to note, the PDB you link to is too large to mount on the FC mounting holes, I believe it would even stick out of the frame. You need a PDB that has a 30.5mm hole spacing (if I remember correctly).
I also run a DSMX sattelite to my naze, an OrangeRX. Very neat and light weight, but the binding procedure is poorly documented. I did get it to work though.
I also run a DSMX sattelite to my naze, an OrangeRX. Very neat and light weight, but the binding procedure is poorly documented. I did get it to work though.
SnowRocker88
Amateur pilot and builder
My apologies. I meant new to me.
VERY interesting tho. I had no clue! I thought I was all clever utilizing the CPPM capabilities of my Naze. Little did I know I didn't even need a receiver at all. If this one dies, I'm swapping it out with a satellite!!
The lemon sat technology is beautiful and has some advantages. I don't use this. I use FrSky and have to stash a full sized receiver (although they are pretty small) above or below my Naze. Because I use FrSky receivers I have to program failsafe twice, once on the receiver and once on the Naze. With the lemon sat, you only have to program failsafe once, on the Naze.
This really confuses a lot of people who end up with flyaways. Why didn't my failsafe kick in and drop the copter? Because you didn't set it on the receiver and the receiver kept telling the flight controller to maintain last input.
Since the sat only passes what it is currently receiving when signal is lost between the sat and the transmitter, the Naze32 failsafe kicks in.
The sats really are a great choice as long as you don't need tons of range. If you're only flying LOS they're perfect as their range is considerably longer than I suspect the visibility of the quad will be 
If you're flying FPV...I'd be careful to range check the extents of how far you plan to go before flying as the sats aren't intended as a primary receiver and don't have the best of antennas on them. Don't take that the wrong way - I'm not trying to put the sats down and they are good RX's (I use one on my 230 twitchity and my friends warp) but on a FPV setup a more full featured RX with better antennas and RSSI does have some benefits.
Support for the sat actually predates the Naze and has been in MW for some time. Same with sBus (Futaba) and HoTT (Graupner) which are also digital serial signals like the spektrum sat.
As CD mentioned the binding support is new. I've always just hooked the sat to a full RX and done the binding there which works just fine. I have seen some people (on both Naze and Tau setups) having issues with binding through the FC. Keep in mind - the spektrum protocol isn't officially documeted so this is all reverse engineered, and there are various flavors of the Spektrum protocol (DSM/DSM2/DSMX) which support different "options" (11ms vs 22ms) and that can all effect how binding is done. So it's a complex issue for the FC firmware developers to address. So don't be surprised if you run into some hurdles doing the binding through the FC. Don't be surprised if it "just works" either
Three things to watch out for on the sats based on my experience:
1) Don't trust the wire colors. I believe currently shipping Lemon sat's are now wired correctly but for awhile they had the red and yellow wires swapped. Wiring it backwards won't hurt anything...but it won't work either There are photos in the first post of the warpquad thread on RCGroups that show the correct wiring.
2) Protect the antennas. At least on the lemon sats the antennas are fairly small wire with comparatively large insulation around them. This puts a lot of stress on the antenna wire where it mounts to the board as the antennas flex under G loads. A dab of hot glue at the base to help hold the insulation to the board goes a long way. If the antennas do break replacing them is simple - you just need a piece of wire the correct length. After mine fell off I replaced them with some wire that's a bit thicker and has thinner insulation and they're holding up much better with no effect on range as far as I can tell (I still have more range than I can use flying LOS on a 230)
3) Protect the signal wires. They're VERY fragile. Again a dab of hot glue where they attach to the FC will go a long way towards protecting them. (Assuming you're soldering them on and not using a connector as I know some boards like the Flip Pro have a connector for them.)
Other than those 3 things they work great and are a simple cheap and reliable RX for LOS quads and FPV when flown at the ranges 250 FPV setups are usually flown within.
One of these days someone will take me up on my offer of a custom RX FWIW my homebrewed RX has given me fewer issues than any other RX I've used. My orange openLRS RX died for no apparent reason, my flysky RX's have no failsafe and don't seem to live long in crashes, and my spektrum sat has lost it's signal wires and it's antennas in crashes. My homebrewed RX has been through more crashes than any other RX I have and is still going great...even if it is still FlySky protocol (which is it's biggest weak point - though I've never had any issues with FlySky despite lots of people claiming it glitches and drops out frequently...I suspect that's the cheap "official" rx's fault more than the protocol based on my experience.)
As for failsafe settings. I'm with CD (and FGA and Soma and others) and go with 1 sec before activating and then 1 second at minthrottle followed by disarm. The exception is on my Tau setups where I run 1 second before activating and then 5-10 seconds at minthrottle because the way failsafe on Tau works is a little different and failsafe won't actually disarm - but you can set a disarm timer that will disarm when no change in input is detected. I'd like to run it lower...but then I have to throttle up as soon as I arm or it will immediately disarm. That and the lack of profiles are my 2 biggest gripes about Tau.
If you're flying FPV...I'd be careful to range check the extents of how far you plan to go before flying as the sats aren't intended as a primary receiver and don't have the best of antennas on them. Don't take that the wrong way - I'm not trying to put the sats down and they are good RX's (I use one on my 230 twitchity and my friends warp) but on a FPV setup a more full featured RX with better antennas and RSSI does have some benefits.Support for the sat actually predates the Naze and has been in MW for some time. Same with sBus (Futaba) and HoTT (Graupner) which are also digital serial signals like the spektrum sat.
As CD mentioned the binding support is new. I've always just hooked the sat to a full RX and done the binding there which works just fine. I have seen some people (on both Naze and Tau setups) having issues with binding through the FC. Keep in mind - the spektrum protocol isn't officially documeted so this is all reverse engineered, and there are various flavors of the Spektrum protocol (DSM/DSM2/DSMX) which support different "options" (11ms vs 22ms) and that can all effect how binding is done. So it's a complex issue for the FC firmware developers to address. So don't be surprised if you run into some hurdles doing the binding through the FC. Don't be surprised if it "just works" either
Three things to watch out for on the sats based on my experience:
1) Don't trust the wire colors. I believe currently shipping Lemon sat's are now wired correctly but for awhile they had the red and yellow wires swapped. Wiring it backwards won't hurt anything...but it won't work either
There are photos in the first post of the warpquad thread on RCGroups that show the correct wiring.2) Protect the antennas. At least on the lemon sats the antennas are fairly small wire with comparatively large insulation around them. This puts a lot of stress on the antenna wire where it mounts to the board as the antennas flex under G loads. A dab of hot glue at the base to help hold the insulation to the board goes a long way. If the antennas do break replacing them is simple - you just need a piece of wire the correct length. After mine fell off I replaced them with some wire that's a bit thicker and has thinner insulation and they're holding up much better with no effect on range as far as I can tell (I still have more range than I can use flying LOS on a 230)
3) Protect the signal wires. They're VERY fragile. Again a dab of hot glue where they attach to the FC will go a long way towards protecting them. (Assuming you're soldering them on and not using a connector as I know some boards like the Flip Pro have a connector for them.)
Other than those 3 things they work great and are a simple cheap and reliable RX for LOS quads and FPV when flown at the ranges 250 FPV setups are usually flown within.
One of these days someone will take me up on my offer of a custom RX
FWIW my homebrewed RX has given me fewer issues than any other RX I've used. My orange openLRS RX died for no apparent reason, my flysky RX's have no failsafe and don't seem to live long in crashes, and my spektrum sat has lost it's signal wires and it's antennas in crashes. My homebrewed RX has been through more crashes than any other RX I have and is still going great...even if it is still FlySky protocol (which is it's biggest weak point - though I've never had any issues with FlySky despite lots of people claiming it glitches and drops out frequently...I suspect that's the cheap "official" rx's fault more than the protocol based on my experience.)As for failsafe settings. I'm with CD (and FGA and Soma and others) and go with 1 sec before activating and then 1 second at minthrottle followed by disarm. The exception is on my Tau setups where I run 1 second before activating and then 5-10 seconds at minthrottle because the way failsafe on Tau works is a little different and failsafe won't actually disarm - but you can set a disarm timer that will disarm when no change in input is detected. I'd like to run it lower...but then I have to throttle up as soon as I arm or it will immediately disarm. That and the lack of profiles are my 2 biggest gripes about Tau.
the rx i have is the first lemon 6ch you linked too..
http://rotorgeeks.com/index.php?route=product/product&path=34_61&product_id=69
so, unfortunately im more confused than i was last night. im not using naze for 1.
oh well, ill use what i have and figure it out as i go.
chris.
http://rotorgeeks.com/index.php?route=product/product&path=34_61&product_id=69
so, unfortunately im more confused than i was last night. im not using naze for 1.
oh well, ill use what i have and figure it out as i go.
chris.
Yeah I bought a 5 pack of those lemon 6ch RX's a while back. They don't support PPM or Serial so I haven't used them on any of my multis. I have used them in a couple of planes and had no issues with them. I would suggest a drop of hot glue on the antenna connections though as just like the sats with those style of antenna they can break off fairly easily.
Thanks for all the insight guys. Can't believe I thought the receiver was one of the least of my concerns for this build. Looks like I'll be getting an Orange DSMX/DMS2 module with a Lemon DSM2 satellite. I also wonder though if there is a satellite that comes with this 8ch Lemon like whats seen in the picture. Then if I could use the main and satellite separately I could get two for one. Also thanks finnen for pointing out that the PCB was too large.
Beyond that I think the only issue now is getting all this together with everything in stock. I'm trying to avoid the dreaded HK backorder... These parts are in such high demand they can disappear overnight.
Beyond that I think the only issue now is getting all this together with everything in stock. I'm trying to avoid the dreaded HK backorder... These parts are in such high demand they can disappear overnight.
That was what I did, I ordered the 8ch that comes with the sat so I'd have the full RX to use for binding since that was before binding worked even remotely reliably through the FC I really need to build something to put that RX in one of these days
The 8ch also has UART output so you should be able to use it single wire as well on a bigger build...though I haven't tried it with mine yet.
I really need to build something to put that RX in one of these days The 8ch also has UART output so you should be able to use it single wire as well on a bigger build...though I haven't tried it with mine yet.
With having to do some surgery on my TX to separate the stock module, I think I'm going to use the opportunity to do a few more upgrades. I'm probably going to pick up a white LCD Backlight Kit as well as the USBASP to flash OpenTX. I know OpenTX is way better than the stock firmware, but can anyone enlighten me on some key perks of upgrading my firmware? Also comment if you have any other TX mods I should look into. I really should place my order soon, otherwise I'll keep adding stuff to my cart!
ExperimentalRC
Senior Member
Don't waste your money on those gemfan 6x3 props! They cant handle the RPMs of the these mini motors, and will snap at the hub when in a hover. Spend your money on some hq 6x3 props. They will last so much longer in a crash too.
SnowRocker88
Amateur pilot and builder
I've actually had a lot of luck with the Gymfan HQ 6045's. I have BEAT on them and they've held up in crashes that even the real HQ 6030's that I bought didnt.
I'm running 2300kv motors on 3S. Idk if it's a good setup for you to run 6045's or not but they have Gymfan HQ 6030's too!
I'm running 2300kv motors on 3S. Idk if it's a good setup for you to run 6045's or not but they have Gymfan HQ 6030's too!
Small Gemfans truly are a low end prop, but they're not that bad. They will need to be balanced, but with balanced props I haven't found any issues with them failing at higher RPMs. I've even bent-till-white-line and (for lack of replacement) flew anyways without failure. I don't recommend that, but I haven't seen this catastrophic failure, and I've destroyed MANY sets of Gemfans. (now at the first hint of a branch or tree and they will crack . . . cowards!)
Other brands *WILL* fly better, but if your average prop life is measured in fractions of a battery (Hey! I went 2 and a half packs before having to replace all four in that crash!) expensive props won't live long enough for you to enjoy the nicer feel.
Buy cheap until you've got the chops to make good use out of the nicer props, and if you start doing something new and your break rate goes back up again, switch back to the cheaper props.
that is why i decided to buy some 6x3 gem fans.. ill try HQ after i get the basics down and crashes down to one or two per couple battery's :d
hope you guys are right and 6" will fit on the ZMR china frame..
if not, i have some spare 6" props i guess. i just did a quick check, and it looks like a 6" will fit no problem like you guys said.. being a china frame could of been different than other zmr frames.
chris.
Last edited:
The 5" gemfans are tolerable - they perform sub-standard but take abuse pretty well for the same reasons they perform poorly. I have no problem suggesting 5" gemfans for beginners and keep some on hand for my 230 so I can put them on when I let people who've never flown give it a try (I have a profile setup with low rates and PID's tuned for the 5" props, add in some expo on my TX and just about anyone can fly it.)
The big issue with the 5" is they're so thin and flexible that they just don't perform well. But because they're so thin and flexy they take quite a bit of effort to break in a crash.
But the 6x3's....unless they've changed the molding lately they're absolute rubbish. As already stated brand new out of the bag never flown and blades will fly off in a hover. I tried flying on some two weeks ago and actually broke one before I even got the screw tightened because the root joint is so weak
The 6x45's may be better...I haven't tried them and am not in any hurry to. But the 6x3's are a joke.
The big issue with the 5" is they're so thin and flexible that they just don't perform well. But because they're so thin and flexy they take quite a bit of effort to break in a crash.
But the 6x3's....unless they've changed the molding lately they're absolute rubbish. As already stated brand new out of the bag never flown and blades will fly off in a hover. I tried flying on some two weeks ago and actually broke one before I even got the screw tightened because the root joint is so weak
The 6x45's may be better...I haven't tried them and am not in any hurry to. But the 6x3's are a joke.
ExperimentalRC
Senior Member
Gemfan makes some great props, but the 6x3 from gemfan is specifically bad. Ive had no experience with any of their mini props, but from what I hear the 5x3s work really well, and the 6x4.5s are decent.
A while ago I ordered some 12x4.5 carbon filled gemfans, and they were so unbalanced that I gave up on them all together. People might have other opinions, but from my experience, I probably wont buy props from gemfan any more, unless I'm building something ultra cheap.
A while ago I ordered some 12x4.5 carbon filled gemfans, and they were so unbalanced that I gave up on them all together. People might have other opinions, but from my experience, I probably wont buy props from gemfan any more, unless I'm building something ultra cheap.
A few years ago the Gemfans were about all you could get under 8". Serious prop manufacturers didn't make props that small. These were for toys for kids, not models.
Now that there is money to be made, I expect Gemfan will wise up and cash in with a better prop series in the 'toy' category.
Now that there is money to be made, I expect Gemfan will wise up and cash in with a better prop series in the 'toy' category.
Similar threads
