Ultra budget quad build.

[jhitesma]

So I've been posting about the failsafe frustrations I've been having over on the MW board. And got an interesting reply this morning.

Apparently the default MW GUI never shows values below 1000 for the RC channels. All this time I've thought I had my endpoints set correctly at 1000 for the bottom since that's what I've been seeing in the GUI - but in reality the GUI just rounds anything under 1000 up to 1000 for display.

So I probably do have my endpoints set lower than intended. Looks like I get to spend some time with my TX setup tonight when I get home from work. Not sure how I'll tackle this since in ER9X I never see actual values just percentages...may have to put on my thinking cap for a bit.

 

[Foam Addict]

That's funny, are you using 2.3? My GUI displays down to 0 and up to 3000.

 

[jhitesma]

Yep, stock 2.3 GUI from the official 2.3 distribution. It was PatrikE (the main guy behind the airplane code) who told me the GUI doesn't display below 1,000 and then provided a link to a modified version that will: http://www.multiwii.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=5073#p50792

I'll give his modified version a go over lunch if I get a few minutes.

 

[jhitesma]

Got to sneak in a little flight this evening on my wife's lunch break. Still just with my 2.4ghz setup since I still can't get the LRS reflashed. But man oh man do I love these new motors! Put the nanotech pack on was just grinning ear to ear with the throttle response now!

Before I could cut throttle then punch it full and the quad would still fall and loose 15-20 feet of altitude before the motors were spinning enough to catch it. Now...no problem, don't loose any altitude and it jumps up into the sky instead Scared myself a few times with how quickly it can gain altitude now!

Only flew about half a pack because I noticed my timer on my TX didn't kick in and my battery buzzer has been crashed so many times it's not very loud anymore and I don't really trust myself to hear it. But it was the best half pack I've flown in awhile. Really hope I can get out to the park tomorrow after work to burn through the 3 packs I still have usable. And think I'm going to pick up a few more of these nanotech packs...I like the punch they've got and I like that they're smaller and lighter than my Zippy's. That should tide me over until I can pick up some 3000mah compacts.

Then after my daughter went to bed I fired up the tweaked GUI from PatrikE and got my endpoints dialed in. Turns out I wasn't quite hitting 2k either so I was never getting full full throttle. Was close...but now it's within +-5 of 1000-2000 so I'm feeling a lot happier about that.

And the mailman delivered the RF modules I need to try and make my own PPM output flysky RX's. Probably won't have time to put solder to that until June though since the rest of this week I've got a lot of prep for Yosemite, next week I'll be in Yosemite the later half of the week, and the week after that is my Daughters birthday - so not a lot of freetime to play with solder. Still...you never know....

If you're reading this Cranial I'm still planning on sending you one if I get them working so you can shed some grams from that warpquad with the giant ugly 9x RX stuck on its back

 

[jhitesma]

So what was I saying about not starting the DIY RX project until I get back from Yosemite?

The soldering iron was calling to me tonight:
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthread.php?9344-DIY-PPM-flysky-RX&p=103668#post103668

 

[jhitesma]

Oh yeah...also got my openLRS units reflashed finally last night. Had to use my Linux notebook which is why it took so long. I was still running Ubuntu 12.04 on there and an older version of Chrome that couldn't run the configurator. Updated chrome and then it wouldn't run anymore. So had to dig in on upgrading Ubuntu to a newer version. After two nights of various upgrades I finally got a current copy of Chrome running again last night and the configurator ran no problem and my CP2101 based serial adapter worked just like it always has (and still does for everything except the ng config tool)

Didn't have time to reflash my FC for PPM and swap RX's...but the RX is ready to go with a fresh load of ng now so maybe tonight I'll have time to reflash and swap and see if I feel I can trust the LRS again if it's talking to the FC nicely again.

 

[jhitesma]

Well, came home from lunch and there as a pouch in the mail with my new mega board waiting for me.

So in between bites of my sandwich I loaded my MW sketch configured for PPM onto it...hooked up my freshly reflashed openLRS...and...it all looks good! So signs are pointing towards it NOT being my openLRS going wonky on me.

Since I still had the sketch open I went ahead and flashed it to my quad and swapped the 9x RX out for my openLRS. Hooked it up and...garbage on the RC channels still.

So it definitely looks like something has happened to that arduino board that's causing issues with the PPM signal. Not sure what...maybe that dented and smashed oscillator Except I would expect bigger issues than just not being able to deal with PPM if that was the issue.

Looks like tonight I get to swap brains on the quad....

 

[cranialrectosis]

"with the giant ugly 9x RX stuck on its back"

Am spending the day learning about frsky and cppm and all kinda crap to get that gorilla off my copter.

 

[jhitesma]

"with the giant ugly 9x RX stuck on its back"

Am spending the day learning about frsky and cppm and all kinda crap to get that gorilla off my copter.

Just be careful, once you go PPM you won't want that mess of all those PWM channels on your copters anymore


I did manage to swap out the arduino last night and the quad is looking better than ever. Confirmed that the failsafe works correctly and my RC channels are all doing 1000-2000 now (within +-5 or so which is as close as I can seem to get as one notch either way on my end point adjustments pushes it about 7-8 points.) I'm also feeling pretty confident that the issue was due to that iffy mega board I had retired back in December but started using again after the 3.3v regulator got knocked off it's replacement. Only got to do a quick hover test in the yard so far but it's looking great. Hope this weekend I'll have a bit of time to get up to the park and do some tuning to get the new motors really dialed in.

 

[cranialrectosis]

To be honest, now that I have built the String Theory and the SS Mini-Spider Hex where wiring space is at a premium and lights are mandatory for orientation (at my age), I have plans to rebuild all 5 copters....

I am looking at the smaller 6 channel receivers from HK. I hate dealing with that devil but it is the least expensive option. :black_eyed:

I can build copters and explore building a FCB or I can buy a new transmitter and all new receivers.

 

[jhitesma]

I am looking at the smaller 6 channel receivers from HK. I hate dealing with that devil but it is the least expensive option. :black_eyed:

But then you're limiting yourself and still having to deal with all those extra wires Stripping a 9x 8ch RX down isn't that hard. Two screws gets the case off, and that makes it a LOT smaller. Then to get really small you can break out the soldering iron and remove the pins. The way they mount they're fairly easy to remove if you don't mind destroying the pin header. Just heat them one at a time and pull them off. Then the whole thing will come loose. I did it the hard way and sucked/wicked the solder off to preserve the header...but really there's no need to. Once it's stripped to a bare board it's a lot smaller and the antenna becomes the biggest/heaviest part. Oh yeah, you do have to add one jumper on the back, I can take photos showing it though if you want to try.



My stripped down 9x RX is actually lighter than my openLRS RX. IDE drive cables are fairly light and work well for keeping the wiring clean. I just hated having that many wires and love the telemetry of the openLRS.

I can build copters and explore building a FCB or I can buy a new transmitter and all new receivers.

[/quote]

Since you're using 9x RX's I assume you've got a 9x TX? Modifying the module to be removable isn't that hard. Just have to open the module, heat the two points where the antenna connects to disconnect it. Move the antenna off the radio and mount it on the module (I did that using all the original parts) and then solder it back on. You have to be careful doing the soldering because it is small and kind of easy to accidentally bridge...but not super difficult since you don't have to cut and restrip the coax at all (which is tricky) as long as you're careful.

Then you could pick up a FrSky or Spektrum transmitter module ($36 for an Orange Skektrum from the US warehouse or about $100 for a Spektrum brand available in the US) and have access to a lot of great RX options that support PPM. RTFQ has the DSM sat RX's for $5 or $15 for the 8ch with failsafe and UART (which I think Naze supports).

It's just a bit of work...but would open a lot of possibilities without too much of an outlay of funds.

 

[cranialrectosis]

I just grabbed a D series JR type module and a few of the little receivers. PPM here I come! I know I can't use the lemon but stripped down, this should be pretty small!

I didn't go with the X series as the receivers don't seem to do CPPM but SBus. With Sbus and a Naze 32 I think I will need a converter and at that point, what's the point?

 

[jhitesma]

I bet you'll love it. If I didn't get my openLRS from my wife for Christmas I probably would have gone FrSky by now. I just have an easier time justifying $20 for a LRS RX than a 2.4rx. Though with a TX module under $25 I may have to look into picking one up since there are ways to homebrew FrSky RX modules....

 

[e_lm_70]

I bet you'll love it. If I didn't get my openLRS from my wife for Christmas I probably would have gone FrSky by now. I just have an easier time justifying $20 for a LRS RX than a 2.4rx. Though with a TX module under $25 I may have to look into picking one up since there are ways to homebrew FrSky RX modules....

HomeBrew FrSky ... yes ... you can

Still you have the same moral issue ... not paying to the people that invest on it ... same issue as Naze32 and TimeCop

Ok ok ... it can be a never ending story

In my view as long people do DIY on their own, and don't sell their own DIY .. it is morally correct ... DIY at the end it will be never mainstream ... only 0.1% of people will do DIY vs buying a PNP solution ... unless there is 1:10 price difference .. but here we speak about 1:2 (FrSky) or 1:4 (Naze32) difference.

Anyhow ... in these days ... you can homebrew everything

PS: I just made some bench test only of FrSky homebrew (and based on the 2500 module used, it may not be so trivial) ... homebrew OpenLRS did work the prototype ... but the real thing that is safe to be used in the air .. has some issue .. also ... I have issue with HobbyKing 1W OpenLRS TX ... the inside chip dies too often even with a 3.3v serial .. needed for openLRSng configuration ... :black_eyed:

 

[cranialrectosis]

HomeBrew FrSky ... yes ... you can

Still you have the same moral issue ... not paying to the people that invest on it ... same issue as Naze32 and TimeCop

Ok ok ... it can be a never ending story

In my view as long people do DIY on their own, and don't sell their own DIY .. it is morally correct ... DIY at the end it will be never mainstream ... only 0.1% of people will do DIY vs buying a PNP solution ... unless there is 1:10 price difference .. but here we speak about 1:2 (FrSky) or 1:4 (Naze32) difference.

Anyhow ... in these days ... you can homebrew everything

PS: I just made some bench test only of FrSky homebrew (and based on the 2500 module used, it may not be so trivial) ... homebrew OpenLRS did work the prototype ... but the real thing that is safe to be used in the air .. has some issue .. also ... I have issue with HobbyKing 1W OpenLRS TX ... the inside chip dies too often even with a 3.3v serial .. needed for openLRSng configuration ... :black_eyed:

It isn't a moral question. It is a strategic question.

I do not think you or anyone else who builds their own is a thief.

If I have the ability to create Naze 32 revision 6 and do it better than TC, I will. I can't. Because I can't, I choose to support Timecop who can. By doing so I don't save myself the $3 BUT, TimeCop can use the money to build revision 6. Revision 6 will benefit EVERYONE including me, in the long run.

Going cheap may work short term but often costs more long term. I purchase based on value, not cost and I place value on spending money that will be invested in the future of the hobby that may happen long after I am gone.

Therefore, for me, supporting Timecop is a better long term value because I think I can make an investment in the future of the hobby for everyone including me with my purchase.

 

[e_lm_70]

It isn't a moral question. It is a strategic question.

...

Therefore, for me, supporting Timecop is a better long term value because I think I can make an investment in the future of the hobby for everyone including me with my purchase.

Ok ... no morality here .. let's speak about strategy then.

TimeCop does not even want to support GPS function on this Naze32 (what is the point to have telemetry, expensive Baro and Mag) ... if GPS is not supported from his point of view ?
Baseflight being a port from MultiWii has GPS support ... so is the TimeCop point of view going to bring much innovation ?

Interesting enough ... there is a guy from Germany making innovation extending the Baseflight code, bringing functionalists on pair of DJI Naza ... and this guy is often a target of the joke from TimeCop ... :black_eyed:

About better future ... at the moment latest Naze32, the HW it is not even open source ... so only few people know the details needed for further improve the code ... like the 16Mbit onboard memory, or the telemetry port, etc ... closing up, something that was fully open from MultiWii .. is this something future proof ?

In my book TimeCop is working for cash as much as possible his work ... nothing wrong with this ... but still ... supporting him for get innovation, it sounds a bit strange.

On the other side, the more open approach ... the DIY HW + Open Source code ... so where everything is open ... this if get enough momentum ... it can give way better future results, and as well, it will always keep down the prices.

BTW .. DIY FlySky or FrSky ... I think FrSky does even deserve more support then not TimeCop for their continuous innovation at very low prices.

 

[cranialrectosis]

Ok ... no morality here .. let's speak about strategy then.

TimeCop does not even want to support GPS function on this Naze32 (what is the point to have telemetry, expensive Baro and Mag) ... if GPS is not supported from his point of view ?

I concur but I ask a slightly different question. What is the point of having an expensive baro and mag on a copter you want to fly? I don't want a robot that flies for me. I want a board that lets me crash and flip and fly. I see no need and have no desire to have a barometer, GPS or mag on any of my copters.

I have it on a full blown MW. I just see no value in it.

Interesting enough ... there is a guy from Germany making innovation extending the Baseflight code, bringing functionalists on pair of DJI Naza ... and this guy is often a target of the joke from TimeCop ... :black_eyed:

Timecop is abrasive and shouldn't be targeting people with jokes. Like me, he has much to learn about people. I expect his personality has cost him much. Then again, Einstein and Tesla and Edison were not people oriented either and it cost them too. The question is, how can we benefit from his skillset AND allow him to learn and grow as a person?

I have to also wonder why anyone would want DJI technology on a copter they want to fly. DJI enthusiasts don't seem to want to fly. They want a robot to do the flying for them. DJI products are boring and prohibitively expensive.

DJI NAZA is a flying gilded cage. You will be safe in your cage, but you never get to fly.

About better future ... at the moment latest Naze32, the HW it is not even open source ... so only few people know the details needed for further improve the code ... like the 16Mbit onboard memory, or the telemetry port, etc ... closing up, something that was fully open from MultiWii .. is this something future proof ?

Nothing is future proof. The Naze 32 Acro board is the best for me today. Build a better board and don't waste my time with GPS and a throttle that I can't control (like DJI) and I will buy one. However, Timecop is funded and is on version 5 of his board. You will be hard pressed to compete with his technology and price.

In my book TimeCop is working for cash as much as possible his work ... nothing wrong with this ... but still ... supporting him for get innovation, it sounds a bit strange.

On the other side, the more open approach ... the DIY HW + Open Source code ... so where everything is open ... this if get enough momentum ... it can give way better future results, and as well, it will always keep down the prices.

IMO the best way to keep prices low is simply to keep government out allowing people to vote with their wallets.

The open source geeks who code because they love it will continue to do so. The open source geeks who code because they may someday launch their own branch and be able to make some cash from thier hobby have Timecop as an example (or cautionary tale depending on the unforseeable future). If there is never any way to profit from open source code, people leave the project. Add the opportunity to make some cash and you get a rush of fresh development.

I am employed because I leveraged a hobby into paying work. I used my money to buy three frames from Flitetest, one from WarpQuad and one from Polakium. I support the FT frames here on this forum to the best of my ability and I support WQ and Polakium with build logs, photos and actively try to send business to vendors from whom I have received good service.

Those vendors in turn have capital for innovation and also support the postman, the board and chip and G10 vendors etc..

Money talks...

BTW .. DIY FlySky or FrSky ... I think FrSky does even deserve more support then not TimeCop for their continuous innovation at very low prices.

I hate to spend $25 on a 4 channel Frsky receiver when I could spend $9 on an 8 channel FlySky receiver. I am doing exactly that because now that I know the difference, I feel FrSky is superior and I choose to support FrSky over FlySky even though FrSky costs me more money in the short term.

If I could build a better FrSky receiver, I would build my own. I cannot. Therefore I prefer to support those who can.

That said, if you or jhitesma can build a better, smaller, FrSky receiver similar to the Lemon Sat that I can solder directly to my Naze 32, I will be happy to look at your proposal for funding.

I am not in the hobby to make money. I am into this hobby because I love to fly. I feel the best impact I may personally contribute is to spend my money and time on products that make it easy for people who love to fly to learn to fly. The Naze 32 makes flying fun and easy and helps get people into the hobby and loving the freedom of building their own and flying it.

The time and money we spend is an investment in the future of our hobby. Unless you are able to move the hobby forward with innovative technology, where and how you spend and teaching others is the greatest contribution you are likely to have on our hobby.

Your thread on how to build moves our hobby forward. Likewise this discussion may also move our hobby forward. We are all empowered by education and disposable income. How we use these will determine the future of our hobby.

 

[e_lm_70]

Lot of points ... ok ... possibly we are abusing this thread with a little bit off topic discussion ... even if ... we are still in the context to achieve the cheapest copter ... so DIY allow to be cheap ...

Let me point my different view on few points.

I concur but I ask a slightly different question. What is the point of having an expensive baro and mag on a copter you want to fly? I don't want a robot that flies for me. I want a board that lets me crash and flip and fly. I see no need and have no desire to have a barometer, GPS or mag on any of my copters.

I have it on a full blown MW. I just see no value in it.

So no value on GPS, Baro, etc ... :black_eyed:
Clearly I don't agree.
Yes, some people like to fly acro mode in the copter ... they think they fly, but in fact it is the control board that fly the copter
Personally, if people are into "acro" ... they should go for an helicopter or for a 3d airplane ... acro on a multi-copter taste as a surrogate
Ok ... let even acknowledge that value of Acro ... still ... there are tons of other usage for a multicopter, like aerial video ... I see a future where people instead of making photo with their own mobile phone .. will take video better then this one: http://youtu.be/xz3DTP_iKcU while being in "vacation" ... I made "tons" of videos from my recent "trip" ... having my micro copter in the back pack, and ready to fly in no time !
If you acknowledge the usage of aerial video, then you should see the advantage of RTH, baro, headfree, etc etc
Even send a copter in UAV for make this type of video: http://youtu.be/Qy0kTAEHCQk it does make sense too

Timecop is abrasive and shouldn't be targeting people with jokes. Like me, he has much to learn about people. I expect his personality has cost him much. Then again, Einstein and Tesla and Edison were not people oriented either and it cost them too. The question is, how can we benefit from his skillset AND allow him to learn and grow as a person?

Compare TimeCop with "Einstein and Tesla and Edison" sounds a bit too much .. and as far as I know Einstein was a social person too ... being smart also help to related with other people, even if practice make perfection ... so even dummy people that spend all the time "relating" with other people may outperform in social skills smart people that have very limited social interaction ... anyhow ... social interaction on the net .. is a bit odd anyhow ... I would not judge/compare/relate real social skills with online social "skills" ... there are too many tricks online for fake the "reality" ... some used by corporation too :black_eyed:

Nothing is future proof. The Naze 32 Acro board is the best for me today. Build a better board and don't waste my time with GPS and a throttle that I can't control (like DJI) and I will buy one. However, Timecop is funded and is on version 5 of his board. You will be hard pressed to compete with his technology and price.

I'm not in the RC biznes ... I will never compete with TimeCop
I only sell very few of this tool : http://youtu.be/9qRXtKP00HM ... for get a free beer once in a while ... also because I believe is a nice tool not existing in the market for now.

Still I bring the food on my table doing something that has nothing to do with RC

I hate to spend $25 on a 4 channel Frsky receiver when I could spend $9 on an 8 channel FlySky receiver. I am doing exactly that because now that I know the difference, I feel FrSky is superior and I choose to support FrSky over FlySky even though FrSky costs me more money in the short term.

The 25$ FrSky, is not a 4channel , but it is a full range 8 channel .. also it cost less then 20$, but you have to add shipping (as low as 1$ per RX based on the quantity you buy)
Anyhow ... 20$ when was introduce the FrSky TX/RX it was a very good price ... but after 3 years (or more ... can't recall) now it is looking expensive since other competitors are fighting at the price level ... while FrSky kept a different marketing policy
I still remember years ago that a good FM RX, did cost no less then 40$ ... before buying FrSky RX, I was buying the 15$ Corona FM Synthesizer RX ... I still fly FM on my airplane
Also 20$ FrSky is still cheap compared to a Futaba RX with telemetry (~200$ :black_eyed

Anyhow ... related to TX/RX ... I'm now experimenting on openLRSng DIY (7$ for a TX/RX) ... and soon also on DIY FrSky (same 7$ cost ... but a good TX/RX cost no less then 15$ in DIY ... vs 20$ from FrSky ... )

About being cheap ... I found this new "Walkera QR Y100 Wi-Fi FPV Mini HexaCopter IOS and Android Compatible " ... being cheap ... 149$ shipped ... yes, it is not a acro copter, possibly it is consider a toy from most of the RC people ... but it does offer tons of technology for a little price ... so ... I did order one ... yes it is the opposite of DIY ... but .. doesn't matter as long as it feel a good value for the money and inside the budget associated to the addiction

Tchuss

e_lm_70

 

[FinalGlideAus]

So no value on GPS, Baro, etc ... :black_eyed:
Clearly I don't agree.
Yes, some people like to fly acro mode in the copter ... they think they fly, but in fact it is the control board that fly the copter
Personally, if people are into "acro" ... they should go for an helicopter or for a 3d airplane ... acro on a multi-copter taste as a surrogatee_lm_70

I've kept quiet up until now but since we're now giving our opinions I'll chime in. I fly acro because I enjoy it and because it is a challenge. It also has made me a far better pilot than anyone who stays in horizon mode will ever be. If all these things ever did was hover but only flipped when you pushed a button I would have never gotten into the hobby already because that is REALLY boring. I need goals and challenges to keep my interest. You should try acro my friend, you might improve your flying rather than spending most of the time on the soldering bench. My opinion is that far too many people on this forum (more than 90%) fly in an automated mode like Horizon and rely on Baro etc and can't fly acro. If you're flying a gimbal for proper vdeography then one of those modes is best. If you're flying slow hover proximity then one of those modes is best. For general flying or fast proximity, acro (rate) mode is far superior. I've stopped counting the number of times I see video that is jerky because the thumbs a constantly fighting the FC to hold position. All these features have their place but they have their limitations too.

This translates to fullsized aircraft also. Just ask Air France. With everything being automated, pilots stopped practicing how to fly manually by attitude flying. A couple of years ago when the Air France Airbus jet crashed it was because they were believing the automated systems and flew a perfectly serviceable passenger jet with a couple of hundred people into the ocean all because a pitot tube got iced up. All they needed to do was maintain a 3 degree nose up attitude and hold 60% thrust and they would have been fine. Instead they believe the computer and killed everyone. There will never be a computer smarted than the good old mark1 human brain..

If you've been in the hobby for as long as I have you will have seen many years ago that all helicopters did was hover and planes had less than a 1to1 thrust ratio. You DIDN'T do acro in a heli and acro in planes was rolls and loops. Despite everyone saying helicopter were boring people like Curtis Youngblood fiddled with the heli's and all of a sudden these things were doing crazy things like inverted flying. The fixed wing guys took note and made their aircraft lighter, put more powerful engines on them which allowed a whole new world to open up to them as well. It is innovators that totally disregard the people like yourself that move the hobby to new heights. Warthox is one. He flew a quad and thought, "I wonder if this thing will flip" and look what he is doing now! He in turn has inspired people like Felix who has developed the Ultra esc and KISS esc which allow reverse rotation for inverted flying, regenerative braking for more effective prop deceleration and "One Shot" which Warthox compares to flying a quad without and then with a SimonK esc. In turn Warthox could now do even more crazy stuff which inspired people like Soma to design ultra light weight but very over powered quads which allows even more things. Warthox has even commented that Soma's ideas have changed the way he designs quads now. Finally this has inspired me to see just how powerful and fast you can get an acro quad to go so it's never ending. Multirotors are in their infancy so the only way is forward. You can put down what others are doing but you will only be eating yours words in a few years just like those who said helicopters don't do acro.

If you wish to put in the effort of making your own Naze boards then all the power to you but this is what I see when I look at them. A board that is bulkier, heavier, has wires sticking out and therefore more points of failure and has lower QC than a bought board. All for saving $20. You're not even saving that amount cause you got to buy your own parts so lets sat $10. Seriously!?! In the time you could have worked all this out and written about it on here you could have gone out and worked a little harder and longer and earned ten times that amount. If you go by my above statements about innovating the hobby none of that is happening here. All is happening is a copy and a lower quality one at that. If you wish to take on this as a challenge then you have my respect. I really do admire what Jhitesma does on this thread and watch what with interest what he is able to achieve next. Just remember that most people don't have the skills or interest to do what you are saying, especially when the dollar savings are next to bugger all. I'm sure cranial would much rather be out there practicing his acro flying skills and becoming a better pilot.

 

[cranialrectosis]

"There will never be a computer smarted than the good old mark1 human brain.."
Huh, I have the markII.

RCSchim and FliteTest got me intersted in the hobby. I love their video. I love to see new places from the air shot by home made copters.

It's not that I see no value to gps, baro etc in flight. It's that I don't need them for the flying I am doing today and I can't add anything new to a board that hasn't already been done. I was thinking I would love a way to have a chip that played Flight of the Valkerie or an Ahhhoooogah horn on demand but I have other things I am interested in right now.

The Naze 32 port is designed by an acro lover for acro lovers. You shoot video with it when you want to make someone barf on their keyboard.

I like that Timecop sells the mini boards at Abusemark. It's shrewd and supports the home builder. I am interested in what you are able to do with the ones you ordered and will be following your progress if you post it.

I have to wonder if one of these boards would make a good replacement on the UBQ.

Jhitesma is right about me seeing the clean wiring with PPM. The Turnigy 9X receiver on my Warp Quad is like towing a trailer with my motorcycle. I have the power in the bike but if I'm gonna need the trailer I might as well take the car.

I have decided to follow jhitesma's advice and buy the modules and modify the Turnigy 9X instead of buying the Taranis. I need to better understand the radio tech and this is my window of opportunity and it's the budget approach.


The prop balancer is kinda cool.