12FG 12-Channel 2048 2.4GHz Computer System

[Helicrasher]

Hoi,

Looks Futaba has a new radio, designed for the 2.4 GHz band.
Is it available yet and did somebody tested already?

Looks like a good replacement of my 14MZ

Mario

[DebianDog]

It was announced way back in March but I have not seen one yet myself.

[DavidH]

Hoi,

Looks Futaba has a new radio, designed for the 2.4 GHz band.
Is it available yet and did somebody tested already?

Looks like a good replacement of my 14MZ

Mario

It is not available yet. I do know someone that has one and has been using it for a few months. No reported problems with using it.

David

[pinewaves]

It is not available yet. I do know someone that has one and has been using it for a few months. No reported problems with using it.

David
Does the 2.4 version use a FASST module or is it integrated into the radio? (i.e. DX7 or 9303 2.4)

[DavidH]

From what I understand. It is a module type radio.

David

[ozsteel]

Any new news on the 12FG? Any release dates yet? Esprit Model Shop has a news item saying it will be released this month (December 07). I've been hanging out for it for months and am beginning to wonder if its worth the wait! Any news would be welcome.

[xrbcoronalogoflyer]

here's the latest from great planes...ken

http://www.flyinggiants.com/forums/fg239/23766-futaba-new-12fg-2-4-almost-here-3.html

[jschief]

From what I heard my order for the 2.4ghz version of the 12fgh is coming in next week.

I can not wait, even though I will not be able to fly much because the weather has not been nice in Wisconsin.

[Dalaus]

Hi my question is I was going to buy a 12FG 2.4 Radio but is the 12FG 2.4 just a module based radio not a purpose built 2.4 system. Because I already have a14 MZ am i going to end up with another transmitter that would be the same as just puting a fasst module in my 14mz and if so will the latency increase any feedback would be grateful.

[DavidH]

The 12FG is a module type radio. The 12FG with 2.4 will be a module type radio. At least that is my understanding from what I have been told.

David

[Trooper Sam]

If you've already got a 14MZ, just buy the module. If you buy a 12FGH 2.4 system, you'll be getting the exact same module, so you'll be stepping down from the 14MZ to no real advantage.

The TM-14 module isn't supposed to increase latency, but who out there has really been able to test it yet? Just Futaba team pilots, so that question is up in the air.

My instincts tell me that it shouldn't increase latency, and I'm going to trust in that.

[DebianDog]

Going from PCM to 2.4 Ghz is going to be slower unless the conversion takes place in the radio as part of the radio. If the 14 is built with that inside then.. sure. Otherwise I do not see how it not being a "little" slower is possible.

[DavidH]

Going from PCM to 2.4 Ghz is going to be slower unless the conversion takes place in the radio as part of the radio. If the 14 is built with that inside then.. sure. Otherwise I do not see how it not being a "little" slower is possible.


Why is going from PCM to 2.4 ghz going to be slower? And what is going from PCM to 2.4ghz?

David

[DebianDog]

1st off: Futaba or JR... it does not matter. If ANY conversion takes place that is not directly 2.4 then it has to add time. That is just the reality of a machine/computer.

i.e. if the module (when hooked up) is receiving its signals directly from the CCPM converter and doing the conversion then there will be no latency BUT if the module is receiving the inputs from the radio after it does the conversion to PCM. It is doing 2 conversions and will never be as fast as a standalone 2.4

[DavidH]

.e. if the module (when hooked up) is receiving its signals directly from the CCPM converter and doing the conversion then there will be no latency BUT if the module is receiving the inputs from the radio after it does the conversion to PCM. It is doing 2 conversions and will never be as fast as a standalone 2.4


Why would be the radio being doing conversions to PCM to send to the module?
The module is the same as it would be if it was intergrated into the radio. Even the standalone radio as you call it has an RF deck (module) that is on the band it is set to transmit on. An example would be when the DX 6 first came on the market. There were guiet a few that took the 2.4 ghz rf board out of the DX 6 and installed in it a JR 6202 that had been 72 mhz. Nothing was gained, nothing loss, just a frequency change. Makes no difference if the RF device is hard wired or not. Pins and plugs are not affecting the RF resolution.The processor that is in the radio is what determines the resolution and computations.

David

[Dalaus]

When I had a 9C I put a 2.4 fasst module in it and it had to be put in to ppm not pcm so is that a rawer form or quicker process than pcm as it was terrible in terms of latency. Basically is the JR 9 channel 2.4 going to be a better radio in terms of latency and servo Grouping than a module based radio like the 12FG
witch is converted from a 72 mg Radio. I want to get a true 2.4 radio do not want to put a module in the back of my 14MZ as I think it looks like an after thought in terms of the aeiral position.

[DavidH]

When I had a 9C I put a 2.4 fasst module in it and it had to be put in to ppm not pcm so is that a rawer form or quicker process than pcm as it was terrible in terms of latency. Basically is the JR 9 channel 2.4 going to be a better radio in terms of latency and servo Grouping than a module based radio like the 12FG
witch is converted from a 72 mg Radio. I want to get a true 2.4 radio do not want to put a module in the back of my 14MZ as I think it looks like an after thought in terms of the aeiral position.

Dalaus,
Changing the 12FG, 12Z , 14MZ to 2.4 with an RF module change is not the same as making the change on a 9C. With the above radios, the program in the radio undergoes a software update to utilize the 2.4 ghz modules. So the processor in the radio is programmed to utilize the 2.4 module. It is really no different than the 2.4 RF deck( module) being hardwired inside the radio. It is just a convienent way of allowing the modeler to switch between frequency bands if needed. The 12FG,12Z, 14MZ are not giving up any resolution or computation time by changing the module to 2.4 ghz. They will still have 2048 step resolution when using 2.4 ghz with 14 ch. rx.

David

[jschief]

I just got the 12fg 2.4 yesterday. I have not had any time to try it yet except for getting some of my setup in the radio.

By the way the 12fg is a module type. There is alot more stuff to worry about and setup so it will take a little longer to get going than my 9c.

[Dalaus]

Thanks David for the info. jschief can you let us know your thoughts after you use it.
Cheers Dallas

[DebianDog]

Dalaus,
Changing the 12FG, 12Z , 14MZ to 2.4 with an RF module change is not the same as making the change on a 9C. With the above radios, the program in the radio undergoes a software update to utilize the 2.4 ghz modules. So the processor in the radio is programmed to utilize the 2.4 module. It is really no different than the 2.4 RF deck( module) being hardwired inside the radio. It is just a convienent way of allowing the modeler to switch between frequency bands if needed. The 12FG,12Z, 14MZ are not giving up any resolution or computation time by changing the module to 2.4 ghz. They will still have 2048 step resolution when using 2.4 ghz with 14 ch. rx.



Sweet! :thumbup:

[jschief]

I have loaded alot of the settings and have gotten my mini-titan set up and running. I have not had a chance to fly yet waiting for weekend. The servo's seem to react quicker from just sitting on the bench.

It is a little overwhelming with all the functions on the radio, I am just changing one thing at a time. The 9c did not have half the features.

[Zoid555]

I am thinking about the 12FG they say with the 14ch rx it will have 2048 resolution. But with the other Rx's it wont. Does this mean that the 7 and 8 ch receivers will only have 1028 resolution? Or will it be somewhere in between. I just want to know if i would get any speed gain over my 9Z if using the lower priced receivers with the 12 FG.

Thanks

[DavidH]

The 12FG has a better processor than the 9Z. You will definitely gain an advantage over the 9Z with the 12FG. Even using the 7 ch and 8 ch 2.4 ghz receivers, it will still be better than the processing of the 9Z. But for ultimate benefit, the 14ch receiver will be the way to go.

David

[jschief]

I am thinking about the 12FG they say with the 14ch rx it will have 2048 resolution. But with the other Rx's it wont. Does this mean that the 7 and 8 ch receivers will only have 1028 resolution? Or will it be somewhere in between. I just want to know if i would get any speed gain over my 9Z if using the lower priced receivers with the 12 FG.

Thanks

There is a different channel assignment for using recievers under 8 channels. As far as I can tell the transmitter still uses 2048 resolution just a different channel assignment to get fast response from the 14 channel reciever.

Note: the 12fgh does use all 14 channels, it is just that channel 13 and 14 are switched only.

[DavidH]

From Krysta that works at Futaba/Hobbico in the technical and repair department.

I am in fact the Lead over the technicians here at the Futaba Service Center.

As to your questions, the R6014FS is the only receiver that you will get 2048 resolution from with use of the TM-14 module.

The R608FS will not deliver 2048 resolution as even though the TM-14 is sending this data to it, it cannot decode this.

When you get the TM-8 module, the instructions will tell you to use the FASST Multi mode, but again, you will not get 2048 resolution from this.


Sincerely,
Krysta
Product Development & Support Specialist
Futaba Service Center USA