I'm ready (but have some questions)!

[scott s]

Originally Posted by lperagallo

Since I am a Jeti dealer I do have to remind you that using non FCC approved receivers is illegal. You may also run into a future incompatibility using non US approved receivers with US transmitter firmware/software.

Lou

ofcourse you must say this, but I also must add that the rsat2 should have been put in for fcc approval. I could name at least 1 of the rx's that wont be a hit even with plankers. This is realy a misjudgment by jetti IMO. Heli guy's will basicaly insist .on the rsat2 and that is just plain ole fact.

[pcskyhi]

The other thing that should be considered when marketing for those of us that fly helicopters is space consideration. Space for electronics is tight, especially on the smaller birds and having a fbl unit plus a receiver can be a bit tight. The reason most of the fbl companies incorporated the technology for consumers to utilize satellites/ppm because they know space is an issue on RC helicopters.
Jeti U.S.A. get with the program and get those satellite receivers approved. The Heli guys are watching this and if you want us to feel like your catering to the Heli community and not just planks then hear our pleas for the RSAT 2 for the U.S. market.

[flymustangs]

I've been looking at the numbers and I just don't see a big difference in size between the different options. The RSat2 is listed as 35X23X6mm and the R5L should be 40X20X7mm based on what Esprit has said on the RCG thread. That's basically a 5mm difference in length.

The only FASSTest receiver that I'm aware of is the R7008SB, which is 45X22X13mm. If you didn't want telemetry you could use the smaller R6203SB, which is still 37X22X9mm.

A Spektrum satellite is smaller at 25X23X9mm, but two are typically used on larger, more expensive helis so the size would still be pretty similar and you have to find two different places to put them.

Yes, it looks like the R5L will be a shrink wrap arrangement instead of a fancy plastic box, but many ESC's as well as other items (batteries) are a shrink wrap arrangement.

[Kiba]

Originally Posted by lperagallo

Since I am a Jeti dealer I do have to remind you that using non FCC approved receivers is illegal. You may also run into a future incompatibility using non US approved receivers with US transmitter firmware/software.

Lou

No reminder needed Lou-- I'm well aware of the FCC implications and possible future compatibility issues. Right or wrong, I was just putting the info out there.

Someone on RCG ordered a few R5's from a European supplier and asked me if I wanted to order some RSAT2s and split the express shipping costs with him. I passed, but he's already ordered and received the R5's.

I'd say the risk of future firmware incompatibilities or the FCC catching you using such a low powered device is minimal... but again, just because you can doesn't mean you should!

I'm sticking with R9s in my helis for now and holding out hope the RSAT2 (or a very similar version) will one day be FCC approved.

[F1 Rocket]

The issue with certifying the RSAT2 is purely economic. Each Jeti receiver is also a transmitter. This makes certifying a receiver almost as expensive as certifying the DS-16 and DC-16 transmitters. Due to this expense we had Jeti design a series of receivers for the North American market that we could certify under common FCC ID numbers. This allows us to spread the cost across a larger number of receivers. These receivers are:

ONTJETIR11EPCUS
R6i
R6L
R7
R9
R11

ONTJETIR18US (pending)
R14
R18

ONTJETIR5US (pending)
R4i
R4
R5i
R5L

The RSAT2 is a standalone design and therefore very expensive to certify. We will take a look at doing this once we have the rest complete. For now the R5L will do everything the RSAT2 does as well as function as a standard 5 channel receiver.

Danny
Esprit Model
Jeti USA

[Seasick78]

Danny,

All of the above mentioned receivers support single line PPM, correct?

[mkovalcson]

The RSat2 is actually quite a bit heavier than the R5 EX.

However the R5 EX only has 100mm antenna and is -98 db and not the -106 of the full range receivers. Unless there is a 3rd R5 besides the indoor and the EX.

I wouldn't want anything but full range for my helis.

[mkovalcson]

I understand everything is about capitalization and return on investment. However this will end badly unless it is taken care of.



Danny, The can of worms is open now.

You've just said that you may decide to do this later.

What you have done is the following:

1. Created pent up demand and frustration in a new market you are just entering.

2. Said you will look at this later, which will make people wait and slow sales, or just buy RSAT2's through other channels with the assumption that they will be certified at a later date.

I'm sorry about the expense of certification, but this decision will be a huge marketing mistake in the RC Heli market.


Do not underestimate the anal retentive nature of this market.

I'm looking forward to getting my DS-16, but I have to say this already takes a little of the shine off of the product.

[lperagallo]

Originally Posted by mkovalcson

The RSat2 is actually quite a bit heavier than the R5 EX.

However the R5 EX only has 100mm antenna and is -98 db and not the -106 of the full range receivers. Unless there is a 3rd R5 besides the indoor and the EX.

I wouldn't want anything but full range for my helis.

Guys. Let's try to keep this conversation going, but let's try to stick to the facts. Things are happening fast now that the first batch of receivers have been approved. Jeti Duplex R5 (Not on the web yet) is full range receiver that can be used as Axillary (Satellite) receiver as well.

You can connect it to any receiver that has SAT port (R18/14/11/9/7) or use it as FULL RANGE 5-channel receiver with single cable PPM output.


It will look similar to the attached picture.

Also on the Rsat2 issues, I have copied a response to a post from Flymustangs on dimensions that shows the R5 isn't really much bigger that the Rsat2 and has more functionality.

I've been looking at the numbers and I just don't see a big difference in size between the different options. The RSat2 is listed as 35X23X6mm and the R5L should be 40X20X7mm based on what Esprit has said on the RCG thread. That's basically a 5mm difference in length.

The only FASSTest receiver that I'm aware of is the R7008SB, which is 45X22X13mm. If you didn't want telemetry you could use the smaller R6203SB, which is still 37X22X9mm.

A Spektrum satellite is smaller at 25X23X9mm, but two are typically used on larger, more expensive helis so the size would still be pretty similar and you have to find two different places to put them.

Yes, it looks like the R5L will be a shrink wrap arrangement instead of a fancy plastic box, but many ESC's as well as other items (batteries) are a shrink wrap arrangement.

[F1 Rocket]

Only being open and honest about what we can and cannot do at this time. We are a small company that works very hard to give the best service we can to our customers. I agree, the RSAT2 is a nice package. Maybe we will be able to offer it (or something similar) in the future. In the mean time all of the receivers listed (with the exception of the indoor versions) work very well in helicopters. I know as I have been the one testing them

Danny
Esprit Model
Jeti USA

[scott s]

Sorry lou but that thing is butt ugly LOL. Exposed servo ports when used as ppm, and shrink wrapped to boot. In no way is this a proper "replacement" for the rsat2. How many layers of double sided tape will it take to build it up to a point where it will lay flat where it is to be mounted ? as it sure looks as the servo connection block is a lot fatter than the electronics. Sure it will work, but again not what the heli fbl guy's are gonna want to put on their helis, period LOL! Also I would put up with a few grams of hard case weight with rsat2 to protect the thing in a crash. The rsat2 is just so ideal for fbl heli use!

[mkovalcson]

Originally Posted by F1 Rocket

Only being open and honest about what we can and cannot do at this time. We are a small company that works very hard to give the best service we can to our customers. I agree, the RSAT2 is a nice package. Maybe we will be able to offer it (or something similar) in the future. In the mean time all of the receivers listed (with the exception of the indoor versions) work very well in helicopters. I know as I have been the one testing them

Danny
Esprit Model
Jeti USA

Danny,

I appreciate that and I was just reciprocating with what I considered an honest assessment of the market. I'm still looking forward to getting my DS-16. I'm just a little less thrilled putting something that looks cheap on my TDR. As a result I'll probably use a larger Jeti receiver to get an enclosure around it, but I won't be happy doing it. I hate bulky, but I hate cheap looking more.

I don't know the inner workings of your business or this market. It may be that RC Helis will be a small percentage of the market and as such you made a business decision to cut corners here. In fact I have to be sure this is the case since all this market really needs is the RSAT2 and nothing else. It's not my money on the line and I understand that this is a business model that has to be profitable based on total sales, not just RC Heli sales.

However I am normally NOT an early adopter of ANYTHING and I purchased my DS-16 now even though I didn't particularly need it because it looked exciting and because I wanted to support getting Jeti into the US. I still very much want you to be successful making a profitable business model selling Jeti equipment in the US, but I hope that you will consider getting the RSAT2 certified as soon as it is financially possible

It is frustrating to see what you want and not be able to get it, but I won't belabor this point any more.

[Seasick78]

I will be content with the R9 until a smaller unit hits the market. The investment required for this company to even bring these things to market here in the US is huge and completely out of their control. At some point folks are going to have to realize that they are a business and there needs to be some sort of return on investment in order to stay in operation. There is quite a selection of units available to choose from which have already been certified. I think that is quite impressive when taking into account the effort that has been required to get to this point so far.

It goes without saying that they will continue to improve the products they sell, as well as expand their catalogue in various parts of the world.... One set of "regulations" at a time!

[mkovalcson]

Originally Posted by Seasick78

It goes without saying that they will continue to improve the products they sell, as well as expand their catalogue in various parts of the world.... One set of "regulations" at a time!

True enough!

We should let them focus on getting the DS-16 through certification

[cbdane]

Originally Posted by mkovalcson

Do not underestimate the anal retentive nature of this market.

Please don't try to speak for the entire community. Thank you.

[cbdane]

Originally Posted by mkovalcson

It is frustrating to see what you want and not be able to get it...

Yep, my children had to learn this same lesson.

[mkovalcson]

Originally Posted by cbdane

Yep, my children had to learn this same lesson.

Fair enough.

I'm waiting patiently for my DS-16 for now.

[pcskyhi]

I also have pre-ordered a DS-16 and will initially transfer my two planes over to the DS-16 and give it some time to see if the RSAT2s eventually get tested for utilization in the U.S.A. This will be hard for me because I fly helis a lot more than planes so my DS-16 won't be getting much use at first. If it looks like the RSAT2 will not get approval for us in the U.S. then I will also go with one of the hard case receivers capable of PPM. As others have said as well as myself, We don't want no ugly stuff sticking off the side of our heli.

[mkovalcson]

Originally Posted by pcskyhi

I also have pre-ordered a DS-16 and will initially transfer my two planes over to the DS-16 and give it some time to see if the RSAT2s eventually get tested for utilization in the U.S.A. This will be hard for me because I fly helis a lot more than planes so my DS-16 won't be getting much use at first. If it looks like the RSAT2 will not get approval for us in the U.S. then I will also go with one of the hard case receivers capable of PPM. As others have said as well as myself, We don't want no ugly stuff sticking off the side of our heli.

That sounds like the plan.

I want to make sure that my previous comments are understood. It is one thing to predict how I think others will behave. It is another to endorse that behavior.

Personally I feel very strongly that we should support the people who are spending the money to bring these products over and I want them to succeed and be profitable.

The right way to do this is to give them our business especially in this initial period when they are looking to recover their initial investment and make this a viable business for them to continue.

[brw0513]

Just wondering if it's feasible for the heli community to help out with the cost of FCC testing these RSAT2 Rxs?

Just an idea, but how many people would it take at a $50 donation to get FCC testing done? Maybe those contributors could get a 5-10% discount on purchases of Jeti equipment until they recoup their initial outlay.

Possible?