Comparing deviationtx to other transmitters......

As I do not own a Taranis or Flysky or Futaba, Jeti, Graupner, Spektrum, Jr or other transmitter, I cannot really compare what benefits each of those TX bring.
So I am just wondering what important features are lacking in deviation while other transmitters do already provide it? Why would you prefer your other radio? Just some kind of brainstorm;


Some ideas;
-I think we are missing a kind of template wizzard or a menu to easily generate the most known configs for glider, v-tail, delta, flaps brakes etc etc. Although deviation is very powerfull it is a bit of hassle not very intuitive for beginner. Also we cannot easily browse true models, as model names can't be changed to intuitive names.
-We are lacking a chinese manufacturer for a dedicated DeviationTX unit, like Frsky manufactures a Taranis base Open Tx. Many people do not like flashing a new Walkera radio...

Deviation trades ease of use for power. So it's more capable than most of the proprietary transmitters. OpenTx (on the taranis) has the power and the desktop config program to recover some of the ease of use. But like the missing manufacturer, that's not a feature of the transmitter, but of the environment.

I don't know what you mean by not having intuitive model names. I get to use the same model names on deviation as I did on OpenTx or my spektrum tx.

Voice alerts are available from most major vendors but not in the deviation release yet.

Yes thanks personally I like deviation a lot, and I believe that control wise a direct SPI interface is technically the best way, it would be interesting to measure the real jitter and latency from stick to output, but it would not surprice me if deviation, provide the most locked in control, better than Taranis approach and possibly best in the market. (depending on protocol selected indeed)

Indeed voice is on the way and telemetry can always be improved, but hey its there....


But anyway I was just wondering what other features, people may like in their other transmitters and why would they prefer or use an other transmitter above deviation?

With regards to model names, I find sharing of models not very intuitive. As model1 etc does not say much there can be hundeds of different model1's made by many people. If we could just have some annotation in the file name would make a lot of sense to me. It is the same with MP3, if anybody would just call it's music for all his cd collection the same file names, music01.mp3, music02.mp3 you never be able to share your music as nobody can find it.

Ah, this an issue with file names, not model names. And it's a community issue, not a software issue. Personally, I always use an intuitive name on the files I share, and it seems like most other people do as well. That means people have to rename them to use them, but that's a feature - I'd much rather explain that they need to rename the file than that they just destroyed their favorite model file when they didn't rename model3.ini or whatever.

FDR wrote: That's because of the limitation of the currently used filesystem: it can't create files, so all the model slots must exist before use...

That's only an issue for models created on the Tx. I think the ability to get a list of files in a directory is also missing, and we'd have to have that as well. If we only had that, we would eliminate the need to rename files copied from the desktop.

There's a model file manager for Windows/Mac/Linux available as well, but it hasn't been bundled into the distribution. I believe it has an import function that handles renaming the file, but haven't looked at it in a while. Which is a good indicator of how important this feature is.

If there would be a way to store some predefined model templates and scroll true them in a readable selectable way, it may help, some users? flaps, taileron, delta etc?

Or what about a secundairy "defaults templates folder" part of each build, you can only open a model from there. But when edit and save it must be in the models folder ?
Maybe if this contents is fixed and defined with the builds, a contents list can be defined, scrolled true?

Anyway it is all bit off topic as it was more a question about what do other tx offer what a deviationtx not provides...

So we could read the description from the model files, and display that instead?

Hey guys, you have a real effective way to im/export, inspect/edit model files that is around in the
transmitter world and you are complaining?

Take a look on how that is done on OpenTX and Taranis. Without Companion, no way.
The files are always binary and a complete eprom content can not be loaded without destroying the transmitter setup.
So you must copy and paste and save, create a new document and save and load....and save and load.

No preinspection before you have it into Companion or on the transmitter.
The export file has to be named or it will be "document1" (OpenTX 2.2.0N369)

BTW the backup file(binary) from the SD card can not be shared and loaded directly into companion,
only transfered to the eprom and.....start from above...

Edit: ..and on the Devo you only have to remember the modelfile number of the setup you want to share.

Ahhhh I learned something guys, but likely many people don't know about it or we not use it;.

To load a template is already there.....

1> Model Setup > File scroll to Template > : following options are there;
- 1 Simple 4 Channel
- 2 4ch dual rates
- 3 6ch airplane
- 4 6ch helicopter
- 5 Heli standard gui


Could we make this list bigger? I never used it and not sure if other do use it...
If we could add more proven model setup's would be very usefull, including flaps, vtail, delta wing, possibly even some common models as Eachine H8, Walkera Super CP etc etc or other drones etc.
Than you can have a flyable starting point, los I think will answer many requests...

elevon and v-tail are already available.

]

Yes and the templates can be selected by scrolling true readable names, perfect!!

Very usefull, as we get many questions about how to mix delta etc.
I think it could be usefull if in the deviation builds, we put some proven collection of defaults templates inside.
So after discussing in the forum someone has a nice working config (which could be of general interest for others), we could add it to the builds?

The problem with templates not being very useful is that we don't really provide any useful ones, not that templates aren't that useful.

The only exception are the heli templates, but they're for CP helis and if you have a modern flight controller are really more a convenience than a necessity. Other than that, what we provide are rather simple examples.

If we provided templates for more complicated - I use one for my CP helis - or less obvious setups - the fixed wing variants than mix surfaces, or a 3-channel yacht - they might get more use.

I have owned a several Spectrum transmitters. DX7(1st gen), DX6 (2nd gen), and few of the RTF transmitters like DX5e. My Devination TX is a Devo 7E with a 4-in-1 RF mod.

A few firmware features I would like to see:

1) Having the Standard GUI available for planes or multi model types. The Standard GUI is much easier to understand, but it is only for CP-Helicopters. I agree that the Advanced GUI is extremely powerful, and I have forced myself to learn it. But I had a very difficult time understanding it at first. I found a tutorial/blog post somewhere that REALLY helped. If I run across that again, I will add a link here.

2) One thing I like about the Airware (Spectrum's name for their firmware) is they shut down the RF signal when editing some, (but not all) menu items. As far as I can tell, Deviation doesn't do this. If Deviation IS shutting down the RF, it does not report it back to the user.

3) I would like to see an option to generate a random number for the Fixed_ID. Or at least a way to set new default value, when setting up new models. I'm worried that if I use Fixed_ID=123456, then I risk conflicting with a fellow modeler. The whole beauty of 2.4GHz is; "no more frequency conflicts". Frankly I'm not 100% sure having the same Fixed_ID as someone else creates a frequency conflict...

4) And there is lots of opportunities to improve the documentation. I know that is not a helpful comment without specifics... But I gotta go mow my lawn before I run out of daylight.

Thanks for your feedback!


For point 3 as I understand) A random id generator is what spectrum call "Modelmatch", basically it is virtually impossible to control the model with the wrong selected model in your TX, as the ID's are always different. Currently whith same bind in all your models you could end up, by controlling the wrong model and crash it at start flying........

It is a different then you describe, as other deviation flyers will not be able to fly your model, as the transmitter ID for each deviation TX is unique. Although it is possible to set the transmitter ID in hardware INI, and so have multiple transmitter control same model, in adition the bnd ID nr must be same too.

And here's my response:

1) I'd like that too. At the very least, extend the current one to properly support the "mode" switch on modern flight controllers so it's sane to use it for quads. I'll be surprised if it ever happens, though, because the developers generally don't use the standard GUI so don't have much incentive to work on it.

2) I'm not convinced this is a good idea. The problem is figuring out which things you should shut down the radio for and which you can't, which would seem to depend on the model type, and deviation doesn't really take use that the way airwave does.

3) The transmitter ID used to bind the radio is generated from the fixed id you use and a value from the rf chip. The chances of you binding to another Tx won't change if you use the same Fixed ID in a model.

4) Yup. And anyone who can read and write English can help. If you're interested, let me know and I'll add a page to the wiki with instructions on how to best submit documentation improvements.

Edit: was that tutorial by any chance this one: rc.mired.org/p/writing-deviationtx-model.html