Your review is really comprehensive, this is so much hardwork and the rest of us just feeds on your research. Really useful, can't wait to get my hands on the R9, thank you!
Thanks :) There's some more to do on the R9, I was going to update the firmware and try the latest, but they have told me that over the air updates are coming, so I thought I'd wait until they were here before following up
@@CurryKitten Wow over the air updates would be awesome! Btw, what is the difference between the r9mm and r9 slim+ receivers? I'm kind of new to the hobby, and I'm quite confused for the different use and purpose between them. Which do you use?
I really appreciate your hard work testing and documenting. I can't justify the cost of Crossfire yet for my own use but I have snapped up an R9 starter kit. German TH-camr Torban Dallas is testing the 2.2.3 firmware and various antennae including the True-Mox 868. He's doing long range line of sight RSSI tests at the moment with interesting results.
Thank you for tests. From my experience: 1. Be sure that your antenna module and antenna on receiver are the same frequency (EU or non-EU) 2. Stock antenna on module are weak - replace on super 8 3. Receiver's antenna in horizontal position On flex and 25mW (without telemetry) I got 4.1km without any problem (Tranis X9D + R9 + R9MM non-EU). Have FC+GPS , so lost of signal triggers return to home , theretofore I do not use telemetry in RX.
That's good to know - I'm still waiting for the update for over-the-air updates just so I don't have to mess around with it multiple times to get future updates installed.
Very much appreciate your work on these videos on R9 stuff. I am waiting on the arrival of a R9M 2019/R9mm to complete my LR build. This antenna information will really help me out as I set up for mid range flying. Thank you
What do you have your RSSI audible warnings set to on your Taranis for the R9M? I thought that it was supposed to give audible warnings automatically and that you don't have to set them up using the logical switches and special function. But if not, and you have to do it manually, what are the thresholds you use when flying? 50% low and 45% critical? For mine, I've gone down to 45% and there was no audible alert.
I've left on default, so it's something like 45 & 42 I think. It does give an audible warning should the RSSI fall that low, but only if you are using the telemetry version, of course. It's one of the ways I figured out that there must be a difference in what ch16 RSSI was telling me vs the telemetry signal as I was getting single figure RSSI with no audible warnings (that's because the telemetry signal was still 50+). Did you discover the sensors ok to make sure your RSSI signal is there, and are you using the telemetry version of RSSI and not ch16?
@@CurryKitten So I did more range testing (drone indoors me running around town with a Tx like a mad man) and I found I finally did get the low alarm at ~40 and the critical at ~35. I was just using my Taranis for rssi reference so I believe that's the native telemetry rssi? When I was flying my quad for real though I set up my sbus rssi (R9 mini) through channel 12 (aux 8) and it did seem to align with the rssi on my Taranis, but I didn't push it far because I didn't want to dump my drone.
Hey CK, I think the RSSI values you are seeing in the OSD are not what your receiver is actually getting due to RSSI-scaling in Betaflight and/or your TX mixer weights. When doing these tests, you should also have a camera showing the RSSI value on your transmitter and you'll see a large discrepancy depending on how Betaflight is interpreting the RSSI input. The link between the TX and RX is scaled properly but betaflight most likely isnt and it changes whether you use F.port, S.port, Aux Channel, or using the RSSI ADC connector on the FC. Thats why you see a big difference when using the Aux Channel method compared to the rest in your video. Use S.port or F.port for the most accurate link between FC and RX then fly out and check the RSSI value on the OSD against the TX value and use the [set RSSI_SCALE = xxx] command in the CLI to tune it. This is true for all radio systems, even Crossfire where people might (incorrectly) be getting 99 db ALL the time.
Thank you i just brought the R9M kit, and have not set it up yet. Thank you for an awesome video, i think i will buy the antenna before i use it. I know crossfire is the king of the game, but the R9M was 30quid i would much rather stick with the R9M and have to work the firmware game, than pay over the odds for a system i don't think i would use to its true potential.
I think lots of people have done the same and given it a go... because it's only £30, and the receivers are cheap and it's not too much more for a decent antenna. It's something you'll have to stick with a little bit until the bugs are ironed out, but it's certainly got some potential
Hi Curry K. What about the TBS Crossfire Micro Module? Would you go with the Crossfire module or the R9M? I'm looking at a reliable RC link for long range fixed wing FPV, but willing to pay a little more for something that just works. Any thoughts?
I did a review of the Crossfire micro, you can find it here th-cam.com/video/E8VUdzQp00s/w-d-xo.html The Crossfire is a better system quite simply - it works reliably out of the box, is better documented, and has far better software integration with OpenTX. I looked at it mostly in terms of flying a quad (as it has some really noticeable latency improvements) so whilst it'll work long range, I don't know quite how far the 250mw max on the micro module will give you, and depends what your definition of "long range" is. I think it would take you to at least 10km though
good tips, i bought one of those immortal t receiver antennas immediately when i bought my cheap r9m deal, never had any problems - and never flown with the stock antenna!
The receiver or TX antenna? The RX antenna is actually ok if you get it into the right shape, it's those stock TX antennas for the radio that really suck
The FrSky T style Antenna's make a big difference too. But that along with the Super 8 Radio Antenna & the Nightly Build Firmware seems to be the winner. Having said all that, We did a few flights along side the TBS shod quads and the TBS STILL went further with a stronger RSSI on a low power setting. But I do think the the FrSky stuff is worth having and can only improve. Now there are so many units out there, I can't see FrSky being out done by TBS. On another note, isn't it about time you got some fixed wing stuff? I love your reviews, but I've got bored of the multirotor stuff now. Need an even balance of fixed wing and multi's.
Well, the T antennas finally came back in stock, so I have a few on order along with a Super-8 to test out. I love flying fixed wing, the reasons you don't see so much from me is that it's often a case of needing better weather or more room - and I don't tend to get offered my fixed wing stuff to review. That said, I've cleared my schedule a bit so hoping to do some more. I might put that 2nd r9mm I have in a wing and add iNav to mess around with
My mate Jon has done exactly that. Not flown fixed wing for nearly 2 years but he's loving his Eachine 680 Black Wing & AR 900. Both with Matek F411 & INAV and R9MM in. Over 5k yesterday with over 60% RSSI on Flex Firmware. Just his video that turned him home. This was only his second flight with the AR 900 too.
This is exactly the setup I've just built, currently waiting for a break in the strong winds and rain to get out there and do my final trimming and set up before I put the R9 system to the real test of some long range wing flights so interesting to hear you've had 5k @@blackbirdboy1
Wayne you are an absolute star with all those tests. Are you getting any lost telemetry warnings when you are close at all? I shall wait for your super 8 test before I buy one. I have heard good things about them...
Nope - That's one thing that I haven't notice happening on 868. Having the radio near the RX will wipe out telemetry very easily on 2.4, but hasn't happened to me at all on 868
I have one quad which doesn't lose signal, not even 500m away doing rolls of any kind, and I have another quad which loses signal 50m away while doing rolls... One is fiber glass the other is carbon fiber... Do you think that could be the problem? Both quad are very similar after all.
I think you are going to get the best range out of it on a wing. Stick your antenna way down the wing vertically polarized and get a half decent TX antenna and you are good. I'll have a play with flex though and let you know what I think
I do have a r9mm with a 900 mhz FCC antenna on my quad...I flashed the receiver to EU LBT and i am using it with the EU m lite Module with the EU 868mhz super 8 antenna. Do you think it will be a much better connection if i switch the antenna on the quad to a 868mhz EU T - antenna? TY so much for your great content & all your work with that video!!
What I have in this video was the first version of the antenna which is 900 on the basis it will work pretty well on both... and it does. If you are pushing the extremes of you limits then that's when a tuned 868 antenna will help more, but it's not a dramatic change, and if you are flying quads you may not notice the difference.
On ch16 there's a signal that can be picked up directly by the flight controller and show on your OSD. The telemetry RSSI signal is sent from the RX to your radio, so if you want to show it on your OSD then you need to send it back to the RX as a regular RC channel which can then be interpreted as RSSI by the flight controller. A sort of round trip situation, so the setup is a bit more complicated
Hi Wayne, I'm surprized and sorry to hear you had such negative feedback to your original review, I anticipated similar signal strength from the R9 to the crossfire but other than that I have no misconceptions and can't argue that crossfire is a better system for various reasons. I've bought the R9 as a stop gap, I'm currently part way through installing it on a wing and 3 possibly 4 quads at less than half the price it would have cost for crossfire but will at some point be moving to the more superior TBS system. So far I'm finding it to be the usual Frsky fiddly firmware updates etc and a bit of messing around getting it working but no different to the Frsky 2.4 system. I anticipated the stock antenna for the module would not be great so ordered the super 8 antenna from the off and I'm due to test the Frsky 'T' antenna and TBS 'T' antenna on the receivers shortly so I'll let you know how I get on. It's not just about signal strength but from your tests it would seem that the Frsky system is more sensitive to antenna placement (I seem to remember Tom Smith running his crossfire antenna in 'V' configuration without too much detriment to signal strength) and as expected the stock antenna are not a patch on the TBS antenna. Great initial review and follow up.
It's more about people feeling a bit precious about what they've bought and then only seeing the good. I like to cast a critical eye over everything because nothing's perfect. I just saw the T antennas come back in stock, so I've gone and ordered a couple along with a Super-8 to test as well. I wasn't expecting such a dramatic improvement when using the crossfire antenna, so I'm hoping for great things with the Super-8/T antenna combo
Very informative video, thank you. I have a Turnigy 9X with opentx so I am doubting between getting the R9 module for that or getting the new X-Lite controller with its R9 counterpart. And secondly, would you say the Frsky T-antenna is close to the TBS Crossfire T-antenna tested here? Thank you very much for your contribution to our hobby!
Are you talking about the new Xlite Pro... as that seems to need a bit more development before I would consider it at the moment... the fact right now that it only speaks ACCESS protocol and the original R9lite module won't work for it... should be fixable, but not yet. Yes on the antenna front though, in the range I was testing, which I would call "typical quad" flying, so out between 300-500m but down low there was no discernible difference between the TBS and FrSky antenna.
@@CurryKitten Good to know those antennas perform similarly. I was actually referring to the normal X-Lite. Is it worth switching to it now that I want to make the move to the R9 system, or is the R9 module in my upgraded 9X radio a better performer? Maybe it is impossible for you to answer...
There actually a difference in the modules. The R9M-Lite can only go up to 100mw, but the full-sized R9M that will fit in the 9X will go all the way up to 1W. Depends what you are flying and how far away you want to go.
No then curry I was thinking of getting a Long range geprc baby crock 4 but I I am using a qx7 & fat shark Teleporter V3/v4 gogglesI think so what’s would I be better off getting a R9M lies are a crossfire I’m not very clued up with these long-range accessories or should I hold out four the dji goggles & HD version Drone. ❓
Well, as per usual, it all depends. But I would always recommend a Crossfire over R9, it's just so better supported and TBS actually tell people what they are up to with it. You could go DJI, but you could do that at any point in the future, it doesn't stop you running Crossfire (or anything else)
Excellent, excellent video👍 I do hope you end up picking up the Frsky antennas and give them a go. My X-Lite w/R9M is on backorder but it will be nice to know from now what is the ideal antennas to purchase and have them ready for install once my radio arrives.
Hey thanks :) Yes, I made a follow up video flying with the T-Antennas on my RX and the Super-8 on the TX. The Super-8 works well and is cheap, so definitely recommended
Hi, need some help as finding my feet with all of this. Looking to purchase r9m module with receivers included in the pack and also a qx7 transmitter. If i bind using the r9m included recevier would i also need to use the module or would it also work directly with the qx7 also?
Hi Sean. The QX7 is a 2.4Ghz radio, so in order to use the R9 receivers (which works at 915/868Mhz) you'll always need to use the module in the back of the QX7
RF side of CF and R9 are using very similar LORA modules, this shows the importance of tuned antennae and correct mounting. The wideband R9 whip antenna and monopole wire on the R9MM are only fit for the bin as they aren't tuned to either 868 or 915Mhz giving poor gain at both frequencies. Tuned Super 8 and T antennae are the way to go. I am still not convinced spliting the radiating elements of the antenna with RF conductive carbon is going to give the best results.
I do - although depends a bit on what you want to do with it. But there's not much in the hobby you can get for that cheap, and all you need for the receivers to be at least as good as the 2.4Ghz equivalents and you've got potentially cheaper receivers !
If you want low level flights at a distance then TBS recommend their Diamond antenna over the stock one you were using. Try the stock Frsky antennas on a CF TX.
Haha, I don't think there's any doubt that the stock FrSky TX antennas are terrible. I hear great things about the diamond, but the Super-8 is next to test.
So a good antenna matched by the correct orientation works better than a poor antenna with the poor orientation? Who knew ? :D _Excellent testing regime and demonstration CK_
Yes - of course we didn't know the stock antenna was crap until we tried a decent one. Many people have remarked about the fact that "of course you need to swap the antennas" I think it's less obvious, I mean the stock 2.4Ghz antenna on my Taranis worked great and it was all about the receiver sensitivity, which is how the L9R went so far
When I watched the original tests I didn't at first think about testing the antennas. I should have done so and this test was really a D'oh! moment for me.
Now the R9m module comes with the super 8 antenna and the r9mm receiver comes with the T antenna. I use this set up. The module can ramp up to 1W. But that setting uses a lot of battery power and gets slightly hot.
Because FrSky left R9 out to stagnate, the best thing I can suggest you consider is flash both the module and the receivers with ExpressLRS - which is being actively developed at a very fast rate
@@CurryKitten but I think the problem for me is I only have 2 -qx7 transmitters I would have to do the transistor mod, for crossfire too. Because edge tx one bit mod did not work. . I'm just worried about messing up my qx7 doing such a small soldering job right now until I get better at it. LoL
Interestingly the very early QX7's (often the ones sent for review) don't need the resistor mod (I have one like that) but yes, you would need it run run the higher baud rates. I was going to suggest onebit mode, why didn't it work for you?
@@CurryKitten I do use Access QX7. It fail-safed on my $400 quad using TBS crossfire with edge tx one bit setting. I will have to try again later on a cheep quad in the future. Just another project to look forward too, 😃 Keep up the great world wide video's.
I have the combo with the r9m and 3 r9 mm receivers and 3 t-antennas. I also have a eu lbt 868mhz super 8 antenna because i live in europe. but i think that the t-antennas are 900mhz. I have flashed my r9m and r9 mm receivers to lbt eu 868mhz . Can i use the 900mhz t-antenna for it or do i have to buy the 868mhz t-antennas?
I've yet to see any real evidence there are specific antennas for 868mhz. They appear to have tuned the Super-8 for 900mhz and then it works in both the 868 and 915mhz ranges. I'd be happy to change my mind if someone shows me an actual difference, but I haven't seen any as yet
@@CurryKitten they now have the super8 for 900 and one for 868mhz. I am going to try the 868mhz t-antenna and i let you know if it improved the signal😉
Cool if that's the case - where are you finding it though? Whenever I see a seller in the UK showing it as an 868Mhz antenna, the tech spec for it then goes on to say the frequency range is 860-920 and the peak gain is at 900
Well, something like the Super-8 is cheap and works pretty well. As far as the RX antenna goes, the stock ones aren't bad, but the T's are a little easier to mount
Nice testing Wayne, the results were what I would have expected really, slight RSSI on telemetry vs channel 16, but by all means nothing out of the ordinary, I would say that channel 16 is perfectly acceptable to use, all be it a bit more jumpy. I wonder if that's more a sample rate or refresh time than anything else. So the conclusion is, rather predictably, FRSky dipoles are complete crap lol, but once you pull the heatshrink off and see how they soldered them up they are poorly built. TBS antennas and R9 module the clear winner. Also for your next test a Super 8 and True-Mox is the next logical testing step.
Your reseults seems to correspond with my own findings. The stock TX antenna is truly awful. I went with a Moxon antenna from TrueRC and it made a huge difference. Thanks for doing the tests. Looking forward to your test of the Super 8 antenna. Might want one of those as the Moxon is directional (but very good) Btw: I have one quad for more longer range which has the antenna vertical to reduce the risk of antenna nulls. For "close combat" I have the antennas horizontal as the antennas is better protected.
This question came up before - I haven't got an AT9, but there's a PPM out for the trainer port, so this could be used to run the module. Obviously, it doesn't have a module bay and so you'd need something extra a hold it in place nicely
Hello Curry yes the problems with the R9 units are the Antenna's not the modules the Transmitter stock Antenna is way of its centerfrequentie and also the reciever does it have (bad antenna) I personally messured these antennas and they have a SWR of 1.4 which should be at least 1.2 because of the bad tuning you get these dips. I have modded the stock antennas by tuning them and I have now a SWR of 1.1 or less the Antenna's of Crossfire are better tuned so they work a lot better. When you have mismatch between the send/reciever unit and they antennas a lot of the power gets feedback in the R9 modules which gives a bad rssi. I can confirm that by change to a better tuned antenna the Frsky modules are exactly as powerful as the Crossfire system. So buy the Crossfire antennas and take a tuned dipool for flying around and not the special ones like Moxon because they have more gain and be very derectional and let be sure a drone at 1km from you could be everywhere so a directional antenna can cause more problems then better reception. Love your channel and keep up your way of bringing info. People needs to listen good so they know what you say. Greetings from the Netherlands with kind regards Dinant de Kruijff aka DroneMadnessRC
Interesting stuff - really handy when someone brings me some solid info like this about the SWR. So do the TX and RX antennas just have the problem of being the wrong length, or does the tune involve something else ?
how do i change the rf power on the xlite all i have is 100mw and if i stand close when launching its to strong do i have to change both to eu the r9m lite and the rec
If you are on FCC I believe you only get the choice of 100mw. However, OpenTX 2.2.3 is now out, so this along with the flex firmware should give you some power options (I think - I've not tried it myself as yet)
When you say the Immortal T, I presume you mean the FrSky equivalent? They were out for quite a while, I've since picked myself up a couple ready to test though
@@CurryKitten yes frsky equivalent..put with ipex4 connector that will fit the mini and the mm...I can't find, the tbs pins are wrong size. Send a link if you have one. Love you Content.
I've been testing this system quite a lot and i got that super 8 antenna and its much better than the stock! I'm curious how it holds up to the TBS tx antenna! Ive found the best results on the Flex firmwares, i noticed they seem to be working only on the flex firmware and that may just become the only firmware for this system. I didn't use the beta open tx but updated the receiver and module for the xlite and the only thing is not having the option for 100mw with telemetry which is what the beta open tx allows. Thanks for this info!!!
So if you keep your radio on 2.2.2 and update to flex, presumably it just stays on 25mw with telelmetry (for the x-lite at least ?) I've got a Super-8 on order now, so I'll be having a compare to that stock TBS antenna - hopefully it'll come out at least as good and hopefull better !
CurryKitten that’s correct! In fact I was wondering if it was really 25mw because I was getting such good readings. I’ll be looking out for that super 8 test comparison 😎👍🏽
It might come up, but what you can compare if it you look at my original R9 video and the my Crossfire review as I'm flying the same field (albeit a different one than in the latest video)
Your last review must have cursed me - reverse reviewers curse? Been flying using FCC and having rock solid rssi, 99% almost always. Watched your last review and suddenly I have failsafes left right & centre, No firmware changes, no hardware chnages, no nothing. Anyway just ordered an Frsky Super 8 Antenna from horusrc. Fingers crossed or it's TBS next (may need to save my pennies).
Haha, it's the first time I've managed to pass on bad vibes through the power of the Internet :) I've got a Super-8 coming now, so I can do a direct comparison to the basic TBS one - hopefully it'll do well
@@CurryKitten Thinking about it the only thing I have changed is going from Inav 1.9.1 to 2.0.0. However it was suggested I upgrade to 2.0.0 as it has "improved" reliability for sbus and R9 in particular. ☺
I 've watched the reviews you have done for the TBS and Frsky an I 've made my decision to buy the TBS, it wins buy a massive long shot hands down. Great reviews as always mate. Are you going to the U.K. Drone Show??
Not really - there's too many factors. How high are you, what's the mounting of the antennas like, how far away is your receiver from other electronics, what are the atmospheric conditions of the day. So yeah - it's 10km+ but it's not quite as straightforward as a number
thats amazing, seems to me its just as good as crossfire just slightly more hassle to setup and you need your own antennas. HOWEVER THIS COSTS 25 DOLLARS FOR TX AND RX SO YEAH!
Yep - It's all good if you don't mind some more hassle and don't need that latency improvement that CRSF gives you. If the receivers stay that price it's cheaper than 2.4
@@CurryKitten jup, I can definently not afford crossfire or a taranis, so I'm modding my flysky to work with r9m right now. The latency is unfortunate but can't be helped. For most mini quad stuff I'll use my 2.4 flysky anyways, and believe it or not that actually has even better latency than crossfire.
Nice bit of testing there. I saw the google earth field and thought 'I know that place!' I've been flying fields all around there looking for good spots. Hopefully meet you out some day. Shame its gonna be houses soon :(
I've just about bumped into everyone who's mentioned they've flown there - but if you know of some good place nearby, then let me know - I'm clearly going to need some new spots soon :(
I didn't do a firmware update on this one, it was just a case of messing with the way I read the RSSI and trying different antennas. Since the time I filmed this, there has been new firmware that says it fixes some issues with the RSSI measurement (although it's a bit vague about what it fixes exactly) so it's probably worth updating to the latest.
I am looking around the market for a new controller and I've found the QX7S with the r9 module included for the same price as without it.. guess it means that I can't justify to go TBS Crossfire when looking at the costs.. see if I'll regret that or not. :S
If you are getting free stuff, it would be silly to turn it down. Let's hope for some decent updates soon. I've been holding off doing more videos on the R9 as I'm waiting for the over the air updates FrSky mentioned to me a few months ago
@@CurryKitten Yes, exactly my thought. And oh, nice to hear about the over the air update. In my opinion the strongest selling point for TBS.. Just hope that the wait isn't too long. Thank you for the heads up! :)
Sure, it's the stock antenna that comes with the TBS Crossfire here www.team-blacksheep.com/products/prod:xf_stocktx_antv2 although if you watch the follow up video, I also test this against the Super-* antenna from FrSky which comes out about the same, and you don't need an SMA->RP-SMA adapter to use it
You'd get another improvement if you mounted the antenna vertical, you want the feed line running next to the ground element of the antenna for the best radiation pattern with the active element inline with the feed line. Also putting it with the center feed point on carbon is a terrible idea it is massively detuning the antenna at best and at worst it will fry the rx if it's sending telemetry because of the carbon reflecting the power back into the antenna. With a decent set up on 25mw 900mhz you can literally go miles with 1w you could get 40-50 miles. It's all about good antenna's and good mounting of the antenna's. I'd suggest putting the antenna in a tube coming vertical off the front of the quad to try and get it away from the vtx antenna a little, you'd probably easily double the range with that alone. Great testing though I love any antenna testing video's.
Yes - there's a balance here between optimum setup for range vs what is "the norm" as far as mini quads go. As it stands, the practice of mounting horizontally polarised under a leg works on a mini quad as it's simple, you get decent range out of it, and it stands up to a lot of abuse. Sure, if I wanted to max the range or was flying fixed wing, then I'd be mounting vertically way away from other components. I've not heard of the idea of carbon reflecting the power back into the antenna. Obviously, we're not making contact between any antenna elements and the carbon, and the active elements are away from the arm - so I'm confused by the ability to reflect power here?
@@CurryKitten I should've said that the carbon will alter the antenna's swr causing more power to be radiated back down the co-ax, sorry I can see how that could be confusing an extreme way to think of it is putting a metal tube around the antenna, that will fry anything transmitting signal pretty quick. With the amount of power these are dealing with I wouldn't expect being up against a little carbon to alter it enough to fry anything that's why I said worst case like say you mounted length wise on the arm but, it's certainty not good for the rf link or the components transmitting telemetry. The way I like to mount my antenna's is with an rc car antenna tube the thicker the better just heat shrink it to the stand off and a drop of ca to keep it from sliding, much better than zip ties less flex more protection for the wire inside and and if you crack the tube they pull right off and are about $1 a piece at the LHS if those still exist in most parts of the world haha.
It will - but the circumstances have to be right. Not having crappy antennas is a useful one to fix, and an RSSI signal that's accurate is another handy one. That said, even with not great equipment, the signal holds up better in dodgy areas on 2.4
@@CurryKitten There have been 2 incidents where I lost signal at close range and it was from a 4 in 1 module for a T16. I still use the older D8 RX like the D8 2 plus and the smaller version " ripped the sticker off of it years ago so can't see its name" I had a line of sight disorientation issue with that smaller one back in 2016 it had to have got at least a half mile from me, it was tiny in the sky. I stayed calm and was able to turn it around. I have never flown that far away since. But I am wanting to try long range FPV, and now I'm not so sure.
Well long range isn't something you just "do" at once. It should be a carefully considered and slow progress - where you take into account where you are going to go, what's the recovery like if you went down, and would it be safe. Then you start to see what your equipment is capable of and if it goes well you try and push through that limit little by little. Sometimes you'll reach the limits of what is possible in your config and then you might have to reconfigure, or rearrange or replace - and then you go back several steps and start building up again. It can be a long process, but I always enjoyed finding the limitations and seeing what things I could do to mitigate the limits. The most important thing to remember is that nothing when dealing with longer range is simply plug and play and nothing is ever transformed to a long-range machine with just a single change
Like to see all these antennas on an antenna analyzer. Great testing, bummer its not just working great to begin with. :) Kinda hard to come by, these analyzers aren't common even among Hams as there's not alot of folks that play in those freqs. though there may be someone on here that has one and has the adapters that could take a look at the vswr on these antennas. Lot of times these antennas are off frequency or poorly constructed and that may have a negative impact also.
Seems that frsky antenna quality is pretty cheap and nasty. Best use the tbs antennas like I do. But I use the tbs tuned antenna. With the immortal t on the quad.
Just remember the super 8 is a Moxon antenna so it will directional and you will failsafe very close behind yourself with a TRuRC 915 MOX or a Super 8 or the TBS Diamond
Is it though? Where are you getting your info. My info suggested this was omni, and seems to be backed up by the radiation patterns you'll find by doing a search on it... example: cdna1.zoeysite.com/Adzpo594RQGDpLcjBynL1z/cache=expiry:31536000/resize=fit:max,width:1200//compress/s3.amazonaws.com/zcom-media/sites/a0i0L00000QyvG7QAJ/media/catalog/product/s/u/super8_rad_pat_.jpg
I am 90% sure yes.. personal experiments show that pointing the front edge toward your flying area it performs as a moxon should. I.E. it has good coverage in front of oneself but will drop off as soon as you fly to far behind the antenna. The only failsafes ive had on the system were from flying behind the antenna. Also when contscting TrueRc i was told that the super 8 was a directional antenna with a moxon-like shape modeled after the success of the TBS Diamond... whatever the truth may be I can tell you 100% that thr antenna is directional
I like to test things as they come to start with - I've got the Super-8 on order now, I was waiting for the FrSky T antennas to come in as well so I could try a nicer RX antenna
The hardware is practically the same, but that doesn't mean they are similar! Tbs has put a lot of time into software and testing stuff, so naturally it will work better but you have to pay for it, it all works out in the end.
Yep - there's a Tru-Mox antenna that's tuned to 868. It's something I might like if I want to really push the range (probably more on a plane) but I've got a Super-8 on it's way now, so be useful to see if that holds up well
@@CurryKitten The super 8 is a folded dipole design, it should help if you fly near the ground (like the diamond antenna does). But the ultimate range should be equal to the crossfire dipole.
@@CurryKitten literally just turn 90deg to the side and problem solved... another way to put it, fly out to your right not directly in front. you don't HAVE to point right at the direction you're flying, just turn to the side and the whip antenna is doing exactly the same thing as you showed with the 90deg bend antenna.
those antenna's arent good for horizontal orientation, if you turn that 90deg antenna it's flat against the radio and isn't that creating a small noise floor since it's hard up against metal etc. you're better of with the whip and just fly out to your side
Yes, could fly it that way - I get what you mean though. Although in this case, those stock antennas are just awful and in every single case using the TBS or Super-8 massively improved the signal
Thank you for the great video! Anyone tried swapping the antenna on R9 MM receiver? I've got an FrSky 900Mhz T receiver antenna with IPEX4 connector but while trying to remove the stock one from the receiver looks like have broken the connector on the receiver pcb. And this thing is so tiny that it cannot be soldered back safely without microscope. So maybe it is not a good idea trying to mess up with the receiver. Need a new receiver now.
I've got some of the FrSky ipex4 antennas on their way, so I'll try and swap one as well. ipex in general can be a bit of a knightmare, I've broken regular ones before just by removing the antenna
Ah yes - I forgot about those. I tried to do a little message of the day along with all the "don't forget to subscribe stuff" but I quickly ran out of ideas there :D Keep on with your 5-a-day though
It's my attempt to lighten the idea of a "call to action" that thing where I encourage people to subscribe and whatnot at the beginning of a video. I've already run out of nice little one-liners to use
I myself have been testing the R9 Mini this week on a new build A low profile.First test i was fail safe within feet of myself Going back to the old school of thought which seems to be forgotten with the smaller and smaller builds i checked over the quad to find The R9 was way too close to the vtx ( which can get very hot ) I believe this was causing the R9 to shut down. ( I knew the Module Radio and R9 Mini Firmware was all sound as i have it in a wing and another quad and works flawless. Moving the R9 to behind the camera at the front end of the quad seemed to stop the fail safe and give me back the good distance.
![[UNCUT]"ทนายตั้ม" แฉยับ! ความลับสวรรค์ ใครคือ "บิ๊กเทวดา" ของบอสพอล l คนดังนั่งเคลียร์ l 15 ต.ค. 67](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ru9fpSaUwdA/mqdefault.jpg)
Your review is really comprehensive, this is so much hardwork and the rest of us just feeds on your research. Really useful, can't wait to get my hands on the R9, thank you!
Thanks :) There's some more to do on the R9, I was going to update the firmware and try the latest, but they have told me that over the air updates are coming, so I thought I'd wait until they were here before following up
@@CurryKitten Wow over the air updates would be awesome! Btw, what is the difference between the r9mm and r9 slim+ receivers? I'm kind of new to the hobby, and I'm quite confused for the different use and purpose between them. Which do you use?
I really appreciate your hard work testing and documenting. I can't justify the cost of Crossfire yet for my own use but I have snapped up an R9 starter kit. German TH-camr Torban Dallas is testing the 2.2.3 firmware and various antennae including the True-Mox 868. He's doing long range line of sight RSSI tests at the moment with interesting results.
Thank you for tests.
From my experience:
1. Be sure that your antenna module and antenna on receiver are the same frequency (EU or non-EU)
2. Stock antenna on module are weak - replace on super 8
3. Receiver's antenna in horizontal position
On flex and 25mW (without telemetry) I got 4.1km without any problem (Tranis X9D + R9 + R9MM non-EU). Have FC+GPS , so lost of signal triggers return to home , theretofore I do not use telemetry in RX.
My Rssi was all over....put it aside for a few months. Latest update made it rock solid.
That's good to know - I'm still waiting for the update for over-the-air updates just so I don't have to mess around with it multiple times to get future updates installed.
@@CurryKitten Yeah I was used to Spektrum...PNP. Frsky pain to need updates although its pretty easy to do.
Is the ch16 RSSI better now ? I'm afraid because i dont use telemetry on my x-lite
Really appreciate the time and detail you put into this.
Very much appreciate your work on these videos on R9 stuff. I am waiting on the arrival of a R9M 2019/R9mm to complete my LR build. This antenna information will really help me out as I set up for mid range flying. Thank you
What do you have your RSSI audible warnings set to on your Taranis for the R9M? I thought that it was supposed to give audible warnings automatically and that you don't have to set them up using the logical switches and special function. But if not, and you have to do it manually, what are the thresholds you use when flying? 50% low and 45% critical? For mine, I've gone down to 45% and there was no audible alert.
I've left on default, so it's something like 45 & 42 I think. It does give an audible warning should the RSSI fall that low, but only if you are using the telemetry version, of course. It's one of the ways I figured out that there must be a difference in what ch16 RSSI was telling me vs the telemetry signal as I was getting single figure RSSI with no audible warnings (that's because the telemetry signal was still 50+). Did you discover the sensors ok to make sure your RSSI signal is there, and are you using the telemetry version of RSSI and not ch16?
@@CurryKitten So I did more range testing (drone indoors me running around town with a Tx like a mad man) and I found I finally did get the low alarm at ~40 and the critical at ~35. I was just using my Taranis for rssi reference so I believe that's the native telemetry rssi? When I was flying my quad for real though I set up my sbus rssi (R9 mini) through channel 12 (aux 8) and it did seem to align with the rssi on my Taranis, but I didn't push it far because I didn't want to dump my drone.
Hey CK, I think the RSSI values you are seeing in the OSD are not what your receiver is actually getting due to RSSI-scaling in Betaflight and/or your TX mixer weights. When doing these tests, you should also have a camera showing the RSSI value on your transmitter and you'll see a large discrepancy depending on how Betaflight is interpreting the RSSI input. The link between the TX and RX is scaled properly but betaflight most likely isnt and it changes whether you use F.port, S.port, Aux Channel, or using the RSSI ADC connector on the FC. Thats why you see a big difference when using the Aux Channel method compared to the rest in your video.
Use S.port or F.port for the most accurate link between FC and RX then fly out and check the RSSI value on the OSD against the TX value and use the [set RSSI_SCALE = xxx] command in the CLI to tune it. This is true for all radio systems, even Crossfire where people might (incorrectly) be getting 99 db ALL the time.
Thank you i just brought the R9M kit, and have not set it up yet. Thank you for an awesome video, i think i will buy the antenna before i use it. I know crossfire is the king of the game, but the R9M was 30quid i would much rather stick with the R9M and have to work the firmware game, than pay over the odds for a system i don't think i would use to its true potential.
I think lots of people have done the same and given it a go... because it's only £30, and the receivers are cheap and it's not too much more for a decent antenna. It's something you'll have to stick with a little bit until the bugs are ironed out, but it's certainly got some potential
Pretty interesting results, man! Looking forward to see what the new antennas can give you. 😊
Thanks MC, hopefully even better !
Hi Curry K. What about the TBS Crossfire Micro Module? Would you go with the Crossfire module or the R9M? I'm looking at a reliable RC link for long range fixed wing FPV, but willing to pay a little more for something that just works. Any thoughts?
I did a review of the Crossfire micro, you can find it here th-cam.com/video/E8VUdzQp00s/w-d-xo.html The Crossfire is a better system quite simply - it works reliably out of the box, is better documented, and has far better software integration with OpenTX. I looked at it mostly in terms of flying a quad (as it has some really noticeable latency improvements) so whilst it'll work long range, I don't know quite how far the 250mw max on the micro module will give you, and depends what your definition of "long range" is. I think it would take you to at least 10km though
Thanks a lot. I´m a newbie with exactly your same problem and you´re helping me A LOT. I´ll post my test results following your recomendations.
Cool - let me know how you get on
good tips, i bought one of those immortal t receiver antennas immediately when i bought my cheap r9m deal, never had any problems - and never flown with the stock antenna!
The receiver or TX antenna? The RX antenna is actually ok if you get it into the right shape, it's those stock TX antennas for the radio that really suck
@@CurryKitten the TX antenna, i mis-typed!
@@jtrent90 Ah, no worries - makes perfect sense. Clever of you to be a bit forward thinking there
I appreciate your opinion sir and welcome it. Thank you.
The FrSky T style Antenna's make a big difference too. But that along with the Super 8 Radio Antenna & the Nightly Build Firmware seems to be the winner. Having said all that, We did a few flights along side the TBS shod quads and the TBS STILL went further with a stronger RSSI on a low power setting. But I do think the the FrSky stuff is worth having and can only improve. Now there are so many units out there, I can't see FrSky being out done by TBS.
On another note, isn't it about time you got some fixed wing stuff? I love your reviews, but I've got bored of the multirotor stuff now. Need an even balance of fixed wing and multi's.
Well, the T antennas finally came back in stock, so I have a few on order along with a Super-8 to test out. I love flying fixed wing, the reasons you don't see so much from me is that it's often a case of needing better weather or more room - and I don't tend to get offered my fixed wing stuff to review. That said, I've cleared my schedule a bit so hoping to do some more. I might put that 2nd r9mm I have in a wing and add iNav to mess around with
My mate Jon has done exactly that. Not flown fixed wing for nearly 2 years but he's loving his Eachine 680 Black Wing & AR 900. Both with Matek F411 & INAV and R9MM in. Over 5k yesterday with over 60% RSSI on Flex Firmware. Just his video that turned him home. This was only his second flight with the AR 900 too.
This is exactly the setup I've just built, currently waiting for a break in the strong winds and rain to get out there and do my final trimming and set up before I put the R9 system to the real test of some long range wing flights so interesting to hear you've had 5k @@blackbirdboy1
Good Review and thanks for sharing your experiences.
Thanks muchly :)
Wayne you are an absolute star with all those tests. Are you getting any lost telemetry warnings when you are close at all? I shall wait for your super 8 test before I buy one. I have heard good things about them...
Nope - That's one thing that I haven't notice happening on 868. Having the radio near the RX will wipe out telemetry very easily on 2.4, but hasn't happened to me at all on 868
I have one quad which doesn't lose signal, not even 500m away doing rolls of any kind, and I have another quad which loses signal 50m away while doing rolls... One is fiber glass the other is carbon fiber... Do you think that could be the problem? Both quad are very similar after all.
Excellent I'm waiting to to see what the best outcome is for set up and updates.
The plan is for use in a wing with iNav on F4 v2 board.
I think you are going to get the best range out of it on a wing. Stick your antenna way down the wing vertically polarized and get a half decent TX antenna and you are good. I'll have a play with flex though and let you know what I think
@@CurryKitten The Super 8 seems to be the way to good.
But will wait for findings.
I do have a r9mm with a 900 mhz FCC antenna on my quad...I flashed the receiver to EU LBT and i am using it with the EU m lite Module with the EU 868mhz super 8 antenna. Do you think it will be a much better connection if i switch the antenna on the quad to a 868mhz EU T - antenna?
TY so much for your great content & all your work with that video!!
What I have in this video was the first version of the antenna which is 900 on the basis it will work pretty well on both... and it does. If you are pushing the extremes of you limits then that's when a tuned 868 antenna will help more, but it's not a dramatic change, and if you are flying quads you may not notice the difference.
Great video, I learned a lot and can now make a much more informed purchase decision, thank you!
Glad it was helpful!
Forgive the newbee question, but what is the setup/connections differnce between channel 16 and telemetry?
On ch16 there's a signal that can be picked up directly by the flight controller and show on your OSD. The telemetry RSSI signal is sent from the RX to your radio, so if you want to show it on your OSD then you need to send it back to the RX as a regular RC channel which can then be interpreted as RSSI by the flight controller. A sort of round trip situation, so the setup is a bit more complicated
Nice in depht well founded technical look at this system. I highly appreciated what you did here and learned something today so to speak with JB :-)
Cheers - glad it was useful
Hi Wayne, I'm surprized and sorry to hear you had such negative feedback to your original review, I anticipated similar signal strength from the R9 to the crossfire but other than that I have no misconceptions and can't argue that crossfire is a better system for various reasons. I've bought the R9 as a stop gap, I'm currently part way through installing it on a wing and 3 possibly 4 quads at less than half the price it would have cost for crossfire but will at some point be moving to the more superior TBS system. So far I'm finding it to be the usual Frsky fiddly firmware updates etc and a bit of messing around getting it working but no different to the Frsky 2.4 system. I anticipated the stock antenna for the module would not be great so ordered the super 8 antenna from the off and I'm due to test the Frsky 'T' antenna and TBS 'T' antenna on the receivers shortly so I'll let you know how I get on. It's not just about signal strength but from your tests it would seem that the Frsky system is more sensitive to antenna placement (I seem to remember Tom Smith running his crossfire antenna in 'V' configuration without too much detriment to signal strength) and as expected the stock antenna are not a patch on the TBS antenna. Great initial review and follow up.
It's more about people feeling a bit precious about what they've bought and then only seeing the good. I like to cast a critical eye over everything because nothing's perfect. I just saw the T antennas come back in stock, so I've gone and ordered a couple along with a Super-8 to test as well. I wasn't expecting such a dramatic improvement when using the crossfire antenna, so I'm hoping for great things with the Super-8/T antenna combo
I straight up got the tbs Dimond.. with my r9m and mini rx.. works great haven’t had one failsafe
Good choice !
Very informative video, thank you. I have a Turnigy 9X with opentx so I am doubting between getting the R9 module for that or getting the new X-Lite controller with its R9 counterpart.
And secondly, would you say the Frsky T-antenna is close to the TBS Crossfire T-antenna tested here?
Thank you very much for your contribution to our hobby!
Are you talking about the new Xlite Pro... as that seems to need a bit more development before I would consider it at the moment... the fact right now that it only speaks ACCESS protocol and the original R9lite module won't work for it... should be fixable, but not yet. Yes on the antenna front though, in the range I was testing, which I would call "typical quad" flying, so out between 300-500m but down low there was no discernible difference between the TBS and FrSky antenna.
@@CurryKitten Good to know those antennas perform similarly. I was actually referring to the normal X-Lite. Is it worth switching to it now that I want to make the move to the R9 system, or is the R9 module in my upgraded 9X radio a better performer? Maybe it is impossible for you to answer...
There actually a difference in the modules. The R9M-Lite can only go up to 100mw, but the full-sized R9M that will fit in the 9X will go all the way up to 1W. Depends what you are flying and how far away you want to go.
love your common sense approach
Thanks :)
No then curry I was thinking of getting a Long range geprc baby crock 4 but I I am using a qx7 & fat shark Teleporter V3/v4 gogglesI think so what’s would I be better off getting a R9M lies are a crossfire I’m not very clued up with these long-range accessories or should I hold out four the dji goggles & HD version Drone. ❓
Well, as per usual, it all depends. But I would always recommend a Crossfire over R9, it's just so better supported and TBS actually tell people what they are up to with it. You could go DJI, but you could do that at any point in the future, it doesn't stop you running Crossfire (or anything else)
Excellent, excellent video👍 I do hope you end up picking up the Frsky antennas and give them a go. My X-Lite w/R9M is on backorder but it will be nice to know from now what is the ideal antennas to purchase and have them ready for install once my radio arrives.
Hey thanks :) Yes, I made a follow up video flying with the T-Antennas on my RX and the Super-8 on the TX. The Super-8 works well and is cheap, so definitely recommended
@@CurryKitten Great! Will look for that now!
Good work curryK, great info... for the cost, will get an antenna on order... 👍
Good call, happily, they are fairly cheap
Thanks for the video. I found it very useful. I'm new to frsky, so been using the channel 16 rssi :P
Thanks 0 Hopefully it'll get better, but for now I would suggest using the telemetry RSSI
Hi, need some help as finding my feet with all of this. Looking to purchase r9m module with receivers included in the pack and also a qx7 transmitter. If i bind using the r9m included recevier would i also need to use the module or would it also work directly with the qx7 also?
Hi Sean. The QX7 is a 2.4Ghz radio, so in order to use the R9 receivers (which works at 915/868Mhz) you'll always need to use the module in the back of the QX7
@@CurryKitten your reply is much appreciated. Thanks for taking the time. Soz for being a noob. Keep up the good work!
No worries - it's never obvious especially when you are starting out
RF side of CF and R9 are using very similar LORA modules, this shows the importance of tuned antennae and correct mounting. The wideband R9 whip antenna and monopole wire on the R9MM are only fit for the bin as they aren't tuned to either 868 or 915Mhz giving poor gain at both frequencies. Tuned Super 8 and T antennae are the way to go. I am still not convinced spliting the radiating elements of the antenna with RF conductive carbon is going to give the best results.
Why don't TX/RX use circular polarized antennas like VTX do?
Hey there, do you think the r9m for the x9d is still great for the money at 40$us for the r9m+r9mm? i almost cant resist.
I do - although depends a bit on what you want to do with it. But there's not much in the hobby you can get for that cheap, and all you need for the receivers to be at least as good as the 2.4Ghz equivalents and you've got potentially cheaper receivers !
Thanks for all the content. Is there a difference from the r9mm ota to normal or is it the same but just said ota on packaging
They look identical, but are different. The OTA (I think) has more on-board memory to support OTA updates. The original just can't do OTA
If you want low level flights at a distance then TBS recommend their Diamond antenna over the stock one you were using. Try the stock Frsky antennas on a CF TX.
Haha, I don't think there's any doubt that the stock FrSky TX antennas are terrible. I hear great things about the diamond, but the Super-8 is next to test.
Now you’ll have to test the super 8! Great video, thanks.
I've just got one on order, now that that the ipex4 T antennas are also in
So a good antenna matched by the correct orientation works better than a poor antenna with the poor orientation?
Who knew ?
:D
_Excellent testing regime and demonstration CK_
Yes - of course we didn't know the stock antenna was crap until we tried a decent one. Many people have remarked about the fact that "of course you need to swap the antennas" I think it's less obvious, I mean the stock 2.4Ghz antenna on my Taranis worked great and it was all about the receiver sensitivity, which is how the L9R went so far
When I watched the original tests I didn't at first think about testing the antennas. I should have done so and this test was really a D'oh! moment for me.
Now the R9m module comes with the super 8 antenna and the r9mm receiver comes with the T antenna. I use this set up. The module can ramp up to 1W. But that setting uses a lot of battery power and gets slightly hot.
Because FrSky left R9 out to stagnate, the best thing I can suggest you consider is flash both the module and the receivers with ExpressLRS - which is being actively developed at a very fast rate
@@CurryKitten but I think the problem for me is I only have 2 -qx7 transmitters I would have to do the transistor mod, for crossfire too. Because edge tx one bit mod did not work. . I'm just worried about messing up my qx7 doing such a small soldering job right now until I get better at it. LoL
Interestingly the very early QX7's (often the ones sent for review) don't need the resistor mod (I have one like that) but yes, you would need it run run the higher baud rates. I was going to suggest onebit mode, why didn't it work for you?
@@CurryKitten I do use Access QX7. It fail-safed on my $400 quad using TBS crossfire with edge tx one bit setting. I will have to try again later on a cheep quad in the future. Just another project to look forward too, 😃 Keep up the great world wide video's.
I have the combo with the r9m and 3 r9 mm receivers and 3 t-antennas. I also have a eu lbt 868mhz super 8 antenna because i live in europe. but i think that the t-antennas are 900mhz. I have flashed my r9m and r9 mm receivers to lbt eu 868mhz . Can i use the 900mhz t-antenna for it or do i have to buy the 868mhz t-antennas?
I've yet to see any real evidence there are specific antennas for 868mhz. They appear to have tuned the Super-8 for 900mhz and then it works in both the 868 and 915mhz ranges. I'd be happy to change my mind if someone shows me an actual difference, but I haven't seen any as yet
@@CurryKitten they now have the super8 for 900 and one for 868mhz. I am going to try the 868mhz t-antenna and i let you know if it improved the signal😉
Cool if that's the case - where are you finding it though? Whenever I see a seller in the UK showing it as an 868Mhz antenna, the tech spec for it then goes on to say the frequency range is 860-920 and the peak gain is at 900
Thank you for this video!👍🏽
I’m getting the R9 full size soon. Just gotta figure out which setup I need with regards to antennas
Well, something like the Super-8 is cheap and works pretty well. As far as the RX antenna goes, the stock ones aren't bad, but the T's are a little easier to mount
Nice testing Wayne, the results were what I would have expected really, slight RSSI on telemetry vs channel 16, but by all means nothing out of the ordinary, I would say that channel 16 is perfectly acceptable to use, all be it a bit more jumpy. I wonder if that's more a sample rate or refresh time than anything else.
So the conclusion is, rather predictably, FRSky dipoles are complete crap lol, but once you pull the heatshrink off and see how they soldered them up they are poorly built. TBS antennas and R9 module the clear winner.
Also for your next test a Super 8 and True-Mox is the next logical testing step.
Your reseults seems to correspond with my own findings. The stock TX antenna is truly awful. I went with a Moxon antenna from TrueRC and it made a huge difference. Thanks for doing the tests. Looking forward to your test of the Super 8 antenna. Might want one of those as the Moxon is directional (but very good)
Btw: I have one quad for more longer range which has the antenna vertical to reduce the risk of antenna nulls. For "close combat" I have the antennas horizontal as the antennas is better protected.
hello, let me ask, can these modules be integrated into Radiolink's TX AT9 controller?
This question came up before - I haven't got an AT9, but there's a PPM out for the trainer port, so this could be used to run the module. Obviously, it doesn't have a module bay and so you'd need something extra a hold it in place nicely
Do you know the name of the device? Can you tell me?@@CurryKitten
The device doesn't exist, it would be a DIY job to fix the module to the back of your radio, perhaps a 3d printed design.
Hello Curry yes the problems with the R9 units are the Antenna's not the modules the Transmitter stock Antenna is way of its centerfrequentie and also the reciever does it have (bad antenna) I personally messured these antennas and they have a SWR of 1.4 which should be at least 1.2 because of the bad tuning you get these dips. I have modded the stock antennas by tuning them and I have now a SWR of 1.1 or less the Antenna's of Crossfire are better tuned so they work a lot better. When you have mismatch between the send/reciever unit and they antennas a lot of the power gets feedback in the R9 modules which gives a bad rssi. I can confirm that by change to a better tuned antenna the Frsky modules are exactly as powerful as the Crossfire system. So buy the Crossfire antennas and take a tuned dipool for flying around and not the special ones like Moxon because they have more gain and be very derectional and let be sure a drone at 1km from you could be everywhere so a directional antenna can cause more problems then better reception.
Love your channel and keep up your way of bringing info. People needs to listen good so they know what you say.
Greetings from the Netherlands with kind regards Dinant de Kruijff aka DroneMadnessRC
Interesting stuff - really handy when someone brings me some solid info like this about the SWR. So do the TX and RX antennas just have the problem of being the wrong length, or does the tune involve something else ?
how do i change the rf power on the xlite all i have is 100mw and if i stand close when launching its to strong do i have to change both to eu the r9m lite and the rec
If you are on FCC I believe you only get the choice of 100mw. However, OpenTX 2.2.3 is now out, so this along with the flex firmware should give you some power options (I think - I've not tried it myself as yet)
Do you know why the immortal t for the mini receiver is still not for sale? You can buy it in an R9 package deal though..
When you say the Immortal T, I presume you mean the FrSky equivalent? They were out for quite a while, I've since picked myself up a couple ready to test though
@@CurryKitten yes frsky equivalent..put with ipex4 connector that will fit the mini and the mm...I can't find, the tbs pins are wrong size. Send a link if you have one. Love you Content.
Found my order - got it from T9 Hobbies, here's a link - looks like they still have stock www.t9hobbysport.com/frsky-900mhz-ipex4-t-antenna
Cheers for these video's they are very informative.
Cool - glad they are useful :)
I've been testing this system quite a lot and i got that super 8 antenna and its much better than the stock! I'm curious how it holds up to the TBS tx antenna! Ive found the best results on the Flex firmwares, i noticed they seem to be working only on the flex firmware and that may just become the only firmware for this system. I didn't use the beta open tx but updated the receiver and module for the xlite and the only thing is not having the option for 100mw with telemetry which is what the beta open tx allows. Thanks for this info!!!
So if you keep your radio on 2.2.2 and update to flex, presumably it just stays on 25mw with telelmetry (for the x-lite at least ?) I've got a Super-8 on order now, so I'll be having a compare to that stock TBS antenna - hopefully it'll come out at least as good and hopefull better !
CurryKitten that’s correct! In fact I was wondering if it was really 25mw because I was getting such good readings. I’ll be looking out for that super 8 test comparison 😎👍🏽
Just by adding a TBS Crossfire antenna it made the R9 system better. Can you do a video using crossfire micro tx flying that same field?
It might come up, but what you can compare if it you look at my original R9 video and the my Crossfire review as I'm flying the same field (albeit a different one than in the latest video)
@@CurryKitten i remeber those videos. Thanks for responding. I bought the crossfire micro bundle based on one of your videos.
Your last review must have cursed me - reverse reviewers curse?
Been flying using FCC and having rock solid rssi, 99% almost always. Watched your last review and suddenly I have failsafes left right & centre, No firmware changes, no hardware chnages, no nothing. Anyway just ordered an Frsky Super 8 Antenna from horusrc. Fingers crossed or it's TBS next (may need to save my pennies).
Haha, it's the first time I've managed to pass on bad vibes through the power of the Internet :) I've got a Super-8 coming now, so I can do a direct comparison to the basic TBS one - hopefully it'll do well
@@CurryKitten Thinking about it the only thing I have changed is going from Inav 1.9.1 to 2.0.0. However it was suggested I upgrade to 2.0.0 as it has "improved" reliability for sbus and R9 in particular. ☺
Great review thanks
Cheers :)
I 've watched the reviews you have done for the TBS and Frsky an I 've made my decision to buy the TBS, it wins buy a massive long shot hands down. Great reviews as always mate.
Are you going to the U.K. Drone Show??
I should be there yes - I'll be wearing a conspicuous T-Shirt and hoodie as well, so say hello if you see me :)
Really very informative! Thanks a lot.
Glad it was helpful :)
Can you bind the external rf modules to Frsky XSR reciever or other Frsky recievers?
The R9 module, no. You can use a FrSky XJT module to bind to those (if you are running on a non-frsky radio)
Great reviews.. enjoyed the content and yes, I watched it all.. lol!!
After installing r9. Can you tell me the range of plane in kilometers, That i can control
Not really - there's too many factors. How high are you, what's the mounting of the antennas like, how far away is your receiver from other electronics, what are the atmospheric conditions of the day. So yeah - it's 10km+ but it's not quite as straightforward as a number
Ive know people who have gone as far as 25K on fixed wing, but it all depends on terrain and your 5.8 video equipment.
thats amazing, seems to me its just as good as crossfire just slightly more hassle to setup and you need your own antennas. HOWEVER THIS COSTS 25 DOLLARS FOR TX AND RX SO YEAH!
Yep - It's all good if you don't mind some more hassle and don't need that latency improvement that CRSF gives you. If the receivers stay that price it's cheaper than 2.4
@@CurryKitten jup, I can definently not afford crossfire or a taranis, so I'm modding my flysky to work with r9m right now. The latency is unfortunate but can't be helped. For most mini quad stuff I'll use my 2.4 flysky anyways, and believe it or not that actually has even better latency than crossfire.
Nice bit of testing there. I saw the google earth field and thought 'I know that place!' I've been flying fields all around there looking for good spots. Hopefully meet you out some day. Shame its gonna be houses soon :(
I've just about bumped into everyone who's mentioned they've flown there - but if you know of some good place nearby, then let me know - I'm clearly going to need some new spots soon :(
Do you have to update firmware when you get it to make it wirk
I didn't do a firmware update on this one, it was just a case of messing with the way I read the RSSI and trying different antennas. Since the time I filmed this, there has been new firmware that says it fixes some issues with the RSSI measurement (although it's a bit vague about what it fixes exactly) so it's probably worth updating to the latest.
Seems like the qx7 with the full size r9 module is the better option for long range flying.
Yes - you've more options for power settings, and the module seems to get a better signal even on the same power output ?!
I am looking around the market for a new controller and I've found the QX7S with the r9 module included for the same price as without it.. guess it means that I can't justify to go TBS Crossfire when looking at the costs.. see if I'll regret that or not. :S
If you are getting free stuff, it would be silly to turn it down. Let's hope for some decent updates soon. I've been holding off doing more videos on the R9 as I'm waiting for the over the air updates FrSky mentioned to me a few months ago
@@CurryKitten Yes, exactly my thought. And oh, nice to hear about the over the air update. In my opinion the strongest selling point for TBS.. Just hope that the wait isn't too long. Thank you for the heads up! :)
Good video. Can you send me a link to the T-antenna you used?
Sure, it's the stock antenna that comes with the TBS Crossfire here www.team-blacksheep.com/products/prod:xf_stocktx_antv2 although if you watch the follow up video, I also test this against the Super-* antenna from FrSky which comes out about the same, and you don't need an SMA->RP-SMA adapter to use it
Thanks a lot, that helps. Figured it was the tbs antenna but would have forgot about the adapter.
good information, thanks
You'd get another improvement if you mounted the antenna vertical, you want the feed line running next to the ground element of the antenna for the best radiation pattern with the active element inline with the feed line. Also putting it with the center feed point on carbon is a terrible idea it is massively detuning the antenna at best and at worst it will fry the rx if it's sending telemetry because of the carbon reflecting the power back into the antenna. With a decent set up on 25mw 900mhz you can literally go miles with 1w you could get 40-50 miles. It's all about good antenna's and good mounting of the antenna's. I'd suggest putting the antenna in a tube coming vertical off the front of the quad to try and get it away from the vtx antenna a little, you'd probably easily double the range with that alone. Great testing though I love any antenna testing video's.
Yes - there's a balance here between optimum setup for range vs what is "the norm" as far as mini quads go. As it stands, the practice of mounting horizontally polarised under a leg works on a mini quad as it's simple, you get decent range out of it, and it stands up to a lot of abuse. Sure, if I wanted to max the range or was flying fixed wing, then I'd be mounting vertically way away from other components. I've not heard of the idea of carbon reflecting the power back into the antenna. Obviously, we're not making contact between any antenna elements and the carbon, and the active elements are away from the arm - so I'm confused by the ability to reflect power here?
@@CurryKitten I should've said that the carbon will alter the antenna's swr causing more power to be radiated back down the co-ax, sorry I can see how that could be confusing an extreme way to think of it is putting a metal tube around the antenna, that will fry anything transmitting signal pretty quick. With the amount of power these are dealing with I wouldn't expect being up against a little carbon to alter it enough to fry anything that's why I said worst case like say you mounted length wise on the arm but, it's certainty not good for the rf link or the components transmitting telemetry. The way I like to mount my antenna's is with an rc car antenna tube the thicker the better just heat shrink it to the stand off and a drop of ca to keep it from sliding, much better than zip ties less flex more protection for the wire inside and and if you crack the tube they pull right off and are about $1 a piece at the LHS if those still exist in most parts of the world haha.
Wait what? I thought these low mghz Tx Rxs where supposed to give you "miles" of signal, this looks about the same as a basic 2.5 ghz
It will - but the circumstances have to be right. Not having crappy antennas is a useful one to fix, and an RSSI signal that's accurate is another handy one. That said, even with not great equipment, the signal holds up better in dodgy areas on 2.4
@@CurryKitten There have been 2 incidents where I lost signal at close range and it was from a 4 in 1 module for a T16.
I still use the older D8 RX like the D8 2 plus and the smaller version " ripped the sticker off of it years ago so can't see its name"
I had a line of sight disorientation issue with that smaller one back in 2016 it had to have got at least a half mile from me, it was tiny in the sky.
I stayed calm and was able to turn it around.
I have never flown that far away since.
But I am wanting to try long range FPV, and now I'm not so sure.
Well long range isn't something you just "do" at once. It should be a carefully considered and slow progress - where you take into account where you are going to go, what's the recovery like if you went down, and would it be safe. Then you start to see what your equipment is capable of and if it goes well you try and push through that limit little by little. Sometimes you'll reach the limits of what is possible in your config and then you might have to reconfigure, or rearrange or replace - and then you go back several steps and start building up again. It can be a long process, but I always enjoyed finding the limitations and seeing what things I could do to mitigate the limits. The most important thing to remember is that nothing when dealing with longer range is simply plug and play and nothing is ever transformed to a long-range machine with just a single change
Like to see all these antennas on an antenna analyzer. Great testing, bummer its not just working great to begin with. :) Kinda hard to come by, these analyzers aren't common even among Hams as there's not alot of folks that play in those freqs. though there may be someone on here that has one and has the adapters that could take a look at the vswr on these antennas. Lot of times these antennas are off frequency or poorly constructed and that may have a negative impact also.
Yes - it would be quite useful. There's not many people with the sort of kit that could test them... mainly antenna developers :)
Seems that frsky antenna quality is pretty cheap and nasty. Best use the tbs antennas like I do. But I use the tbs tuned antenna. With the immortal t on the quad.
Is there a convertor to go from ipex to ipex4 for the R9MM, or are you using a different RX?
Thanks for this!
No worries - glad it was useful
Just remember the super 8 is a Moxon antenna so it will directional and you will failsafe very close behind yourself with a TRuRC 915 MOX or a Super 8 or the TBS Diamond
Is it though? Where are you getting your info. My info suggested this was omni, and seems to be backed up by the radiation patterns you'll find by doing a search on it... example: cdna1.zoeysite.com/Adzpo594RQGDpLcjBynL1z/cache=expiry:31536000/resize=fit:max,width:1200//compress/s3.amazonaws.com/zcom-media/sites/a0i0L00000QyvG7QAJ/media/catalog/product/s/u/super8_rad_pat_.jpg
I am 90% sure yes.. personal experiments show that pointing the front edge toward your flying area it performs as a moxon should. I.E. it has good coverage in front of oneself but will drop off as soon as you fly to far behind the antenna. The only failsafes ive had on the system were from flying behind the antenna. Also when contscting TrueRc i was told that the super 8 was a directional antenna with a moxon-like shape modeled after the success of the TBS Diamond... whatever the truth may be I can tell you 100% that thr antenna is directional
Nice Review, Bro! ;)
I'm surprised that you didn't buy and test the super 8 antenna.
I like to test things as they come to start with - I've got the Super-8 on order now, I was waiting for the FrSky T antennas to come in as well so I could try a nicer RX antenna
@@CurryKitten Fair point. I'll look forward to your evaluations of them.
@@CurryKitten Fair point. I'll look forward to your evaluations of them.
Great video buddie and i appreciate all that testing!
Think ill swap my stock for a "T" thanks bro!🍻✌👊
The Super-8 works nicely as well, but almost anything other than the stock will work so so much better :)
@@CurryKitten ah thank you bro, thanks for getting back to me! 🙏👍
I do not understand the various reviews described the frsky r9m hardware same as crossfire means theoretically should have a similar range :-)
Not so much about range for me, but FrSky is certainly missing some of the very lovely features that Crossfire has. More dev on firmware needed !
The hardware is practically the same, but that doesn't mean they are similar! Tbs has put a lot of time into software and testing stuff, so naturally it will work better but you have to pay for it, it all works out in the end.
You could try a Moxon antenna if you want 99 rssi forever. I could send you one to test if you want when I receive my rg402 order :P
Yep - there's a Tru-Mox antenna that's tuned to 868. It's something I might like if I want to really push the range (probably more on a plane) but I've got a Super-8 on it's way now, so be useful to see if that holds up well
@@CurryKitten The super 8 is a folded dipole design, it should help if you fly near the ground (like the diamond antenna does). But the ultimate range should be equal to the crossfire dipole.
@@RockTouching Cool - should be good for quad then
all my r9 stuff never failed me
It's certainly been better than 2.4 for me, I just wish it did more... like tell you what power you are on, or give a more consistent RSSI signal
Frsky R9 shits over the TBS crossfire in many ways, and TBS crossfire are better in a few ways so all in all the R9 is way better value in my opinion.
In what way do you think R9 is better than Crossfire ?
GO VERTICAL ftw
Yep - vertical is better - it's nice and easy to do on a fixed wing model, but I find it too much hassle on a mult
Fruit and vege tho 😂
Shame to see a nice green space developed, can always offer you a site across the border into Sussex
Fly at 500mw and turn off the RSSI 🤫
You should be able to go a long way on 25mw, and the RSSI should work and be a useful tool. I don't just max power out unless it's needed
3:15 lol wow dude, can't you just turn 90deg to the side? ;-P
What, you mean stand at a weird angle. Not sure about that from a comfort level point of view :)
@@CurryKitten literally just turn 90deg to the side and problem solved...
another way to put it, fly out to your right not directly in front. you don't HAVE to point right at the direction you're flying, just turn to the side and the whip antenna is doing exactly the same thing as you showed with the 90deg bend antenna.
those antenna's arent good for horizontal orientation, if you turn that 90deg antenna it's flat against the radio and isn't that creating a small noise floor since it's hard up against metal etc.
you're better of with the whip and just fly out to your side
Yes, could fly it that way - I get what you mean though. Although in this case, those stock antennas are just awful and in every single case using the TBS or Super-8 massively improved the signal
@@CurryKitten maybe that's because you were pointing the whip straight at the quad?
anyway at $10, super 8 worth it.
Thank you for the great video! Anyone tried swapping the antenna on R9 MM receiver?
I've got an FrSky 900Mhz T receiver antenna with IPEX4 connector but while trying to remove the stock one from the receiver looks like have broken the connector on the receiver pcb. And this thing is so tiny that it cannot be soldered back safely without microscope. So maybe it is not a good idea trying to mess up with the receiver. Need a new receiver now.
I've got some of the FrSky ipex4 antennas on their way, so I'll try and swap one as well. ipex in general can be a bit of a knightmare, I've broken regular ones before just by removing the antenna
I eat an apple?
???
@@CurryKitten your intro message lol
Ah yes - I forgot about those. I tried to do a little message of the day along with all the "don't forget to subscribe stuff" but I quickly ran out of ideas there :D Keep on with your 5-a-day though
@@CurryKitten will do keep the great videos coming mate
You got shares in fruit and Veg lol
It's my attempt to lighten the idea of a "call to action" that thing where I encourage people to subscribe and whatnot at the beginning of a video. I've already run out of nice little one-liners to use
@@CurryKitten It was a good one i did laugh for real
which of course lead to my witty comment :D
I myself have been testing the R9 Mini this week on a new build
A low profile.First test i was fail safe within feet of myself
Going back to the old school of thought which seems to be forgotten with the smaller and smaller builds i checked over the quad to find
The R9 was way too close to the vtx ( which can get very hot ) I believe this was causing the R9 to shut down.
( I knew the Module Radio and R9 Mini Firmware was all sound as i have it in a wing and another quad and works flawless.
Moving the R9 to behind the camera at the front end of the quad seemed to stop the fail safe and give me back the good distance.
ummmm you might be a ck
No idea what that means. Compliment, or insult?