Glad it was helpful!

Good to know, I am seeing a common thread that the guys that tell me they are doing great aren't using the R9MM, but the slim or mini.

Hi Vince. Interesting point on the FCC firmware about not rebinding - is that just the normal firmware, not flex or anything? If so, then I wonder if it's because there's a restriction on telemetry vs power in the EU for some reason. Are you still using the Ch16 RSSI, or are you using the telemetry signal - wasn't clear from what you mentioned in point 2/3. As far as point 4 goes, don't forget the drastic price decrease is a promotion. It's still a cheaper product even at full price, but Crossfire is very obviously the R9's competitor, so it would be an incomplete review without the comparison. What we can say is that to get these extra features you have to pay more. For some people it's about getting pretty good performance for cheaps, but others are willing to spend more in order to get something more polished now that they don't have to come back and potentially update a few more times.

So what's the answer on iNav? How do I interpret the values it is presenting or is there some modification required?

Yes, if your time is limited and you want to go out and fly, not mess about trying different versions of firmware and stuff - then the extra money that Crossfire costs is easily offset by it "it just works" vibe.

It's also going into winter in the northern hemisphere, so might want to just hold tight, save your money, and fly with the receivers you've got (xm+ etc.) until it warms back up. I've found patience in this hobby to be essential! I've saved a ton of money by not rushing out and buying something new. I'm doing like many commented they are doing. Not installing it yet, it's winter soon anyway, and waiting to see what Frsky is going to come up with. They are moving fast with changes... i.e. The new Flex software! Open TX 2.3 should be fully released then too! I'm also waiting for Frsky's new antennas to fully get into stock. So, before you invest the sizeable dollars to get into Crossfire, might try the patient approach many of us are doing... At least until early Spring pops up some great weather again. If it isn't sorted out by then, you can always buy the Crossfire system then... And chances are they'll be some even more awesome deals available because Frsky is still killing them price wise! It's not like we don't already have usable receivers in our quads that are certainly good to fly with in the winter! ❄️😊👍😉

No - I've just been using the Taranis battery. That said, I was just flying quads which is 3-4 minutes a flight and 25mw power. If I upped the power and was flying fixed wing for 40 mins per flight then I might use an external lipo

Well that's my mind blown re: mono vs dipoles. I knew I wanted to have it vertically, but I just couldn't fit it and I thought that what I had would be better than keeping it in line horizontally. I've since changed it to horizontal polarization anyway, and I'll retest with the TX antenna vertically polarised (interested to know if that's actually worse or better) before I change over to a TBS TX T shaped antenna so I can actually line everything up

Better to buy the frsky tx t antenna. As the r9mm has an ipex4 connector whereas the immortal t has ipex only.

Can't get hold of the FrSky T antenna at the moment, I'm talking about hooking up the TBS TX antenna on the radio (with an SMA->RP-SMA adapter)

I haven't used the external power supply, but no. The external battery will just power the module, so the other battery stays in as per normal

From the standpoint of antennas yes it would work fine - I can't remember if they use the same UFL connector though. I seem to remember FrSky or TBS using an especially small one in one of their rx's

Ever figure this out? I updated 1 of mine with the 2 firmwares and it worked but the second one is not working. Even though I went through the same process.

I think the universal opinion of the stock antennas are that they are bad, so replace and retry... which I'll be doing soon :)

What power you running it at?

If you have the R9MM rx and you use the "normal" firmware, then you are fine, as the R9MM only has it's initial version of the code. You'd only have to update the rx if it was a different rx, or you flashed the Flex firmware instead of the normal one.

Yes - and I've set up to push my telemetry RSSI signal back to the flight controller as part of my next series of tests. This is very much a workaround though, so my initial testing is always about what it should do - and later video about. Hey it doesn't do that right, so let's try this instead.

Hi by gh gh BB BMDgaa Secy Hulio

Thanks :)

Yes - have a look at the follow up video here kzfaq.info/get/bejne/fZ-eZcZ6mbvIXYU.html&lc=Ugynq112gG57UzbGmod4AaABAg (and there's a follow up to that one as well) I used the stock rx antenna, but in a horizontal T formation and then used different variations of the TX antennas and where the RSSI signal was coming from to see what worked the best,

Can you take me through (in as much excruciating detail as possible) exactly what you've done step-by-step in your setup.config and what works/doesn't work

Weird video to ask about Crossfire on :D Anyway, Crossfire is much like ELRS in which the RSSI value is pretty useless. Instead use Link quality and the dBm RSSI value in your OSD

I wanted to pickup one of those new Immortal-like antenna FrSky has just bought out, but they are out of stock everywhere in the UK, so I'll bide my time so I can pick up the Super 8 at the same time. I loved the L9R, but only got to around 6.2km with one

The RSSI warnings are default - so low is 45 and critical 42. I did manage to get them when the telemetry dropped low enough, but it didn't match up with the RSSI. Thanks for the offer, but I'm going to try some other antenna configs first as I have some other things to try based on some other peoples experiences

Sounds good - are you running on the R9M or the R9M-lite - and does your ch16 RSSI match up with your telemetry RSSI ?

The slim seems to work better than the R9MM, and a little differently. The R9MM transmits RSSI on ch16, so you can tell the flight controller to look for it. However, if you are getting your RSSI via the telemetry on the slim you can push this onto your flight controller and show it on the OSD. Here's a guide I wrote www.currykitten.co.uk/getting-the-rssi-value-to-show-in-your-betaflights-osd-frsky-based/

I think you may have murdered it with the 3s lipo :(

@@CurryKitten i was thinking the same but it still works if i power it via the other connector on the back of the module next to the xt30. Is there a way to track where is blown ?

Yeah - the RSSI signal from the rx is on ch 16, so you should just be able to set Betaflight for RSSI on Aux12 and pick it straight up. Of course, if you are using the xlite to send the RSSI back to the FC from the telemetry signal, you'll get a much nicer reading (and hopefully the more accurate of the two)

I think by default betaflight wont show all 16 channels and that's why i didn't see the rssi on chan 16, but what seems to be happening is the receiver firmware isn't scaling the value correctly. however from my test i concluded the rssi value from the radio is spot on as i flew it till failsafe and it matched up. overall i think this is a great system that will be perfect with the right firmware. when that flex firmware comes i think that will be great. seems that's where all the development is at the moment

I don’t like to commit to monthly like patreon. But I did just send you a paypal donation. Thanks for the videos. I’ve really been getting a lot out of them lately 👍

You are nameless no longer :) Thanks so much, that's very kind of you. With any luck, they will get it sorted and in the coming months it will be a reliable system, but you are doing the right thing to sit on those rx's and wait for now until it's more reliable

SO when this was filmed, there was the choice of the initial R9MM firmware from 2018-08-21 (with the modules getting updated to whatever the latest was at the time) Since that point there's been a few more firmware that should have improved the RSSI issue - so I do have a plan to go back and try that out. This is the regular firmware though, I haven't tried flex or f.port. I'm tempted to wait until FrSky implement their over-the-air receiver updates else I'm desoldering/resoldering an rx multiple times

They work better like that - see the next part

Nope - I'm mainly using 25mw so it's not sucking too much power away from my radio. I also don't have any 2s lipos on xt30 so would need to make up an adapter

Great to know - thanks Matt

Distance is only one thing that people use Crossfire for. Try it out on a quad that you're perfectly happy with on 2.4 and tell me if yuo can tell the difference. I didn't think I would be able to, but the extra response on CRSF blew me away !

I'd have to say yes, and no. Whilst the t8sg (as far as I know) doesn't have a specific R9 setting, you can actually bind and set the power via the module, so you can drive it via a PPM connection from the module bay, but not something I've personally tried.

The GSM phone network uses the 915Mhz space, so stay well away from it!

So for a regular SBUS connection, use the same one as me into your SBUS pin on your Omnibus. It's only is you want to use S.port telemetry, or F.Port for flying that you'll need to touch the other pins. So the normal S.Port/F.Port is actually already inverted, so FrSky's "Inverted" S.Port actually means "uninverted" in real terms. Of use if you've got a UART that will only take one or the other. But in terms of easiest path to flying, just connect the SBUS up and ignore the other stuff.

CurryKitten thank you. I got it set up and working now

Yes and no. What I ended up doing (and, of course, there's are videos about this) is first changing antennas to something better - that improves things. Recently, I flashed the latest flex firmware and ran with that, which does appear to work pretty well. What I do notice about the RSSI on R9 is that it's low, but it can go really low and there's no problem in the signal. Whlist a FrSky 2.4Ghz rx falls out of the sky at around 40 RSSI, I can fly R9 under 10 without an issue. So do we just have to change our midsets to the fact it's low and that's it. I've not had an issue with range, I tried 10mw and it held up over 1km so that works for me.

@@CurryKitten hi, thanks for the info. I have mine on a mini mamba stack and have wired it to 5v/g/Sbus. When i go to telemetry on my tx and click find sensors nothing at all shows up. (Obviously im lookimg for rssi) All im wanting from this set up is some kind of rssi. If you had no rssi at all in the osd using this r9 module and r9mm how would you troubleshoot the issue?

That's weird, I did reply to this, but perhaps I didn't hit the button ! In F.Port, the RSSI is exactly 50% of what it should be, so the 200 in the RSSI_SCALE makes sense. For S.bus using ch16, the scale factor wouldn't work as it's the amount it's out isn't linear. FrSky tell me they are working with Betaflight to sort this out.... quite what they're doing is a mystery as they certainly seem to have worked RSSI out on SBUS channels on 2.4Ghz. I'll be retesting comparing ch16 to the telemetry output as a workaround (hopefully today) to see how the figures look

yes thats right

I am in the south of the UK. It's weirdly mild at the moment, but expecting the weather to take a bad turn any second now

Can you run me through how you set it up. If you set it up something akin to this www.currykitten.co.uk/getting-the-rssi-value-to-show-in-your-betaflights-osd-frsky-based/ then it should be doing something. A useful way of looking to see if you have anything is to plug your quad into betaflight and power up radio/receiver and go onto the receiver tab in Betaflight and see if you can see your channel with a large value. One thing I've seen people do (and manged to do it myself) is bind the R9 in 8 channel mode and then use channel 9 to send RSSI - which then of course, doesn't work

CurryKitten many thanks for your response. I have set up the TX as described in your blog, utilising channel input with RSSI and mixer on channel 8 (aux 4). I have done the 200 and -100 offsets. In BetaFlight aux 4 moves and is currently showing a value of 1921. BetaFlight and the OSD in my goggles are displaying 41% and my TX is showing 100 DB. Both values move when distance is put between the TX and receiver but they are not aligned. The receiver is bound to 16 channels. I initially had this setup with an R-XSR which worked perfectly. Setup is a X7 with OpenTX 2.2 and an R9M module with an R9 mini receiver. Once again thanks for your help.

Are you using SBUS or F.Port protocol on your R9, which flight controller are you using, and if you type set rssi in the cli tab, what info do you get back ?

There do seem to be a lot of people in denial and think that coming up with a bunch of workarounds is business as usual. It isn't... at least in my book. But I've got a few plans to try out some easy workarounds to see what difference little incremental changes make. I've made a whole bunch of suggestions to FrSky as well, but we'll have to see if they come back to me at all

Yeah - let me know. I saw that passthrough is a possibility, although does depend if your rx get's powered if the FC is plugged into USB so it's not quite a work in every case. Luckily it is a few minute job to de/resolder that where it is. I think I'm going to try the Crossfire antenna on the radio as a few people have suggested to see if that makes a difference

I thought everyone had sold all of their stock, but looks like rclife have some in (no affiliation, I just noticed them when I was searching for T antennas - which are out of stock) www.rclife.co.uk/Frsky/Frsky-Long-Range-Promotion

@@CurryKitten The kit is still on sale at T9 which is where I bought the T antennaes from. Looks like there are 2 versions of the tuned antenna so be careful which ones you buy.

Yes - so to update the rx, don't use the SBUS pin, use S.Port pin instead (the one next to SBUS)

@@CurryKitten Got it thanks buddy, its working, horray, i think i had a doggy cable as well, but thanks for your swift reply, very much appriciated, Im in Hong Kong so im lucky to have FCC Flex (1W),.. i think.. keep up the good work, i reallly enjoy your program, looking forward to your review of the Orqa soon I hope and another hour of LDO next week, best regards, wez

Well I don't think there's much chance of me getting some Orqa's, but I can live in hope :) Glad you are enjoying LDO, I know we have far too much fun doing it ourselves :D

Glad yours is going well. Are you using the R9MM rx or another as I often notice in comments that people are doing very well with the slim. I've not heard about having to update the module one firmware level at a time... it sounds a bit weird as any firmware level should completely wipe out anything that was there beforehand. Got some other tests lined up to do soon to see how things improve

@@CurryKitten Ah, maybe that's it! I have three R9 Mini's and one Slim working great. Just installed the R9MM last night while I was watching your video and will test today - hoping it works ok. There's a short video I watched before yours with an R9MM and the rssi was acting normal like the mini and slim. I'll try to find the link. It wasn't a review, just a test video. Could FCC setting have something to do with it?

Hi - your other response about the source of the oldest-to-newest coming from GetFPV got stuck in KZfaqs spam bucket because of URLS. But I did see it and so asked them the question about it... as I find the idea confusing and they said "We apologize for the confusion here - that message is very outdated and no longer applies. I'll ask if we can have that taken down. :)"

@@CurryKitten Ah, that's good news :) I found it so annoying but I could not get mine to work properly otherwise. But that was over 3 months ago. Hopefully your rssi is working on the R9MM? I tested mine today and the rssi reading seems pretty much on par with the R9 Mini's in my other builds.

That cool - thanks for sharing, looks like an antenna upgrade is on the list - but I'm intending to try with the Crossfire antenna to start with and see if anything changes.

CurryKitten we started with tbs antenna on the quad and standard frisky antenna on the taranis and this combination gave bad results.

Cool - glad to hear it. I notice the R9slim has had a few revisions of the firmware, perhaps they just need to do the same on the r9mm

I haven't done because the difference between ch16 and telemetry didn't seem linear, so it would be way further off as it dropped down lower. Are you using the R9MM as well ? I was planning to try different antenna and then try the workaround of pushing the telemetry signal back to the flight controller as a follow up. I did talk to FrSky about this and they tell me they are talking to the Betaflight devs about how to fix this

@@CurryKitten Yes I'm using both R9 Mini and MM. Interestingly I don't seem to have scaling problems in the same way with iNav although it does under read a bit. But I've never seen my RSSI go to single digits. Perhaps check the antenna lengths on your quad. There have been reports of different (and incorrect) antenna lengths be shipped with the receivers.

As in using the TBS antennas on FrSky? I was going to do a test using the Crossfire T-Antenna on my Taranis, but I noticed one was SMA, and the other was RP-SMA. Are you using SMA->RP-SMA converter to do this ?

You can use the converter.

i d better not to. r9lite outputs less than 100mw. (some said the actual power is about 60mw!)

yes , also I am not worrying about trying to do antenna orientation with the TBS immortal T . I am using a 3d printed part to mount the Immortal T to the quad link www.thingiverse.com/thing:2752159 . I don't believe in doing any special origination as quads to all sorts of positions why flying so why worry about trying to do this to get the best mounting for best reception.

Take a look at my follow up videos on the R9

So you mount vertically on the arms - does one not impact on the ground when you are down ? This is good info, thanks - I have some more testing to do with these even before the next firmware rollout then :D

I mount horizontally on the arms.. perpendicular to the arm. Not saying it's the best setup but seems to seperate your antenna from the carbon/frame/fpv equipment.. I usually notice rssi getting low when I start holding the tx in a comfortable/more horizontal position rather than the distance I fly at.. I will order a different antenna like the super 8 so I can bend/orientate it properly while holding the tx in a normal/comfortable position.

Cool - I'm going to try a horizontal mount on the arm (maybe - depending how far I can get the dipole out) and then I can retest with the default whip and then change over to the TBS T and retry it

will be cool to see a comparison with the Frsky antenna vs. TBS's. I have an immortal-t and have been meaning to test/compare but have no time to fly.

Using 16ch on sbus, and have had 4 fail-safes in about 60 packs. Always like 100 feet away..weird eh?

It's a question of what data you have available. FrSky give us either the RSSI signal that's being sent directly from teh RX to the flight controller on ch16. This seems like a random number generator... or they give us the RSSI as a telemetry signal which is sent from the RX back to the radio, which appears more accurate. We could in turn take this figure and send it back to the flight controller to use on the OSD. What they don't give us, unlike the TBS Crossfire, is a link quality signal (amongst other stuff) so we have to make the best of what we have

@@CurryKitten ah ok I didn't know that. I thought you could get signal link quality if you wired it differently or used a different receiver pcb than the one I use (x4r). But that's why channels like this exist. To inform us dumb one's ;) I just recently found your channel and am loving your content. So, thanks again for a great review as always. Fly safe my friend

Probably the latest "normal" firmware on each, but there's no real way of telling.

@@CurryKitten 500mw inside my house 2 rooms over and rssi goes to 40 to 35

RSSI on ch16, or telemetry, are you using anything other than the awful stock whip antennas on the TX ?

@@CurryKitten my rssi shows up on 12 and all stock

Take a look at the follow up videos I made that show the difference between using telemetry based RSSI vs Ch16 (aux12 in betaflight) and the massive difference when using something like a Super-8 antenna instead of the stock ones

yes agreed,2.3.3 flex works well here too with Super 8 and stock rx dipole mounted correct..

I'm super-scared of such a beta version of code - I have 70 -80 models spread out over several radios and wouldn't want to screw them up... but that said, I could migrate some around and free up the Q7 as a test bed. Maybe, we'll see - I'd prefer a proper release though !

yes can understand that about nightly builds,i fly a Minitalon serious distance,well out to sea too using my QX7 and EZUHF,,hopefully no probs...untested on 2.3.3..yet!!

That Dipole seems to be out of stock everywhere in the UK. As soon as I can get hold of the pair, I'll try them out

Look at the follow up videos I did about using better antennas on the TX - this really helps, and later firmware updates help on the RSSI a bit - so yes, but it's still playing catchup. I get the feeling FrSky have invested all their time into developing ACCESS instead of fixing all the issues in R9

CurryKitten have you heard of the flex firmware ? Apparently it works great with that firmware. Thank you ✌️

Yes - I was going to test it, but there were plenty of stories of bad experiences as well. So I'm waiting for them to release their over-the-air firmware updates and then I can try out different firmware more easily.

Are you on the latest version of OpenTX. You should be on at least 2.2.2?

@@CurryKitten morning sir, im a total noob to the r9 gear so forgive my inexperience. I was trying to find a video on how to check and upgrade firmware on the r9 stuff last night but i was struggling to understand how to get the information on to my new taranis x9d in order to get it into the r9 mini/mm that i have... any video pointers i should be watching?

Upgrading firmware on the R9 is just about the same as regular FrSky rx's. I made this video kzfaq.info/get/bejne/abR_lbNk2s7FkaM.html which will link you back to an original video about how to flash receivers. On the R9 it's just a case of getting the firmware onto your radio and then writing it to the external device (after making sure you hav ethe right connection from the pins under the rear door of your radio.

Not obviously, no. It might be hackable if you can find a PPM out on the motherboard, but it's certainly not a plug and play thing

@@CurryKitten can u show it. How it make?

Nope - I don't have a bugs3 TX.

Hopefully they'll sort something out in the next few firmware revision levels. I'm going to sent the video link to FrSky and see if they could address some of the issues. I'm ever hopeful that it'll reach the sort of function Crossfire gets to

It's good news... but also bad - I really think they need to consolidate their firmware forks into one single stream. Why would the flex firmware work better on 100mw than the normal firmware at 200mw... at least roll some of that code back into the other firmware for now !

@@CurryKitten I think the EU LBT firmware had been left behind compared to the FCC firmware I spent quite a few hours on R9 group on Facebook, with FCC users going miles on 25mw. I was so disappointed in the results I was seeing, indeed my L9R was kicking the R9's arse for distance. Trying flex was my last hope before sticking the L9R back in the plane. The firmware will get there I am sure of that. It is worth noting that flex will work on open tx 2.2.2 but you don't get the options to change power or choose frequency

That's good to know... and worth noting I'm an international firmware user for 2.4 as I suspect many are in the UK. I think I managed about 6.2km on my L9R, so flex sounds pretty nice. Perhaps a test in a few videos using my radio with less models on it than the others if I use a 2.2.3 nightly

Nope - the R9M will only bind to an R9 receiver. If you are wanting to bind to an XM+ and you don't already have a FrSky Radio, or something with a multiprotocol module like a Jumper, then the module you'll need is the XJT

@@CurryKitten ahhhh I got it, thank you so much :)

So it sounds like - you got the module and the rx and were able to bind, then you updated the firmware on your radio and then the module and the rx and can't connect? Is that right, did you rebind the rx after you updated the firmware, as you'd have to after this process ?

@@CurryKitten Meanwhile, thanks for the reply. I found out that I flashed the R9M module incorrectly, doing it with "flash internal firmware" instead of "flash esternal firmware", so now the binding works! However I do not know 2 things: 1) With the R9M module installed on the X9RPlus taranis on page 2/12 what settings should I put? internalRF mode off or d16 ?? why if I put it off is not that something does not work? but I saw that putting it off, in the entry External RF can bind with telemetry ON, while with D16 mode enabled the telemitria is OFF for the R9M. The point is that I do not understand what is the Internal RF (is that allowed me to connect to the receveid before installing the R9M?) Or what is the use? 2) Update the firmware of the taranis means to update the Opentx (I have the 2.2.2 version) but if we go on the Frsky site to the taranis X9DPlus section there are some firmware that we can install, I see that they are not those of the Opxx, so What are they and why do not I see videos on youtube of people who install them? what are they for? must they be installed? if yes, just copy it to the SD card and then I have to do "flash internal firmware". Many thanks for the moment and I'm sorry for the many questions .. but maybe it can also come back to someone else ..

@@markthirtysix7707 Ok, so to answer 1) The internal RF refers to the inbuilt module in your X9D that talks 2.4 - so that's the default when binding to all your 2.4 FrSky receivers. If you fit an external module to the bay of the X9D this is when to use the external RF. It supports a few modules natively and you'll also see a PPM mode which passes through. Normally you'd turn the internal modeul off when using the external one. It is possible to actually use both at once, but I don't know what the restrictions are there - it may not like getting multiple telemetry sources for example. 2) You are probably looking at the firmware for the internal XJT module (which is what the 2.4 transmitter module in your X9D is) to update your OpenTX goto www.open-tx.org in the download sections and then find OpenTX Companion for the level of the firmware you want. This will allow you to install different versions of the firmware, or backup settings, simulate the radio etc. You just plug in a USB cable and it does the rest

Trust is a big thing, I couldn't get it to failsafe, but I wouldn't trust it in any difficult to recover conditions either.

Yeah, It feels under developed. It might be good one day, but today its just a little flaky. Great Video, As always. My video might just have a big warning sticker on the front of it

Yeah - those stick antennas are just awful

@@CurryKitten what about beta firmware

I've not tried it yet - I do keep hearing horror stories about both flex and the adaptive power not working very well

I tested a lot more today (12 flights in fact with different combos) so I have some more data to present and some fairly easy ways of making things better. I do not that when you catch a null, that RSSI will really drop though, like 99 to nothing in an instant !

Nope - I'm attempting to hold the radio in a way so the antenna is pointing straight upwards. The only time I didn't do this is when I was trying to get a very bad signal to look at the difference between the ch16 and the telemetry RSSI values

Yeah - I heard about expresslrs a while back. It's not something I tried because it revolved mainly around reducing the latency - which I didn't feel was a problem. Maybe I'll look at it at some point though

Weird that you are having issues on the XM+'s, they've been very reliable for me - although as I mention I have a few RF areas in my field where 2.4 craps out and the R9 survived (even if it told me the RSSI was through the floor)

All I know is in my flying field my old Spektrum 2.4 DSMX never had a fail-safe but when I went to a Frsky QX7 it very was flaky with many fail-safes with XM or XM+ receivers. Almost sold it until I tried an r-xsr and then I got solid reception.

Whoops forgot to mention something relevant. I run the FCC version and Inav. My googles barely drop below 95% rssi. However when I disarm the Inav summary screen usually reports a minimum rssi of around 50%.So yes I too experience inconsistent rssi reporting, but is it inav or frsky?

I flew 12 lipos during the tests I did over those two days. But even if it had worked perfectly and the RSSI was wonderful, then I would still rank Crossfire as being better for all the other reasons I mentioned. Unless you are bringing price into it, there's not a single thing that the R9 wins on. During flying, the antenna is orientated straight up, the only time it was in a dodgy position was when I was sat on the ground getting the worse signal I could in order to see the difference between the RSSI signal on ch 16 vs the RSSI signal the telemetry sends back. Bear in mind I now own two R9's and so I would like them to be great - but that's going to take more development from FrSky to get it there.

@@CurryKitten hmmm, it's something you did, because I've watched a ton of KZfaq reviews on R9, and others are having incredible results! They're flying several km's away and still have great telemetry! So, maybe watch their videos for a solution, because somethings just not right with the way yours is working. You had to have seen those awesome results others have had, haven't you?🤔 Others are raving about R9 and you're about the only one saying it's not ready to be used! Sure, it doesn't OTA update, but others are flying to the moon and back, ok, not that far, but crazy far with killer results! Please keep plodding on and don't be so quick to just say Crossfire is better. It's not, just others have got it right and for some reason, you haven't! You'll get it! I've got great confidence you will...from watching your videos forever, you're too smart to not get it figured! 🤔😁

What we're looking at here is my initial testing of the R9 using the documentation available from FrSky. I didn't want to start jumping into Facebook groups and looking at solutions to issue, because then what you have is workarounds that people are using to overcome some of the current short-comings of the system. For example, I could use the telemetry signal from the radio and push that back to the FC and use that as a more accurate RSSI signal.... I don't do that (at least in this video) because FrSky tell me I should be able to use the RSSI signal that's already transmitted on CH16. I've no doubt that I would be able to get some decent range out of the R9, but I do think it's important to acknowledge that certain aspects don't work as they should and you have to come up with other methodologies of doing things. But this video is the start point, I'll be back to retest trying a few other things

The X-lite itself, I really like - but that module is acting weirdly. I'm told there's a slight hardware difference in it's update rate which may be driving that chip differently... but that's kinda the issues that the FrSky developers should have sorted months and months ago. Fingers crossed for some decent updates soon.

I did suggest to FrSky about letting people know about what was going to go into next releases of the firmware, both to show that they know the issues, but also so people can see enhancements and know that the firmware is being actively developed. But they said they didn't want to do that - basically because of possible changes. It would seem fairly trivial to roll non-flex specific changes back into the normal firmware, but what do I know. Using Flex on 2.2.2 means you lose the ability to set power/telem via the radio doesn't it, presumably you need to use the dip switches ?

you can set the power still via the radio but to run 500mw you cannot currently run with telemetry, I ran the Fport firmware but I changed the RSSI scale in betaflight so didnt have the issues you did with getting nervous when it drops BTW antenna placement is the same as crossfire as they run the same frequency's but if I was you I would drop the stock antennas think of them as those antennas that come with a cheap VTX good enough so it wont burn out when you power up but thats about it

That was me caught in the issue of wanting to mount them vertically to match the TX antenna, but just not having a place to do do. For my follow up test, I've gone with a horizontal setup on an arm so I can test the Crossfire TX antenna with them. 2.4 runs at 100mw. So yes, my antenna position was bad, but that cannot explain the mismatch between the ch16 RSSI signal and the telemetry version - that's an issue. External power and running at 1w is overkill in a small field - my testing of the Crossfire module which could adapt between 25 and 100mw (at the time - it now goes to 250mw) had no such issues. More tests are coming, and the need to employ some workarounds and use more experimental firmware may come into play

@@CurryKitten for flying in a small field why the need for 900mhz system anyway then? I get 400-500meters with stock frsky qx7 and xfr-sb flying behind some trees low to the ground. Or 800+meters open.

There are some areas in that field which I would describe as "dodgy RF places" for reasons unknown, and 2.4Ghz doesn't hold up there at all. (as far as Crossfire goes though, many multicopter pilots see the latency improvement as reason enough) But, also at the price this came down to, many people jumped on the R9M because the R9MM rx's very cheaper than buying an XM+. But that said, I also like to fly fixed wing where I would tend to go a little further, and like a good consistent control signal

@@CurryKitten yeh I got my r9m and r9mm for $30, turns up tomorrow

@@CurryKitten I trialed my r9m and r9mm and got easily 1.5km with 90rssi while I was even going behind some trees at that distance. If you set it up properly there is nothing wrong with the r9 stuff.

I was going to ask if you used an SMA->RP-SMA adapter on the antenna, but there's actually an ipex connected pigtail inside? That's interesting. Did you change over the diploe on the rx as well, or does that seem ok (if a little short)?

yes - some not widely spread tiny micro ipex (like on r-xsr) as for the r9mini - a had to cut unshielded part by ~3mm - it was longer than the other, braided part (i am in FCC zone)

The Nano is one of the Crossfire receivers, do you mean the R9MM, or something else ?

you're right I meant R9 mini

As part of this was to compare with the Crossfire - in this case, it was relevant to compare stock against stock. Are you basing your experience on being perfect flying with the R9MM, or another receiver ?

@@CurryKitten I own the slim, R9, slim+ & the mini. I have swapped all of the rx antennas for TBS Immortal T's 😀 That made a difference. Then i made a moxon hand tuned for 868mhz and updated the opentx to 2.2.3. Good informative video btw. Subscribed

Thanks :) I ask about the rx's, as reading through the comments it feels like the slim and mini are getting really good feedback about their range and RSSI value, but the R9MM doesn't seem to work as well - newer rx, and perhaps a few firmware versions behind in development. THere's a bunch of followup videos to do though... in a rough order. Better position of rx antennas and then retest with stock and a Crossfire stock (using an adapter), then repeat with using the telemetry RSSI signal instead of ch16, then try the new R9 antennas (if I can get hold of them) then try 2.2.3 on one of my radios with flex and see what difference that makes. That's may plan anyway - just as the weather takes a turn for the worse

@@CurryKitten just a heads up; the R9 mini currently have the long range record of 32kilometers out :) There is a video of the flight and setup here on youtube. Have a great weekend. - Christian

I'd like to try it, but I think the 2.2.3 OpenTX nightly build is too much of a risk at the moment,

Edited with a bit I forgot Wayne

I thought it was a bad move - I'd seen it somewhere, but that was on a diversity rx as you mentioned - but I couldn't fit it vertically and I thought it might have been better than having it horizontal. But I'm going to stick the Crossfire antenna on the R9 module (with an SMA->RP-SMA adapter) and try it that way, so I'll have it horizontally mounted

No you are right, and I wasn't happy with the placement I had, but unlike Crossfire - you don't get a good TX antenna that would orientate correctly. So next test is to mount the rx antennas on the leg horizontally, retest and then test again with the Crossfire TX antenna. I'll be getting the Super 8 and the T antennas when they are available (I can't get the T's anywhere in teh UK at the moment)

@@CurryKitten same issue. Just realized the super 8 and T antennas had hit a few online retailers but are all out of stock now...too late to the party to get one. So, I need to wait for the next batch. I think, for now, I will do an L shape, out the back with the ground plane on the horizontal axis and the main part vertically up. Won't be the longest range possible, but I'm only looking for a km or so on this build.

You should visit the r9 Facebook group, there is a lot of discussion about antenna orientation and ideas on how to do it. Best placement is vertical.

@@sebastiansombra Will look for it tonight. Vertical orientation for a mini or micro quad would be fairly difficult, I would assume. Either it would be super tall above the quad or split it between the bottom and top and have issues with take off and landing. I'll see what people say in the Facebook group for next best option:)

@@patsjoholm I mount it vertical. Its a 7" quad. GPS and return to home.

Check out uavfutures video from yesterday that does a range test using R9M. Awesome

I commented on Stu's video about the lack of any detail in that video. What power was he running, what antenna was on the RX, where was he getting the RSSI from, and what was the difference in using the stock antenna instead of the TBS diamond that was being used.

Yep - and I'll be testing, but initially you want to see how things do out of the box. Crossfire came with a pretty good set of RX/TX antennas, but it seems like the R9 does not.

I think I responded to all of those questions under Stu's video. If you want any more details let me know (I was the pilot), I'm more than happy to share my experience with the R9M

Hi Tony - thanks for letting me know who you are. I couldn't find the post about the R9M details - I saw you responded about the VTX (The AKK ultimate) but I couldn't see anything else - would you mind reposting here as well

Can you elaborate here - not sure which part you are referring to?

@@CurryKitten when u set up in taranis x9d plus mine don't have tht sbus link

Can you give me a timestamp in the video you are talking about - still not quite sure I'm understanding correctly

@@CurryKitten your on flex rite

Nope - on the standard firmware here

It seems to be an antenna problem. I had almost the same results with the stock antennas. The solution (at least for me) was used a tbs diamond antenna on the module and an immortal T on the MM. OR try the new ones Frsky Super 8 and the immortal clone (readytosky store on aliexpress have it). The RSSI quality signal improves dramatically

@@x23drones31 Yeah, that's probably the case! You're correct! 😊 E, ei... Sou brazuca também. 😛

nothing wrong with the antennas you guys just don't understand the polarisation.

@@MCsCreations I ordered mine about a month and a half ago, I hope it makes it here before next spring!! SHEESH!!

@@dsemolian3071 Good luck, dude! 😃

I did feedback to FrSky and suggest they have something like "here's is a known list of issues that we will be fixing and a list of enhancements we are working on for release x of y firmware" to a) let people in on the fact that they recognise there are issues and b) give people a nice fuzzy feeling that the firmware is still getting resources into the development. Sadly, they are not keen to do this as they say there may be "some uncertain factors that affect the end results" Which is a shame

I feel it will have to be an organized effort with the participation of users, trusted content producers and distributors who truly like and hope that FrSky will only grow and excellence. Otherwise other manufacturers will learn how to provide a stronger product and support listening to their supporters and openly responding with clear documentation and action. Really, how much effort would it be for FrSky to allow their community to again and as always support by content and word of mouth their product. You guys are their advertising division.

Are you running openTX 2.2.3 then ?

@@CurryKitten yep working fine for me on my X12

Right now, the signal seems to hold up, but I do need a more consistent way of looking at how good my signal is. FrSky tell me they are working with Betaflight to sort out their ch 16 RSSI signal. in the meantime, I'll try some workarounds and make some additioanl videos with my findings.

@@CurryKitten ill be watching