(05-Dec-2021, 02:28 AM)kafie1980 Wrote: Then why does ELRS not write their version of CRSF wire protocol if they can write the entire OTA from scratch?

I don't know for sure but I have a strong suspicion that the reason the ELRS devs took a decision to make use of the wired CRSF protocol rather than write their own protocol from the ground up (which I'm sure they are more than capable of doing) is because they knew full well that to write their own protocol would have seriously delayed adoption of ExpressLRS as a control link.

The CRSF protocol was already baked into Betaflight and OpenTX so they could simply just release ELRS without having to wait months or years for any code for a new protocol to be accepted and merged into Betaflight/OpenTX. Some other non-OpenTX based transmitters such as Futaba also already have support for the wired CRSF protocol and I expect there would be virtually zero chance of getting a new protocol into those other transmitters. So by using CRSF it also opens up the ability for ELRS hardware to be used with some other types of transmitters as well.

ImmersionRC Ghost is a classic example. That product was released over 15 months ago and it took them a long time to get their Ghost protocol merged into a release version of OpenTX, and until Betaflight 4.3 is actually released the Ghost protocol still isn't in a public release version of Betaflight yet. Not to mention that the Ghost protocol doesn't exist in any transmitters other than ones that run on OpenTX or EdgeTX, and it probably never will.

So whether or not it is considered ethical for the ExpressLRS to have piggy-backed onto TBS's hard work and made use of their protocol, the ELRS devs have probably been quite clever (and tactical) in using the already proven and established CRSF protocol so that ELRS is able to gain traction and a user base quickly without being held up while being able to be used in not only just OpenTX based transmitters from the get-go.

Betaflight dev's were also under pressure to implement ExpressLRS over SPI in Betaflight and there is no sign of any official support target release in iNav or EmuFlight.

Good news is that although Betaflight devs had announced a feature freeze effective 29 November 2021 (https://github.com/betaflight/betaflight...emplate.md) they added the ExpressLRS over SPI pull request to the 4.3 milestone yesterday: https://github.com/betaflight/betaflight/pull/10788

Editing this post since a question was asked on JB's stream about the same topic (fast forward to the 47:45 mark in the video):

Quote:https://youtu.be/nERsb-Yt6gU?t=2865

Basically the rate at which ELRS is doing updates to their firmware, it will be difficult to keep those changes updated in Betaflight or any other FC firmware. This is because the SPI related firmware is baked into the Betaflight firmware. 

Surely the Betaflight dev's do not have the time to keep up with the ELRS updates even if all they have to do is approve and merge a pull request.

So the SPI based board are going to have to run unofficial firmware versions or wait for the next Betaflight release where the updates ELRS firmware for the SPI rx will be compatible with their TX firmware. 

Anyone enthusiastic about building their own targets can do so from the repo where the update SPI code baked into Betaflight is maintained: https://github.com/phobos-/betaflight/tree/express-lrs

The final release of the ExpressLRS 2.0.0 firmware is now available. See another thread HERE for details.

Curious if you guys think the differences here justify the price? I'm thinking no but I know nothing of ELRS.

(15-Dec-2021, 03:19 AM)the.ronin Wrote: Curious if you guys think the differences here justify the price?  I'm thinking no but I know nothing of ELRS.

There's no denying that the Axisflying THOR ExpressLRS module has a few nice bells and whistles but I'm not sure I'm convinced that those extras are worth $80 more than the next most expensive module (which come in at around $50).

I still also think the case design is a bit janky. Surely they could have come up with something a bit more ergonomic than that for nearly $130. A cable running out the bottom into the the JR module adapter is also a bit naff IMO. With a bit of thought they could have easily come up with something that routed the wires via the back of the main module or integrated another socket into the back of it so all of that wiring was hidden away on radios that have a JR module bay.

As Mr Kim said, with 1W of power and the a price tag to match, I think the THOR module is probably really aimed at super long range flyers who need that power and those features, and who generally spend a lot of money on their gear. It's seems to be an overkill for freestyle pilots, and definitely more than an overkill for racers.

Once the cheaper OLED equipped modules get full ELRS support, you could probably just rip the internals out of one of one and design / 3D print yourself a much nicer looking case that would work with a non-JR module bay radio.

Just flashed my old R9M TX with 2.0.1 and will be trying it out. After vesting my flight environment to Crossfire, justifying any expense on ELRS is pretty much not going to happen so I am repurposing the old hardware.

Have to say, looking at the pricing points of the ELRS TX/RX's, might have considered this had it been around when i made the switch. Have been reading some of the issues people have been having with the TX offerings, decided it could not be worse playing around with the R9 hardware for testing.

(06-Jan-2022, 02:07 AM)kaitylynn Wrote: Just flashed my old R9M TX with 2.0.1 and will be trying it out.  After vesting my flight environment to Crossfire, justifying any expense on ELRS is pretty much not going to happen so I am repurposing the old hardware.

If you're running the original (pre-2019) ACCST version of the R9 module then don't forget to also do the resistor mod.

I think we might start to see 900MHz ELRS support start to drop off because it's far less popular with most people jumping into the 2.4GHz ELRS offerings.

(06-Jan-2022, 02:13 AM)SnowLeopardFPV Wrote: If you're running the original (pre-2019) ACCST version of the R9 module then don't forget to also do the resistor mod.

Here you go if you've not already seen it...

Thank you! I was reading about that too. It appears the TX will simply be limited to 11500 without the mod?

(06-Jan-2022, 02:29 AM)kaitylynn Wrote: It appears the TX will simply be limited to 11500 without the mod?

Correct. You may also have issues running the ELRS LUA scripts on your without the high baud rate mod, but I can't confirm that. You would have to give it a try.

Will be soldering the resistor into the R9M soon, found the R9 Slim+ to be dead so ended up ordering an RX. Like under $20 for the BetaFPV 915 Nano. Am interested to test it and this system is actually exciting in its possibilities. Just not sure which airframe will be the test bed. Might have to get The Leaf back together and see how it works.