NDA policy with FTR (Futaba transmitter ready) Please press key Provided is, that the FTR system should expand market shares of Futaba !?! There are only very few customers with Futaba transmitters, buying beginner FTR models. Futaba has only very few customers in that field. To use FTR the Futaba TX must have S-FHHS protocoll. All other Futaba TX customers can`t use FTR models. This reduces the possible amount of customers in addition. RTF models are for absolute beginners. Buying the first airplane the beginner customer doesn`t have any RC stuff. They need completely ready built models with all RC installed and all additional equipment to get it working. This customer has not any experience, he only can compare one thing which is the price, that’s the key point. This is NOT the market for Futaba, as there is no influence to the airplane producers and no competive beginner radio Almost Ready to Fly (ARF) models with FTR. ARF models are always supplied without installed receivers. If a distribution company has a complete radio line like Futaba, it would be perfect to have the a beginner radio for these ARF airplanes, to get beginners the customers from the beginning to the own radio system. This beginner radio then must be absolutely competitive in price. In that case he already learns about Futaba from the beginning and if he had success he will buy the next airplane with this system. Later on perhaps the next step, a higher grade TX. This works if there is a pure beginner radio which allows all functions, and also all other TX must allow this. Result: FTR couldn`t expand Futabas market shares in the beginner target group. No Return On Investment. FTR would only work for Futaba in the market of already experienced modelers, but they dont buy ARF or RTF airplanes. The most negative point when FTR is distributed via S-FHSS protocoll data describtion to airplane and cheap radio producers: Futabas know how is also distributed/spreaded to chinese. They learn how to create 2,4 GHz systems, without any need to pay. In general, what I want to say: I suggest to new define the NDA policy. It must lead to more business and market shares for Futaba. And it must protect the Futaba know how. Solution: FTR products from other producers must use hardware from Futaba !!! (see next page)

FTR products from other producers must use hardware from Futaba Targets: Futabas know how must be protected. FTR customers must pay for it. FTR customer must explain and proof what he is doing with the PCBs Solution: Futaba is using hardware for the FTR system, not software. Futaba designs 2 very small, new PCB with CC 2530 chip from TI. One with, one without PA. One receiver, one TX. The CC2530 has an inbuilt CC 2500 chip and a microcontroler on 8051 standard. With this chip a complete RX and also a complete TX can be created. The PCB stays small, but most of all the comunication between the controler and RF chip stays internal, inside the chip case. It can`t be read out. Nearly no cracking possible. That means the NDA/FTR customer gets the PCB with the internal Futaba protocoll from Futaba. He doesn`t get a written protocoll describtion which helps cheap producers to learn how to create a 2,4 GHz protocoll. He only gets a interface describtion. The TX module has all possible interfaces like USB, AD, E2C, SPI, S-Bus, aso. So a FTR TX producer can do his own TX, besides the RF radio link. His main PCB must have a interface to the RF part, which fits to the described interface of the Futaba RF PCB. Same with the RX. The PCB already is a complete RX, but without servo output or servo alignment. This is part of the FTR producers design for a receiver. The FTR producer must pay a certain (cheap) amount for the FTR modules. As the figures for this modules will be very high, it gets very cheap. Especially if also Futaba is using it in something like a kit system a for the own RX or TX range. Approvals EN 320 328 only must be done one time for the modules, not for every complete RX or TX This creates not only additional turnover and production. Most if all it allows complete control about quality, sales figures and know how.

Who takes advantage out of NDA 2,4GHz protocoll? Example: Nine Eagles (NE) NE offers a copter with FTR Futaba protocoll. They always supply it with simple NE TX with 4 channel, 4 additional switches. If a customer already has a Futaba TX and he wants to fly the NE drone with FTR protocoll, it must be a TX with S-FHSS. Lots of Futaba TX don`t have it. If a customer already has a Futaba S-FHSS TX and he wants to fly the NE copter with FTR protocoll, he can`t use the additional functions like return to home, camera switch ON/ODFF, or video/picture select aso. He also can`t use the Futaba TX for mode switching. The same with most of NE airplanes with additional gyros. They only can be used with NE TX, as the functions are aligned to this TX. Why a NE customer should buy these products because he already has a Futaba TX? It is no advantage for him….. He still must use the NE TX. It only would make sense, if the NE product could be used with all functions with a Futaba TX. But then it only would make sense if NE has 2 sets, one with NE TX, one without NE TX…… How this system could support Futaba? Why Futaba was not informed from robbe about this?

Third party RX (protocoll cracking) Target: The Futabas know how must be protected. PCB, processor and software designs of receivers and TX must make cracking much more difficult. A 2,4 GHz system always works with a micro controler and a 2,4GHz chip. The 2,4Ghz chip contains all necessary hardware and software for a transceiver. The microcontroler controls the 2,4Ghz chip, it tells the 2,4GHz chip how to transmit, how often, in which sequences aso. This is made by software and it is the core competence of a RF design for a radio link. This core competence must be protected. Cracking always starts with listening the comunication between the controler and the 2,4 GHz chip. Using two chips means the comunication lines are outside of both chips on the PCB, it can be tapped/listened. We must make it impossible to listen at this position. The TI CC2530 has an inbuilt CC 2500 chip 2,4GHz and a microcontroler with 8051 standard. It is a complete RX and also a complete TX with its controler. So the comunication between 2,4GHz Chip and microcontroller is inside the chip case. No external possibility to listen....... If this chip has to less capacity for other functions like servo managment aso., we use aditional microntroler, only for external functions. The comunication between 2,4Ghz chip and his microcontroler always stays inside the CC2530. If there are reasons that this solution can`t work, it is possible to mount the processor at the low PCB side, the 2,4GHz Chip at the same position at the upper side. This makes listening also difficult. Higher costs, but maximum protection against cracking is „Flip Chip Direct mounting“. Then the producer needs to buy a complete waver, which would be about 10.000 pcs. minimum. Software support In addition the software must work like a car key with always changing paritiy bits in a random system. I am sure Futaba designers will find a solution which will achieve the goals