Skywatcher2001
Well-Known Member
Well now these photos bring up an interesting question . . . is my FAA Number required on the RC? I thought it was only for the outside of the bird.
Well now these photos bring up an interesting question . . . is my FAA Number required on the RC? I thought it was only for the outside of the bird.
You sure you don't need someone to send a physical not to you for forensic analysis?Thanks. I have learned another new DJI thing.
You may get some clues comparing the FCC test results for both (I haven’t looked at them side by side). What we do know with some confidence is that the BT- 300s don’t work with the 2 version, at least not reliably. There have also been reports of incompatibility with other android devices. It might be android hardware or OS.So now that we've proven to some doubters that there is an A and B version of the M2 RC, the question remains what's the difference? It has to be something that causes the BT-300 fits.
What I did find interesting is the test setup for the 2 version for the FCC submissions included an iPhone as the display device. I wonder to what extent it was tested with an android phone/tablet during development? I don’t think we can rule out that the compatibility problems could be addressed with a firmware update.Exactly. Not just a software difference.
I'm thinking some hardware difference to be compatible with Enterprise, but backwards compatible with Zoom/Pro.
Do you suspect those who claim to have the 1B controller are mistaken?
If it doesn’t exist DJI went to a lot of trouble providing submissions and commissioning testing for FCC approval.
I have tested one (RC1B) with my BT-300’s to satisfy my curiosity they aren’t compatible.
The label (submitted for RF compliance testing) looks like this....
View attachment 81624
Wanted to ask add a picture of my RC1B![]()
A picture is worth a thousand words. Got one anybody?
What do you make of this one?Few did, until they tried the Epson Moverio BT-300. It will work with the A version but not the B.
Perhaps B had compatibility with Enterprise? But then why not work with BT-300? Difference has to be hardware related, otherwise firmware update would handle the software part.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.