Crossfire nano appears to communicate over Telem1 but no radio calibration

ArduCopter Copter 4.2
1

It appears that the crossfire nano is communicating over Telem1 with CRSF protocol because I have the ability to read/write parameters in Agentlite on a TX16S. However, I have no ability to run a radio calibration because the flight controller isn’t reading RC inputs. Is one way communication possible?..

I did check the radio to ensure the inputs/mixers are set up properly (they’re default, with the exception of Ch5/6/7 mixers set to switches).

Also, I did read the docs on crossfire standalone (SBUS > RCIN) and crossfire telemetry configs (UART > Telem1 (what I’m using)) but nothing is pointing me in the right direction. Am I wrong to believe I can get bidirectional telemetry with a crossfire nano running crossfire protocol? Did I somehow miss a setting to configure ardu* to accept both RC and Telemetry inputs…? Is the crossfire protocol or the mavlink protocol more capable? The documentation leads me to believe crossfire protocol allows RC + Mavlink while the TBS docs lead me to believer the mavlink protocol is better for RC + Mavlink. So confused.
https://ardupilot.org/copter/docs/common-crsf-telemetry.html#common-crsf-telemetry

2

Try this: Connect channel 1&2 of the nano receiver to the TX/RX port on your Telem1 uart. Set the appropriate SERIALx_PROTOCOL to 23. Make sure nano is set to CRSF on those channels. SBUS will give you RC but I don’t think it’s two way in this instance.

Check this Team Black Sheep RC Systems — Copter documentation

3

Ch1/2 are connected to the Telem1 UART, verified that. When you say SERIALx_PROTOCOL = 23. You do mean Serial1 in this case (A cube orange Serial1=Telem1 yes?).

4

Yes, in this case Telem 1 = SERIAL1. That isn’t the case on all boards and I didn’t know what kind of board you were using.

1 Like
5

That worked, and I feel quite stupid for not trying that manually in QGC because of how awful MP is at connecting. I’m going to be quite critical in my next statements but I really wish I could do more to make this more intuitive. Coming from iNav, this is god awful from an integration perspective.

Thank you for your help.