Leisure Industry Features That We Could Implement

But you still have the remote in your hand and touching the break should end the Endless Mode.

Nice, no one does.

ES8’s are Unnecessary. Wake up early to Ride that Public Transportation. Everything’s unsafe until you make it safe.

You don’t remove things, you make things efficient to solve problem. If i were to remove a BMS because it presented a space problem , I would be fixing the space problem , but opening myself to future issues.

Because we see these features implemented on industrial skates with little known problems being a result of them. This is a thread for implementing already used features in industrial boards.

a portion of this thread actually talks upon hiring engineers and teams to tackle the existing problems we have…

Probably, same thing as cruise control, so the result of the feature would still occur with or without it’s existence. and since there’s already mellow riders with those features and there hasn’t been reported accidents thus far…

Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t shoot for such a feature… And it’s beyond just an odometer. Lifetime data that allow us to see the entire life of the board along with faults, max temp , speed, efficiency, and other data that can contribute to refining the perfect configuration.

Ooooor maybe it’s nice to push your board , have your remote on and just GO. re-Implementing the SK8 in ESK8…

Danm, pack it up everyone , more innovation is bad guys!

More Like Boosted’s proven implementation. I do it everyday making the turn off process a one man unit. It makes sure that i never leave either device on once i get into the grove of doing it everyday, especially when i have to keep it moving from the streets to my work building.

I believe you should innovate to higher standards. ESK8 has yet to reach its full potential.

Agreed. Which is why you should work as soon as possible to perfect and make these features an efficient part of the system.

You mean other than the fact that there’s a demand for them. This world isn’t driven by what’s needed, but by what’s wanted. And people obviously want these , just as they want a cheaper VESC6, or a Heatsink enclosure or a $900 alternative to a car.

And you contribute to that, and that’s your thing… But not everyone ride esk8’s to be a better rider to the next guy. I ride it because it feels good and i, along with others, believe their experience will be better with these features.

Hmmmmm no. And so am I

5 Likes

I cannot tell you how many times I have seen friends bail, hit the ground and the remote flies outta their hands…in fact it’s such a thing we prefer tough remotes that can handle it without breaking…I fear there is a lack of experience behind these ideas…in the real word is where I ride…shit happens and safety needs to be considered…shut the doors to unsafe situations and stop opening them up with unsafe feature ideas, think these these things through, run scenarios and ask yourselves if it’s really helping anyone…eskates do no require any of these features to operate correctly or safety…adopting unsafe features for novel reasons is asking for trouble…quite literally…

Good point. I think reasonable settings could help with this… A failsafe such as remote connection being lost, or the board during endless ride slowing down on its own similar to a longboard would be good enough. Even opposed to a longboard that would gain speed down a hill, if you are riding endless mode, your board could slowly slow itself down even going down a hill…

You can mess up programming your eskate with bad settings, it would be similar enough with an endless ride mode. I don’t see much trouble coming from that personally, outside the oddball bad/dumb settings being set.

@Jc06505n

You misunderstood much of what I said, I didn’t make it past your third or fourth point dude, sorry…

1 Like

I didn’t…I compared the reality of this, this being Group buy for features, ending up like an Alex Fiasco in the future. Maybe I should edit to clarify ?

Can only think the usefulness of an odometer on a shop bought, unmodified, completely stock eSK8. DIY eSK8 are like ‘Triggers Broom’ in their lifetime and a figure of total miles ridden will have little practical use on the second-hand market. Sure it might be nice once in a while to check how far you have ridden, but to what end? I just don’t see the point except for individual rides, but a plethora of phone apps exist to track your journey anyway.

Endless Ride bothers me. I built an eSK8 so I can travel power assisted. Can’t remember the last time I wished I could get out and push on a snowboard :joy:

Remote power on. Only if the ON/OFF relay is powered discretely from the main battery pack.

Push to start. Again, not for me and I agree with the reasons posted above as to why it’s a bad idea.

I realise all I’m doing here is being negative, but right now I can’t think of anything that isn’t a gimmick that needs to be added to what’s already available. Maybe front/rear light control from remote, or a horn/warning sound triggered by remote (verbal shouting could be muffled inside a full face helmet) ?

Keep things as simple as possible I say.

2 Likes

Novice here, But don’t we already have that with Remotes (i.e Firefly)? Send a signal to receiver to the VESC to turn off? Again, I’m not an expert in this matter.

I fully understand your security concerns. However I think they are solvable. I also ride in the real world :wink: but still I think it is possible to implement this kind of feature with sufficient security. This is where the innovation comes in. I don’t have the solution now - it demands knowledge of the system, code, development and testing.

1 Like

Sure, in fact any bi-directional telemetry remote control will be able to do this if wired to a solid state switch, too easy. I lack such a remote, and some use bluetooth adapters for the communications to a phone or external device, that makes tons of sense to me, while adding the complexity of bi-directional RF for this feature makes zero sense…the firefly has it for a non novel reason, telemetry most likely, so it’s already there and you are not making it more complex than it already is…but for 99% of the eskates out there (single way RF comms) there’s no point in trying to add it…historically the comms coming from the rx on such systems are weak and unreliable, and I wouldn’t put the main power switch on such a unreliable connection…this is why we use 2.4ghxz spread spectrum for control, and bluetooth for telem…bluetooth control riders have experienced many issues in urban environments and it’s an unsafe protocol for such use…basically get into transceivers instead of TX and RX, things like data radios…sorry but I would much rather have a purpose built control system, robust and solid as hell, error correction, spread spectrum in an RF that isn’t saturated or dealing with a high noise floor in rban environments.,…we are quite literally putting our life in the hands of that RF signal…you might want to learn about how robust it is and how you can make it better before adding features that cripple it…

It seems everyone’s having a hard-time grasping a simply concept here cause i keep seeing the same thing: If your not going to use it don’t. Many don’t use Cruise Control but others still do. You not using a feature is not an excuse for it to not be implemented… so longs as it’s something that someone can use, it’s merit-able to look at and see if the implementation is worth the integration.

I love the debating that’s going on here, I do, it’s what’s needed to progress for both the industry and DIY scene, but people are looking at their side of the picture instead of all of it… The fact is this: ESK8s are going to continue to progress in things that are both needed and un-needed.

After all, how many of us have a BT Mod in our boards? A Friefly? Lights? Go Pros Attachments? Photon Remotes? None of the above is needed yet were all ready to throw money at them! All i’m saying is , The criticism on implementing “non-needed features” when we buy un-needed things on a daily basis. If you don’t want it and it’s not for you , keep it stepping, but don’t be arguing against the advancement of ESK8’s

1 Like

Your definition of “advancement of eskates” and mine are very very different…partly because I realize and accept that we don’t even have good decks, trucks and wheels for them yet, let alone robust drive systems and bombproof speed controllers…to me we don’t even have a completed eskate to begin adding novelty too…do we ride for hundred or thousands of miles on the DIY builds we already make? sure do…and I still find them lacking in many respects…I’m not against new ideas, innovations and novelty, hell I just put in a 50watt speaker system into my last build, I am no stranger to admitting novelty and useless features…BUT…I believe the time of those wishing to innovate could be better spent on finishing the work already started before working on things we don’t need…there’s just too much we still need, for me to look for things I don’t…

Keep in mind that Odometer here is being used Synchronously for Lifetime Data which includes (Top speed, , list of lifetime faults, lifetime displacement, average and median Efficiency, etc), useful data than can be used for further research and tuning.

Can someone explain to me why this is a bad idea? There’s already industrial boards that have this feature no problem and any faults they have are not linked to this feature. If its a safety concern , then like any other feature, it’s toggleable by the rider. Simple.

So here is a crazy hopefully PRODUCTIVE idea . . .

Seems like the nRF51822 is becoming the new standard Bluetooth module. It is the only module officially supported by the VESC tool and there are versions avalable from Trampa and Metr as well as avalable code if you want to diy.

The nRF51822 has a butload load of flash memory and is already connected to the Vesc’s uart, it could easily be used to store a lifetime mileage.

The nRF51822 is also designed to be a Bluetooth Low Energy chip. It can act as a BLE beacon transmitting status 10 times a second for less than 220uA (~2 years battery life on a single 18650). It also has its own AtoD and other I/O capability’s. some modules such as the Metr Pro by @rpasichnyk and @hexakopter already has “Additional nRF52 pinouts” broken out on the back of the module.

Imagine a board including this module permanently powered. You could have lifetime odometer that is viewed from an app. If you connect AtoD to your battery the module could shut its self down in low voltage conditions to avoid battery damage. This would also allow battery monitoring whilst charging or whilst the board is off, imagine getting a notification when charging completes :slight_smile:

Additionally a firefly style remote using another nRF module could easily tell the board to power up or down remotely. The new generations of VESC seem to be starting to include their own antispark switch so its not unreasonable to control this from a spare pin on the nRF. Using the same module for remote and bluetooth would also remove the need to have extra arduinos and rf modules inside the board, removing both complexity and possible interference.

Any CONSTRUCTIVE Thoughts?

4 Likes

I don’t think so, we just have a different way of going about it, You want to stick and refine the fundamentals, i want to take what’s proven to work so far, improve it, and then implement it.

@treenutter says hello…

@Hummie says hello…

That’s subject, Caliber 2’s with Skateboard Knowledge Modifications are just fine for ESK8s, unless you cna tell me why they aren’t?

This I kinda agree but I just see it as wheels wearing out faster than in normal skateboard use. Doesn’t make them bad.

And mind you , each of the above have forum members working on perfecting them. But Just because they aren’t at perfection doesnt mean we should wait for others to finish up. Screw that, while treenutter is making his awesome decks, I want to refine an appropriate odometer system that allows for a user to visualize their lifetime data and make improvements based on what they see so far, whether its changing gears ratios or trying out a new drive all together.

While Hummies is making the ultimate Hub motors i want to refine a push to start system that allow ESK8’s to feel closer to a Skateboard! And we can’t make it safe unless we try Nothing is perfected unless experimented and tried out for as many times needed.

I just want you to understand that there’s nothing stopping the synchronous development of what’s needed and what’s wanted.

So how about this: Two Threads, This one will be Dubbed: " Leisure Features We Could Implement " and another " ESK8 Components that need to be improved". Both threads will serve the purpose of recruiting , debating,discussing, and ultimately funding individual / teams to pursue the prototyping , implementation , and production of their respective purposes.

This way what’s in need of existing and being improved is being addressed and actively worked on (via funding incentive) instead of waited on , and what’s desired is also being created.

“ESK8 Components that need to be improved” is basically every post in this forum where someone is moaning about how shit something is. We don’t need anther thread dedicated to that.

The difference would be that it would be the Main, cumulative thread. A sum of what what needs to be approved all in priority by the community. If every post really is “someone [moaning] about how shit something is”, then even more reason to have a thread that not only addresses it, but aims to provide a solution (one being community discussion and funding) towards it. I plan on updating these Threads every week with the intentions of making it Publicly editable (Wiki) once it’s more organized.

But, the people who program may not be adept at CAD, manufacturing and distribution… and vice versa. Just because some areas may be lacking in innovation doesn’t mean that people with other skillsets should stop innovating until people in other areas catch up.

1 Like

I think the nrf51 has a bit to offer. Cheap, and it’s a SoC, so no need for an Arduino, etc. Started having a play round with Vedder’s code and a cheap oled, basically parts I had left over from my build.

No real firm plans as to what I want it to do. Really just wanted to see if it could drive a small oled… Maybe just intercept and display various VESC commands. Guess you could also use it on a remote side.

Will post a thread/source if I ever get it to do something interesting.

4 Likes

I’d be down to donate towards programming, I like the idea of endless ride and push to start - they should be relatively simple to achieve?

Just a quick note. If you’re against some of the ideas here you can just state that it’s not for you and decide not to follow the thread, taking a personal crusade against every idea that is not your own seems counter productive in every sense of the word. You can have apposing views from your peers and still respect theirs.

2 Likes