Jim Drew of XPS

Chew the fat on any non-RC subject. It's a free-for-all but common rules of decency do apply so act like adults and don't embarrass yourself by trolling or cuss'n.

Jim Drew of XPS

Postby RCModelReviews » Thu May 13, 2010 11:54 pm

Just a little note to clarify some allegations made by Jim Drew of XPS.

In recent postings to RCG, Jim drew has made a number of defamatory allegations in respect to myself.

1. he says I'm not an RF engineer

Actually, as many will have already deduced, I am a indeed an RF engineer, with almost four decades of professional experience in the design, construction, implementation and maintenance of systems that include HF, VHF and microwave communications and telemetry. I designed and built my own proportional RC system back in 1970 and over the years have worked for a number of large and small communications companies as a technician and design engineer. The very fact that many of my early criticisms of the XPS system design have now been addressed might be seen as proof that I know quite a bit more than Jim when it comes to such matters.

2. he claims I am in the employ of Chinese RC manufacturers

Let me state quite categorically that I am *not* in the employ of any RC manufacturer, Chinese or otherwise.

Yes, I have assisted a number of RC manufacturers in recent times -- but only because my goal has been to ensure that the best possible products make it to the market. I have never solicited, nor have I ever received payment for providing that assistance. What's more, as readers will be aware, even the products that provided for review are not kept by me so there is no bias or favor in my articles or reviews.

3. he refers to my low-cost cruise-missile project

Well yes, I am widely acknowledged as someone who is skilled and knowledgeable in the area of pulsejet engine design and manufacture. To this end, I've often been seen on TV with my pulsejets, featuring in Scrapheap Challenge as an on-screen "expert" and behind the scenes as a "technical consultant" for Junkyard Wars.

In 2003, and partly in response to the 9/11 bombings, I announced that I was building a low-cost cruise missile (LCCM) in my garage, solely as proof that "if I can do it, so could terrorists". This was a warning that we need to be vigilant against those who might seek to use readily available technology to build very effective terror weapons. To that end, I guess you could argue that my goals were achieved, since there has not been an LCCM terrorist attack.

Interestingly enough, although JD implies that I know nothing about RF, electronics, or the other technologies required for this (and other) projects, I am presently negotiating the licensing of my LCCM design to the government of a friendly nation. They approached me, not the other way around.

I have openly stated that the latest XPS system would appear to be very good. Robust and reliable with excellent performance -- yet JD still seems to see me as an enemy whose character must be assassinated -- I have no idea why.

Although I have an original XPS system here, I chose not to include it in my 2.4GHz shootout because that would have been unfair to XPS. The original system was a very poor performer and cost many models (there are plenty of people who will testify to that) so to include it in the tests would be pointless and unreasonable.

I invite JD to submit one of the new XPS systems for review if he wishes -- although he's made it patently clear that he would never consider such a thing and reiterates that I know nothing (without even the courtesy of an "in my opinion").

There is no point into getting into a slanging match with JD, even though he has made unsubstantiated and defamatory comments. I think his desire to engage in the character assassination of the person who:

1. said right from the start that XPS needed a proper dipole on the transmitter module (it now has one)
2. said right from the start that XPS needed *useful* frequency agility (it is now FHSS)
3. said right from the start that claims of "an 8-element patent-pending spherical antenna" were false and misleading (no longer mentioned and standard whips are being used instead on newer versions)

speaks volumes about his professionalism and the confidence he has in his own product. It seems that if he can't argue the facts, he'll simply try to discredit the messenger.

N'uff said?
RCModelReviews.com, just the facts.
User avatar
Posts: 2120
Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 3:40 am

Re: Jim Drew of XPS

Postby Jacko » Fri May 14, 2010 12:01 pm

What about the smiley face tape company? Are you on their payroll? Do you own stock in the SFTC? Is the SFTC linked to financially supporting Terrorist cells?

The A9 Thread got quite amusing for a few hours there. Now Mr. JD is claiming to have reverse engineered Hitecs telemetry, and have massively improved the A9 Latency with the new XPS A9 Module... I wonder if his miracle module also fixes the deadband issue :D
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 8:57 pm

Re: Jim Drew of XPS

Postby GBR2 » Sat May 15, 2010 6:03 am

I'm glad to see Bruce respond to the character assassination. XPS appears to now have a decent product. Amazing how after switching to a hopping scheme, almost overnight problems relating to XPS and mystery crashes, all seemed to go away. The worst thing about XPS is JD himself. He has come across as such a snake oil salesman over the years that despite the fact that his equipment now seems to be pretty sound, I just won't use it. I've no confidence in him and at least for me, has translated into non-confidence in the hardware.

At least now we can start to take bets on in what year his 16 channel wonder transmitter is going to be released. I'm sure Graupner will be thrilled about that.
User avatar
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 5:04 pm

Re: Jim Drew of XPS

Postby element » Sat May 22, 2010 1:01 am

Unfortunately many vendors on RCG are following the same trend.
They tend to discret and insult anyone who is not agreeing to their view.

Fortunately, many does not mean the majority, they're a small subset of the community.
However it's always difficult and sad to see. Just seen the same kind of stuff again today.
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat May 22, 2010 12:57 am

Re: Jim Drew of XPS

Postby ADI » Sun May 30, 2010 5:28 am

RCModelReviews wrote:1. he says I'm not an RF engineer

If the truth be known, this JD character could not even bias a BC547 to mid supply rail, let alone comprehend what I'm talking about. He will eventually move on and become a distant memory, but we will still have the power to bias that transistor. Therein lies the real power!

Posts: 12
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 2:53 am
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand

Re: Jim Drew of XPS

Postby RCModelReviews » Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:31 am

An update.

Remember JD saying that *his* systems didn't need antenna diversity and that I was full of BS for suggesting that diversity was important in larger aircraft?

Well look at this

Who'd have thought that a know-nothing like me would have been right yet again?

I doubt I'll get an apology though :lol:
RCModelReviews.com, just the facts.
User avatar
Posts: 2120
Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 3:40 am

Re: Jim Drew of XPS

Postby disco stu » Tue Oct 26, 2010 4:21 am

Thread revival time (bored at work so searching through here):

I remember that junkyard wars episode, the only one I've seen actually. As soon as I read something about pulsejets I thought it was you-your famous :lol:

Why is some government buying the rights to your low cost cruise missile? Is it to keep the info out of naughty peoples hands, or it was superior to anything their own boffins could come up with? I havn't seen yours, but never imagined something like that to be extremely hard to accomplish for someone with the right skills (or a few of course)
disco stu
Posts: 190
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2010 4:58 am

Re: Jim Drew of XPS

Postby RCModelReviews » Tue Oct 26, 2010 5:08 am

It's pretty trivial to build a low-cost missile -- even more so these days.

Of course an LCCM won't be as accurate or as effective as a $1m mil-spec missile from Raytheon -- but if you're simply intent on creating terror -- a very loud, very visible missile with an accuracy of 50 yards instead of 2 feet is still probably a very attractive option.
RCModelReviews.com, just the facts.
User avatar
Posts: 2120
Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 3:40 am

Re: Jim Drew of XPS

Postby disco stu » Tue Oct 26, 2010 6:45 am

Just as I thought, but hearing you say it makes me wonder even more why they are buying the rights to yours when a few of their guys could probably design one just as effective. Its alright, I wont tell them that! Or maybe its for the fact that you were on junkyard wars, and are therefore famous :D
disco stu
Posts: 190
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2010 4:58 am

Re: Jim Drew of XPS

Postby Engineer » Wed Feb 23, 2011 4:59 pm

In the early '70s the Boeing Co. received an R for P for a low cost harassment missile from the Israeli AF.. The main specifications were:
1) Fly 100MPH.
2) Fly 100 miles.
3) Make lots of noise.
I was a part of the prototype fabrication team. We constructed a dynajet powered small aircraft, filled with gasoline, and controlled by a heathkit radio.
We did not get the contract. I don't know if the Israelis got what they wanted.
But I do know that if you are trying to prove something you are about 40 years behind the times.
BTW I have been flying JD's equipment since it came out and never have had a glitch. JD may come off as a snake oil salesman but there are other individuals in that organization that are very competent.
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 4:04 am


Return to Non-RC

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests