3 ms·
Yeah, I'm curious why they don't do that. I guess part of the issue is how gently should "gently" be? If you're not expecting it to start breaking it could thro
by tlrobinson 10y ago
Yeah, I'm curious why they don't do that. I guess part of the issue is how gently should "gently" be? If you're not expecting it to start breaking it could throw you off. If it's too gentle then there's no point.
If the remote emitted a warning sound a second before it started braking, then slowly started braking, that could work.
Also in my experience RF interference is extremely localized. Chances are it will reconnect once you travel ~15 feet.
BTW here's a map someone started of "dead zones": https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?mid=1BSgoslQB-0i16lN1KhgBdJws8TU&hl=en_US https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?mid=1BSgoslQB-0i16l...
- skdoo 10y agoExactly right. It's hard to arbitrarily pick the "gentle" braking point, and unexpected braking is not great.
- Sir_Substance 10y agoOnly if you choose an absolute value. Start gentle and then ramp up over the course of 10-15 seconds. It would be easy to add a slight high frequency oscillation to it as well, to make the board vibrate a little as a prompt to explain what it's doing. It's kind of ridiculous to present that as an unsolvable problem dude.