Turbine to RC transition

I'm not really having a problem with it, I just posted originally because I
saw an easy cheap way to make the lil buggers easier to fly. The other
reason I mentioned my circuit is because there was that fella in here with
helicopter controls rigged to the remote control device. Now that I have a
little experience with the RC thing I can honestly say that his device would
be of little practical value in learning to fly a real one because of the
reversed control issue.

The reason I say that is that unless you totally disconnect the yaw gyro of
the RC and keep the helicopter's tail pointed at the pilot the experience
would share very little in common with a real helicopter, and might even
give you some pretty bad habits that would have to be unlearned. If you used
a circuit like I describe, and disconnect the yaw gyro it would be a lot
more like flying a real one.

The only thing I dont think can really be fixed about the
heli-seat-controller is the fact that the mass of an RC ship is so much less
and the controls are so much more quick and forgiving in the RC. It's much
harder to get behind the power-plant and rotor system in the little RC, if
you behaved similarly in a big chopper you'd overtorque it or get a mast
bump. You might be able to remedy this by putting some fancy software
between the controller and the RC machine though.

One thing about it that just can't be replicated no matter how hard you
tried is that a good portion of hovering flight is done through your
proprioceptive system (aka your ass). I can feel tiny lil G's in my body
that I use unconciously use to correct drift, yaw, and height. The reason I
know this is that I have a damn hard time hovering IGE in Bell's flight
training device when I go for recurrency. The only thing unrealistic about
their simulator is that its not full motion, and you have to fly totally
with your eyes. Because its not a full motion sim, the things its best
suited at training are systems failures and IFR/IMC stuff. They don't ever
try to teach any flight technique in theirs.

Bart

"Steve R" wrote in message
news:EBGag.33475 I had the same problem when I was at your stage. Straight
nose-in wasn't an
issue. That 135 degree point was a total PITA. About the best
explanation I can give is that the model is oriented right at that point
where your brain is trying to decide whether to control it's in normal or
nose-in mode. I remember when I first learned nose-in, I figured that I
could start doing smooth pirouettes now because that was I skill I always
wanted to master. Only to find out that, while I could comfortably fly
tail or nose-in, transitioning between the two, smoothly, was another
matter.

Hang in there, it will come! :-)

Fly Safe,
Steve R.

Thanks for the feed back guys. It definitely puts things in a different
perspective!


"The OTHER Kevin in San Diego" skiddz "AT" adelphia "DOT" net wrote in
message ...
On Wed, 17 May 2006 18:49:54 -0400, "B4RT"
wrote:

I'm not really having a problem with it, I just posted originally because
I
saw an easy cheap way to make the lil buggers easier to fly. The other
reason I mentioned my circuit is because there was that fella in here with
helicopter controls rigged to the remote control device. Now that I have a
little experience with the RC thing I can honestly say that his device
would
be of little practical value in learning to fly a real one because of the
reversed control issue.

That's my argument as well - also if you wad up the RC heli, you're
down until you can set the thing up again and it's not as easy as
bolting on new parts and going flying.

The reason I say that is that unless you totally disconnect the yaw gyro
of
the RC and keep the helicopter's tail pointed at the pilot the experience
would share very little in common with a real helicopter, and might even
give you some pretty bad habits that would have to be unlearned. If you
used
a circuit like I describe, and disconnect the yaw gyro it would be a lot
more like flying a real one.

The only thing I dont think can really be fixed about the
heli-seat-controller is the fact that the mass of an RC ship is so much
less
and the controls are so much more quick and forgiving in the RC. It's
much
harder to get behind the power-plant and rotor system in the little RC, if
you behaved similarly in a big chopper you'd overtorque it or get a mast
bump. You might be able to remedy this by putting some fancy software
between the controller and the RC machine though.

Yep. The power to weight ratios of the models FAR exceed any real
ship. Even my little Blade CP will absolutely ROCKET skyward if I
just firewall the throttle. No way a real ship could hope to
duplicate it's performance.

One thing about it that just can't be replicated no matter how hard you
tried is that a good portion of hovering flight is done through your
proprioceptive system (aka your ass). I can feel tiny lil G's in my body
that I use unconciously use to correct drift, yaw, and height. The reason
I
know this is that I have a damn hard time hovering IGE in Bell's flight
training device when I go for recurrency. The only thing unrealistic about
their simulator is that its not full motion, and you have to fly totally
with your eyes. Because its not a full motion sim, the things its best
suited at training are systems failures and IFR/IMC stuff. They don't ever
try to teach any flight technique in theirs.

Yep. I give demos in ours and one thing I keep having to drill into
prospective customers is that's it's NOT a flight simulator. It's a
training device best used for IFR procedures training and learning the
correlations between the controls. I strongly urge them not to use it
to teach autos, quick stops etc.. It's not accurate enough for that.
It's not of much use for hover training (IMO) either. Like you said,
you don't get "ass feedback" sitting in the thing.

I've often thought about some orientation aid for RC aircraft, but I
think it would cost too much to make something that was accurate. You
don't really need it for helis anyway, since you can fly in any
direction. I guess I'm saying "bah".

And we're not cheating with the heading-hold gyros! It is possible
to fly an RC heli without a gyro, but it's a lot of work. Esspecially
in the wind. There is an inbetween option; most hobby-grade gyros have
a "rate" mode, where it simply slows rotation to sane speeds, rather
than holding it in one direction.

Those cheap coaxials look like fun. If you want something that will fly
a bit more like a real heli and will do aerobatics, the T-rex is a
really good little machine. All the fun of a "real" RC heli, but not
quite as expensive.

RC helis will have to do for me untill I can afford lessons in a
full-scale.

wrote in message
oups.com...
I've often thought about some orientation aid for RC aircraft, but I
think it would cost too much to make something that was accurate. You
don't really need it for helis anyway, since you can fly in any
direction. I guess I'm saying "bah".

I don't have a clue how something like that would work. It's just a matter
of learning the reflexes for the different positions. Flying backwards or
sideways only adds other control requirements that aren't necessarily
intuitive. There's also the added fact that all the right side up forward,
backwards, and sideways stuff can be done while flying inverted which
scrambles the required control inputs yet again. In the long run, I firmly
believe that by the time you get some kind of electronic aid working for all
of this, you would probably have worked it out in your head and be able to
fly it more smoothly to boot!

And we're not cheating with the heading-hold gyros! It is possible
to fly an RC heli without a gyro, but it's a lot of work. Esspecially
in the wind. There is an inbetween option; most hobby-grade gyros have
a "rate" mode, where it simply slows rotation to sane speeds, rather
than holding it in one direction.

As someone who did his initial hover training without the benefit of a gyro,
they were just becoming popular back in 1982 and I didn't know they existed
for the first few months that I tried to learn to hover, it's a lot easier
to fly the model in a modest (10 mph or so) breeze. The model wants to
weather vane into the wind which becomes a natural yaw damper. The gyros we
had back then were mechanical. A couple of brass fly weights attached to
the output shaft of an electric motor that was mounted on a gimble with a
potentiometer like those used on the control sticks of the RC transmitter.
All it was, was a yaw damper and, by todays standards, not a very good one!
The modern "gyro" is all solid state and all of them that have heading hold
capability also have what we call a "normal" mode which behaves essentially
like the old mechanical units did 20 years ago, albeit with much better
precision.

Those cheap coaxials look like fun. If you want something that will fly
a bit more like a real heli and will do aerobatics, the T-rex is a
really good little machine. All the fun of a "real" RC heli, but not
quite as expensive.

Generally true although you have to be careful with models like the T-Rex.
They offer this model in a fully upgraded version with all the bells and
whistles. It sells in the neighborhood of $500 or so, give or take a little
depending on which hobby shop's advertisement you read. Then you get to buy
batteries, RC flight control servos, receiver, gyro, etc. You can build and
fly a "nice" IC (internal combustion) powered model for that kind of money!
Even those who buy the base version of the model eventually start upgrading
it as the stock plastics parts don't handle a crash as well and over time,
they've got all the metal upgrades on there, only they've paid for them one
at a time so now that $500 model turns out to be a $650 model. They can get
you, one way or the other!

RC helis will have to do for me untill I can afford lessons in a
full-scale.

That's one area that you and I definitely have in common! :-(

Good luck & Fly Safe,
Steve R.

Even those who buy the base version of the model eventually start upgrading
it as the stock plastics parts don't handle a crash as well and over time

Yeah, but, when you compare the price of the plastic spare parts of a
T-rex, it becomes obvious why I said it's cheaper than a bigger heli.
All my crashes have cost under $50 to fix. A few times I've just had to
straighten the blades and put the canopy back on.

The stock heli flies just fine unless you're doing hardcore 3D. The
people who end up spending lots of cash on bling/upgrades are usually
more committed to the hobby, or don't mind spending the $. You don't
need to upgrade if you're just flying around not doing anything
special.

I got the a stock kit, batteries, charger, all RC gear -- everything
you need to get started -- for ~$700. You can get a nitro kit for that
price, sure, but you still have to spend another $150 or so on
accessories if you don't already have them. And you have to keep paying
for nitro.

Once you get into the bigger nitro helis, it's more of a serious
commitment to the hobby as you should only fly at an RC field. With the
T-rex, you can just find a person-less outdoor spot, a gym, or even a
hanger

If you want a more serious toy, but don't really want to get into the
hobby, then the T-rex is the top-of-the-line heli to get. My point is
that more people here are in that mindset, rather than the guys in RC
heli groups/forums (like you and me) who are obviously a bit more
commited.

One thing for sure, it's certinaly much easier to get started today
than it was 20 years ago. Now kids, or even full-scale pilots, can get
a kit up and flying without too much trouble