Tandem helicopter control parameter
Posted by Nhan Phan
|
January 16, 2024 09:37AM |
Hi,
I guess this is for Rainer to answer in-depth. But he's quite busy right now, with trade fair preparations and other shenanigans.
In general, Expo and Agility (dual rate in olde English ^^) should work the same as on a single-rotor.
Style and Gain 'only' affect the precision.
The mixers help with particularities of the dual rotor system. Since you need to work collective and cyclic also for torque compensation (tail), stick inputs to cyclic can even more affect the yaw axis, and if you use yaw extensively, interlock the rotors to do that, and also apply collective and cyclic, there's only so much swash plate deflection/aerodynamic leverage. Also for elevator, you use elevator plus collective differentiation (rear up front down or vice versa), and you also need headroom for stabilization and yaw control.
This leads to inverted. Technically it should work, and there's at least one pilot I know who ploughs his 2.3 m turbine chinook through loops and stuff, but in practice, you probably have only little control overhead, particularly in high load situations or (considerably) quick load changes.
You need to be prepared for situations where the model just doesn't react any more as expected, and you need to be prepared that your way out doesn't work quickly or at all, if such a 'wall cabinet' was suddenly hanging inverted, sideways, dead in the wind with flapping sails, figuratively speaking.
I'm not perfectly sure as to what to expect. For instance, with Flettner (tilted interleaving rotors side by side), there's an effect when the rotors pass through zero collective to negative, if I recall correctly, and that's been accounted for.
This leads back to Rainer, he read up on it during his work, down to the flight manuals for the full size
—Eddi
Born to fly ...
forced to work.
I guess this is for Rainer to answer in-depth. But he's quite busy right now, with trade fair preparations and other shenanigans.
In general, Expo and Agility (dual rate in olde English ^^) should work the same as on a single-rotor.
Style and Gain 'only' affect the precision.
The mixers help with particularities of the dual rotor system. Since you need to work collective and cyclic also for torque compensation (tail), stick inputs to cyclic can even more affect the yaw axis, and if you use yaw extensively, interlock the rotors to do that, and also apply collective and cyclic, there's only so much swash plate deflection/aerodynamic leverage. Also for elevator, you use elevator plus collective differentiation (rear up front down or vice versa), and you also need headroom for stabilization and yaw control.
This leads to inverted. Technically it should work, and there's at least one pilot I know who ploughs his 2.3 m turbine chinook through loops and stuff, but in practice, you probably have only little control overhead, particularly in high load situations or (considerably) quick load changes.
You need to be prepared for situations where the model just doesn't react any more as expected, and you need to be prepared that your way out doesn't work quickly or at all, if such a 'wall cabinet' was suddenly hanging inverted, sideways, dead in the wind with flapping sails, figuratively speaking.
I'm not perfectly sure as to what to expect. For instance, with Flettner (tilted interleaving rotors side by side), there's an effect when the rotors pass through zero collective to negative, if I recall correctly, and that's been accounted for.
This leads back to Rainer, he read up on it during his work, down to the flight manuals for the full size
—Eddi
Born to fly ...
forced to work.
|
January 16, 2024 09:28PM |
|
January 17, 2024 01:55PM |
Hi,
non VLink, never tried. If it's updatable (VLink Crossgrade + add Antenna wires), then please do this.
If not, this is a first gen VBar NEO in 2015/16, where the only way to migrate from non VLink to VLink/VBar Control was adding a satellite.
Technically, you'd only need to swap one cell (AUX2) if AUX3 is already unused.
Trying won't hurt, though.
Unless Rainer had a big-big no-no.
My no-no would be, the App addresses the macrocells in exactly one way. If you make changes, you're on your own, also with adjustments.
But honestly, what's another VBar NEO or EVO VLink, compared to the whole costs of the project?
Why endanger such a project with an old unit?
The next part is more positive :-)
You can bind and fly any model, with any VBar Control, even without the corresponding setup app. Bind, pre-flight, and you're good to go.
Lastly, another firmware makes absolutely no sense.
First, there's only a very small group of pilots who would use it, benefit from it.
Second, both firmwares would use the same algorithm anyway.
Third, macrocells would also be addressed/used anyway.
Fourth, the cost for the Pro/Value Pack stands in no relation to the overall costs of such a programming project (AND it includes some other goodies!), same goes for the costs of a VBar VLink Pro, and if we're talking large turbine helicopters, even a transmitter is only a considerably small fraction of the overall costs. I couldn't guess the number of hours which went into the studying and programming, so the cost for having this opportunity is almost a gift :-)
Fifth, the front-end (Pro App) can easily be modified, should need arise. Changing a firmware is a totally different story.
Sixth, also for a standalone firmware, you'd require a setup App (like the known ones), which would also have to be programmed and maintained. Six-a, VBar Control Classic will never be capable of this, was never meant/designed to be. Still you could make changes to the macrocells manually, if you know where and what to change.
Seventh, there are already so many firmware versions for an increasing number of corresponding hardware versions, which makes you think twice (and them some) before branching off another one.
And I guess there are more good reasons agains it :-)
So ... go VBar all-in, or go with the other options there are, on the market
—Eddi
Born to fly ...
forced to work.
non VLink, never tried. If it's updatable (VLink Crossgrade + add Antenna wires), then please do this.
If not, this is a first gen VBar NEO in 2015/16, where the only way to migrate from non VLink to VLink/VBar Control was adding a satellite.
Technically, you'd only need to swap one cell (AUX2) if AUX3 is already unused.
Trying won't hurt, though.
Unless Rainer had a big-big no-no.
My no-no would be, the App addresses the macrocells in exactly one way. If you make changes, you're on your own, also with adjustments.
But honestly, what's another VBar NEO or EVO VLink, compared to the whole costs of the project?
Why endanger such a project with an old unit?
The next part is more positive :-)
You can bind and fly any model, with any VBar Control, even without the corresponding setup app. Bind, pre-flight, and you're good to go.
Lastly, another firmware makes absolutely no sense.
First, there's only a very small group of pilots who would use it, benefit from it.
Second, both firmwares would use the same algorithm anyway.
Third, macrocells would also be addressed/used anyway.
Fourth, the cost for the Pro/Value Pack stands in no relation to the overall costs of such a programming project (AND it includes some other goodies!), same goes for the costs of a VBar VLink Pro, and if we're talking large turbine helicopters, even a transmitter is only a considerably small fraction of the overall costs. I couldn't guess the number of hours which went into the studying and programming, so the cost for having this opportunity is almost a gift :-)
Fifth, the front-end (Pro App) can easily be modified, should need arise. Changing a firmware is a totally different story.
Sixth, also for a standalone firmware, you'd require a setup App (like the known ones), which would also have to be programmed and maintained. Six-a, VBar Control Classic will never be capable of this, was never meant/designed to be. Still you could make changes to the macrocells manually, if you know where and what to change.
Seventh, there are already so many firmware versions for an increasing number of corresponding hardware versions, which makes you think twice (and them some) before branching off another one.
And I guess there are more good reasons agains it :-)
So ... go VBar all-in, or go with the other options there are, on the market
—Eddi
Born to fly ...
forced to work.
|
January 17, 2024 07:53PM |
|
Re: Tandem helicopter control parameter January 18, 2024 09:53AM |
Thank you Eddi, RV, I’m very excited about your comment on this matter.
Totally argee Vlink+VTouch are best choice, I feel alone or exlusive
, because other pilots at my group do not use VTouch.
The reason I want to use RX-sat, I can place the sat outside the scale body, 180mm antenna is still short, maybe replace 250mm antenna is another choice.
Setting tandem with VTouch is never easier, my personal favorite, I usually setup helis with VTouch at home, do some first flights, do adjustment, check telemetry graph, once I feel the model is proven, I fly with vclassic, because its size fit my hands, lightweight, long time battery, 2-monthly charge vs 2-weekly charge.
Thank you again for bringing Vbar Neo to this kind of model.
Totally argee Vlink+VTouch are best choice, I feel alone or exlusive
, because other pilots at my group do not use VTouch.
The reason I want to use RX-sat, I can place the sat outside the scale body, 180mm antenna is still short, maybe replace 250mm antenna is another choice.
Setting tandem with VTouch is never easier, my personal favorite, I usually setup helis with VTouch at home, do some first flights, do adjustment, check telemetry graph, once I feel the model is proven, I fly with vclassic, because its size fit my hands, lightweight, long time battery, 2-monthly charge vs 2-weekly charge.
Thank you again for bringing Vbar Neo to this kind of model.
|
January 18, 2024 12:18PM |
|
January 18, 2024 02:18PM |
|
January 19, 2024 10:00PM |
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.