No excitement here regarding the X50?

[Joe Bailey]

I popped into midland helis yesterday and there was one in the process of being set up on the counter. It looks very nice indeed. All carbon and Ali bits every where. The swash appears to be like the Jr type 120/140 degree selectable and the flybar is underslung meaning no big loops around the grips (the one thing that always pit me off raptors). The carbon ali and plastics all looked top notch, looks like its doing 100 mph on the bench. If it flys like it looks it should be a great machine.

Joe

[Debrooker]

Ace Hobby has the kit only marked up as $739!

Lets hope not.

[JKEP44]

Originally Posted by Raptor30_V1

Regarding the eCCPM vs. mCCPM discussion: Yes, there is a big difference inbetween this 2 things .. anyone can set-up a eCCPM system and true there are even vids and other helps about that .. but:

- most people are not able to set-up an eCCPM with almost no mechanical differentiation and swash-interactions (let's not speak about phasing - makes it even more complicated) ..

- the overall performance of eCCPM systems regarding electronic accuracy is very bad considering people even buy expensive Tx-systems to later have way less resolution of servos then what the paid . :

You seem pretty knowlagable on this so I was wondering if you could explain how to do blade phasing as I have never done this on an rc heli. I have done it many times on real helicopters but I don't understand hoe you could do it on a rotor system that has one blade bolt to hinge on and no lead/lag link. I have never done blade phasing on any of my eccpm helis and never had a problem.

One other thing, what did you mean when you were saying that eccpms electronic accuracy is very bad? Wouldn't any servo inaccuracy be exactly the same in mccpm as it is also driven by a servo?

As far as emotions being involved in discussion, they are not. I just sometimes dissagree with the way that some of my fellow mccpm fliers bash eccpm possibly scaring off potential buyers of the X50 and trex products who are unaware of the ability of both systems.

[alexander]

He's not talking about damper matching for dynamic balancing for lead/lag matching he is speaking about when the blade sees a cyclic input at a point of rotation and how the helicopter responds to it. You know the 1/4 response time of a rotor, well it isn't exactly 90 and can vary slightly with different machines/setups. It's like rotating the swashplate inputs radially.You can use a radio mix or you can rotate the washout driver.

[Raptor30_V1]

Hello again,

Sorry I did not see the qestion before, but as Alexander gave an excellent answer I hope you accept my appologizes. As I have a day-off today and wait until flying this afternoon, I take the time in the following to put it down in more details, why eCCPM has some cons – I call it flaw..

I have nothing personal against eCCPM (I have 3 eCCPM nitros but all of them use a SPM), then the fact, that:

1.) most people do not know what flaw eCCPM can have (I will explain later some typical troubles)


2.) many people flying eCCPM and getting better in 3D-skills will someday notice, that a few things are not their stick input they made, then the heli doing something different then told by stick-inputs ..

IMO both points above together with new reasonably-priced FBL-systems contribute to the coming succes of FBL as this is in principals one (out of 2) easy way to overcome a non-obvious system (as eCCPM is). The worst eCCPM have definetly the helicopter having servo-arms linked directly to the swashplate (e.g. most electric 400/ 450/ 500 class) ..

Some of the following might vary with Tx/ Rx and servos used, but applies to all electronics for eCCPM. Some very expensive Tx have more possibilities to adjust some flaws, but funningly the effort to do so becomes quite insane:

- ever wondered if all 3 swash servos have the equal speed ?
- ever wondered if all 3 swash servos have equal travel ?
- ever wondered if it makes sense to have that long servo-horns on the swash servos ?

Buying 3 equal servo-makes for swash does not mean, that all 3 servos will move at the same pace.. the same will apply to the servo's travel.. if you put a swashplate-leveler tool on the main shaft you will be able (ATV) to have the swash correctly centered in the middle (Zero-degree) and at the up/ down maximal collective position. This means you have set-up 3 positions to be parallel to each other, but what happens e.g. when you go from min. collective to the max. collective position? The swash won't be centred (horizontal) all the time because of the different servo speed and because of given-away servo resolution. What do I mean with given-away servo resolution? As mentionend earlier, the servo-horns (arm or lever) are pretty long for most eCCPM systems, as a result the turning angle of the servo is only part of what it could be (factor 2 to 3) .. the full servo-resolution (you paid for that especially buying expensive servos) is given away as if you buy an expensive tail-servo and then use a very long servo-lever for the tail. Funningly most know about the tail-lever and importance, but never wonder what impact the long swash-servo-horns might have?

To conclude the first part of the story: having less resolution on swash-servo as explained above (e.g. by factor 2 to 3) by moving the swashplate up/ down with the pitch/throttle stick, the swashplate will not stay centred and wobble around. Earlier Tx even had the problem, not sending the 3 swashplate signals in a consecutable sequence to the Rx?

Let’s go further now: so we setup the swashplate to be centred at the down/ mid/ position and accept the wobbling when changing the swash’s height (remember: mainly servo’s speed difference and given-away resolution) but with correctly centred endpoints (corrected with servo travel e.g. ATV). Now we will take a look further into interactions. Simply put interactions are to give one control input on the swashplate (e.g. aileron right) and having at least one further unwanted swashplate movement in some other direction (e.g. elevator slightly forward and/ or swashplate/ collective moves down). Low end and mid-range Tx will not have SW-menues to correct for this and the solutions on more expensive Tx’s will not do the job neither (I will explain later why). There are basically 3 interactions and normally we take a look at them at the down/ mid/ up swashplate position:

- aileron to elevator interaction: aileron input makes the swashplate move in elevator
- aileron to collective interaction: aileron input makes the swashplate move up or down
- elevator to collective interaction: elevator input makes the swashplate move up or down

So you used your servo travel to get the swashplate centred (horizontal) for the up/ mid/ down position you will exactly at this 3 positions try to get this 3 basic interactions out of your swashplate.. this will mean to deadjust, what you set-up before with your servo travel.. this would not be that bad, if there is a high servo resolution to get a good compromise, but as servo-resolution was given away you won’t find an accepteble compromise.. remember a mechanical system (e.g. Raptor) well set-up you won’t experience that problem (except maybe phasing – different story) ..

Why does a very expensive Tx with the “possibility” to correct interactions/ phasing not a better job regarding interactions (phasing corrections work well instead)? Simply put, you paied a lot to have as well a higher Tx/ Rx resolution, but as your eCCPM (servo-horns) give away a lot of resolution, you still won’t have the resolution a modern mid-range Tx and a mechanical swashplate will have. So to find good corrections for interactions (no bad compromise) you need lot’s of resolution to correct by finding (effort) an accepteble compromise (3x3 = 9 possible interaction positions). So buying an expensive Tx to correct eCCPM flaw, you will shoot with canons on little birds..

Meanwhile interactions seem pretty easy to understand, phasing is by far less known. The problem is, that in-flight phasing is pretty difficult to spot, but can be tackled by trying either with mechanical adjstment (not all helicopters have that) or using a SW with virtually pivoting the swashplate around its vertical axis by the desired degrees. What is phasing? The explanation of Alexander is very easy and straight forward – as he wrote, a constant error the swasplate has (CW or CCW) by being pivoted. Meanwhile good mechanical CCPM systems have almost no interactions, phasing can be an issue on any system. What’s the difference inbetween interactions and phasing? If you have an interaction error (e.g. in the up-collective position) of aileron to elevator (e.g. aileron right -> elevator forward) the unwanted movement (in elevator) will not change (=elevator forward) if you reverse your control input in aileron (e.g. aileron left). Having a phasing-error the unwanted movement is different, e.g. aileron-right input will e.g tilt the elevator-back and aileron-left input will tilt the elevator forward. Unfortunatelly interaction- and phasing-errors can be present both – in this case tackle interactions first.

Sure, there are better and worse helicopters regarding eCCPM, and sometimes manfacturers make the whole thing even worse by their mechanical design of the swash-plate. Take a T-Rex600 e.g. the control geometry of the swashplate (control-ball position) are very bad regarding interaction, additionnally worsening the performance of the eCCPM system. Meanwhile there are helicopters you can adjust mechanicaly for phasing deadjustment, other seem to have “built” in phasing-errors (e.g. T-Rex500). IMO can’t tell if this is wanted to harmonize with certain rotor blades or just a lack in design/ or lack of manufacturing perfection?

I don’t know if I could explain the whole thing well, but if reasonable, you will admit that there is lot’s of marketing in this hobby to sell people things and always only tell the pros and leaving the cons away ?

So what to do with eCCPM system and their flaw? IMO:

- if you are a novice or sports-flyer: set-up correctly your mecanical part at Zero-degrees (all horns and mechanical rotor-levers and main blade parallel/horizontal/vertical) and try with ATV to set-up the end-travel-points so the swash is horizontal in the up/ mid/ down position

- if you are an acrobatic-pilot (towards F3C): you won’t like your helicopter corkscrew etc. try the same as for novices and additionnally try to eliminate the worsest of your interactions (ATV). Maybe using trim-function additionnaly you will get an accepteable outcome. If not, use a CSM Cyclock1 to get better precision although mecanical CCPM is first choice when flying F3C?

- If you are a 3D-novice or 3D-average pilot: I strongly recommend a CSM Cyclock (passiv system) or a reasonable priced FBL (active) system as e.g. the MicroBeast. Especially the Cyclock will do an extraordinary job for little money.

- if you fly 3D-worldclass: controlling your helicopter always and in any orientation/ position, this people do not care about any flaw. A buddy of mine sets-up his nitro pretty average and everyone would like to have his 3D flight-skills. Funningly exactly this people are used to promote e.g. FBL and other staff as expensive servos and ever-growing-bore engines

Please be aware, not everything is related to interactions and phasing, e.g. there are errors having different sources but looking like having the same symptoms:

- if you make a elevator input and you see some aileron outcome as well, sometimes you moved yor stick unwillingly in aileron as well (sometimes making the springs on the Tx-sticks mechanics stiffer helps a little too)

- a helicopter in FFF will have a natural tendency to roll to one side. This is related to the fact, that one blade (moving in flight direction) has a higher speed then the other one and asymmetrical lift will result in a lateral movement related to the aileron-axis.

If the above is correct, is it worth to buy very high resolution servos for the eCCPM swashplate, or do you give away to much of what your USD 600.- swash-servos promised? Is it worth to by a very expensive Tx when the interactions-features are an average compromise and take pretty long to tune? Everyone to himelf to answer this qestion – no offense..

So to come back to the subject of this tread, what I do not like on the new X50:

- eCCPM (I know, some of you will still not admit it)
- lack of modularity .. no electronics on a helicopters frame please (it’s not repair friendly)

- TT coming late and doing the same as every-one w/o evolution keeping the advantages a Raptor helped to grow them originally ..

Best Regards,
Oliver

[Broken]

I was bouncing around, trying to find any more info on the X50, came across A-Main Hobbies. They have the X50 available for pre-order in 2 different ways. The kit with blades is going for $440 and the combo kit with blades, RL-53 and muffler is going for $660. I am getting excited about it being released, I have been wanting to upgrade but loved the old 50 too much. I guess it is time to add another one to the fleet.

[Joe Bailey]

You missed the point about 140 degree eCCPM this give no interaction on the swash although the resolution will still suffer. The x50 has optional 140 degree swash, I've seen one close up and had a play with it on the bench. The forward linkages for the swash have two different mounting points. If you have the option of 140 degree eCCPM on your radio then use it. Unfortunately if you limit yourself to mCCPM helis only you don't have much choice on the market, and once Tt decide to discontinue the raptors there's only going to be the realy high end kits from company's like Bergen for you

[Raptor30_V1]

Hello,

The reason to have 140 degrees eCCPM is not to tackle interactions as they will be still present with eCCPM .. the real reason to have a 135/ 140 degrees swash design (instead 120 degrees eCCPM) is something completely different..

A 120 degrees swash-design will not give even aileron and elevator cyclic output when swash-servos make the same travel - so to be straight, it's a basic flaw in swash-geometry !

Having a 135/ 140 degrees swash-design the above inconsistency (even cyclic at same servo travel) is solved

Once again, even on a 135/ 140 degrees swash you will have some serious interactions and sometimes phasing as well. I set-up my nitros pretty well (to be modest) and even my Vibe50 (140 degrees) had some noticeable interactions. Considering the quality of the V50 kit's parts and the well engineered mecanics, this comes definetly from the issue described above in my post ..

Now it starts to be interesting, as what many people describe as of being *flight precision* of a helicopter is a multiple outcome inbetween the quality of a rotor-head (design/ levers and materials) , the dampening of all vibrations and the lack of interactions/phasing .. meanwhile the *agility* is a question of the rotor-head (design/ lever ratios) and the overall weight&power ..

IMO any 3D-helicopter should be looked at it's overall rating as of being an excellent combination in *precision* vs. *agility* .. go a step further and compare the price inbetween the different makes ..

Knowing how and for relatively little money, you can make work your eCCPM way better than before .. but once again, you will need more effort to still not arrive completely where mechanical swash-plate mixing is. Isn't it up to us in this hobby to remember manufacturers what we like and what we do not like? Looking about some trends I sometimes doubt, if manufacturers really keep most of us in mind when designing a new machine (ease-of-built, ease-of-setup, ease-of-repair etc.) or just everything has become to serve the vanity of a few ones?

Best Regards,
Oliver

[Joe Bailey]

I stand corrected,

I defiantly understand about different manufactturers and the design of the helis.
My first heli was a trex 450 (don't mock, I'm not proud of it) and it don't fly strieght, never has probably never will, my next heli is a elyq, this suffers huge interaction problems due to the swash design. My third heli is a MA spectra g, this flys straight as an arrow with very little interactions but at four times the price of the other two I expect it to be right. I'm sure you understand much better then me why this is.

Once again thank you for the.crash course in heli mechanics.

Joe

[JKEP44]

Hey, thanks. The above posts cleared a lot of nomenclature problems up for me. Phasing, as it is called here, is a gyroscopic precession issue on real helicopters, and the asymmetry of lift for a rotor system in ff flight is called retreating blade stall.

The resolution sacrafice mentioned makes sense also.

One thing that differs from what you posted to what I have been taught is that interactions are removed through the use of a "swash mix" page and not atv's.

I guess I have just been lucky in the set ups on my eccpm helis, as they have always flown extremely well when set up right.

[Raptor30_V1]

Hello,

Unfortunatelly I can't contribute that much to nomenclature and terms, as English is not my motherthongue .. that is maybe one reason why my writting is a little bit longer, but hope you understand what I'm trying to say
IMO I distinguish inbetween 3 different price ranges for helicopter Tx/ radios (does not mean their quality):

- the lower end: Futaba T6 & T7, Spektrum Dx6i etc.
- the mid range: Spektrum Dx7i & Dx8, Futaba T8/10, Hitec Aurora etc.
- the high end: Futaba T12 (funningly SW derivated for T8?) and T14

Most of the Txs up from the mid-range have menues to correct for interactions (don't know the menue name for every Tx-brand) and to correct for phasing (virtually pivoting the swash). If you do not have such a menue (I use a T7C) you can either try what I proposed above (for novices & sportsflyers) or be using a CSM Cyclock1 (3D and towards F3C). Correcting for interactions on a Tx which has the software for it, seems not to be that easy and quick to most people (and IMO the resolution problem is not solved as if emulating a H-1 swash), as most people's helicopters I observe seem to have pretty a lot of interactions ..

Furthermore most people I know, own from a Futaba T6 up to a Futaba T10 (many Spektrum Dx6 & 7 here over as well), as the higher-end Tx are priced funningly. It can't be in the helicopters manufacturer's interest, that by applying eCCPM the flight results will become only precise if using a very expensive Tx, or using even FBL? My combination of a Futaba T7C with a Cyclock1 beats maybe even the highend-Tx when it comes to ease of setup and precison (resolution, eliminating interactions/ phasing).

I remember a vid from Bobby Watts/ Bert Kammerer (smacktalk) where they shortly discuss interaction check/ correction on a Tx allowing to do so. Would I buy a more expensive Tx if flying *precise* 3D with an eCCPM helicopter? Nope:

- if you have a T6, T7 or Spektrum Dx6 buy a Cyclock or go FBL (Microbeast)
- if you have a T8/ T10 or Spektrum Dx7 try to get out as much your Tx-software allows (remember the resolution-problem) .. if still unhappy, buy yourself a Cyclock or go FBL ..

Would I buy very expensive high resolution servos for my eCCPM ? Well, somehow weared to pay USD 200.- per servo with 4096 bit resolution to at the end have only a resolution left of maybe 1500 (7.5 bit per 1 buck) ? .. A half-priced well-made servo with maybe 2048 bit resolution and e.g. a Cyclock will almost keep the resolution (20.5 bit per 1 buck) ..
There is a pretty long Thread on HF about how to set-up an eCCPM helicopter. Partially what is written there about what to do when setting-up an eCCPM-system, IMO is a complete overkill in effort ..

To close the loop coming back to the subject of this thread (X50), the main reason why it is so important to have the possibility to setup an eCCPM helicopter as good as possible and fast is, that when you crash you don't want to repeat very complicated setups again and again. So what makes you to setup eCCPM almost completely new? Definetly a crash were you have to exchange one/ or both side frames. That's mainly the case when manufacturers build the servos in the side-frames .. it will cost a hell to buy side-frames, for hours rebuilding, installing the servos again .. and restart your eCCPM settup including the elimination of interactions and phasing ..

Is the X50 a bad helicopter .. surely not .. but no excitement for something that follows the same path others did and already offer (eCCPM and lack of modularity) .. if a X50 does what a Vibe50 or Velocity50 does, but for less bucks (including low spare prices) than the X50 might be worth a trial ..

IMO if you fly 3D the main objective is to have fun (w/o hurting anyone - safety first), if you have fun this comes from learning to fly/ control (3D) your helicopter in any orientation/ situation, if you want to learn this you need training-training-training, if you want to train you need a *precise and agile* machine being in the air and not grounded for whatever reason, to not loose flight time you need a machine very easy to built/ easy to be set-up/ easy to be repaired .. so everything working against the above criteria, is IMO a step-back.. that's exactly what I mean by *manufacturers sometimes not keeping final customers in mind* .. and eCCPM and lack-of-modularity clearly work against my criteria what 3D is all about ..

Best Regards,
Oliver

P.S: There's no such things as "bit per buck" .. just wanted to show how we try to quantify things in this hobby w/o having criteria than just our common-sense and experience when comparing to systems by using them both for fair comparison reasons ..
PPS: I think I do not need to mention what ou hobby is about too, it's in the credo of HF

[Kiply]

Titan X50 already on sale in Singapore. LHS brought it in yesterday, and a member of the local forum put up some unboxing pics:

http://www.daddyhobby.com/forum/showthread.php?t=56727

[Rob43]

I don't currently own any TT birds, but once again, I am very interested in the newest offering. Seeing the video of it at the 3D Masters was mind-boggling. Seeing it at IRCHA this summer was equally impressive. Great value for the price, and promises to be a very high performing model. Canopy looks agressive too.

[kiwibob72]

I wondered just how long they would take to get them ....... kit spec for kit spec, not a lot of difference between the X50 and the STD Raptor 50 SE http://www.helikraft.com/product_inf...oducts_id=7944

[carlos]

The attached info should answer some questions.
file is 1.64MB

[Bob O]

I haven't been this excited about a heli since I built my 600LE. That video was great! The heli appears to fly very "light", which has huge appeal to me since my bird is quite heavy. Seriously thinking about building one of these over the coming winter.

[trekrider586]

got mine Saturday and was flying it Sunday.I like this heli!
there are a few gripes,but otherwise a very good looking machine and flies like a feather.this heli is light and you can feel it in the sticks.it's very agile as well.
haven't picked up the 3g Rex since LOL!!