Hard Deck Function

[genuine]

Originally Posted by Cailid

Anyone with a flybar.

i went back to flybar. IAm not getting the real purpose of this gps thing for a 3d heli y isnt that stuff more suited for air photoagraphy. if sumtn duz come along i figure theyll just start putting flybarless an it all in one as a super brain sytem. wouldnt doubt if they dont have a system that you just program the heli to do 3d with a laptop at the field that way its truly hands off.

[CeeveeSiN]

Originally Posted by -kenny-

Because they can both fail in exactly the same way. In theory. You said that you wouldn't buy this unit because it has total control over the servo's. If anything goes wrong with it, you have no control over the servo's. Exactly the same with a fbl unit. Hence the comparison.

except that it is a second component to fail..
I agree less items that have potential control over my flight control servos the better.

If Mikado or Skookum were to come out with a single unit that had a hard deck function I would be all over it..

but naw.. adding more boxes to fail and removing technology by removing sat use is a game breaker.

[Paka]

Been waiting for the announcement. Will it plug into the existing CPII and what does it do??

Need more info.....

Paka.

[nightflyr]

Originally Posted by CeeveeSiN

except that it is a second component to fail..
I agree less items that have potential control over my flight control servos the better.

If Mikado or Skookum were to come out with a single unit that had a hard deck function I would be all over it..

but naw.. adding more boxes to fail and removing technology by removing sat use is a game breaker.

That is your choice and opinion to have,
I have both setups ( Direct SATs and Rx> Controller) on several machines and have yet to have any issues with either.
Hardware will fail no argument on that point, weither it be Controller, ESC, servos or ball link.
I don't build and fly worrying about such matters... it is part of the hobby we chose to enter.

[-kenny-]

Don't get me wrong, i won't be flying this new system either. Just thought as far as you, the pilot, not controlling the servo's directly it's pretty similar to a fbl unit. But it's also true if you ad this, on top of a fbl controller, the signals to the servo's have to pass through 2 unit's...
But hey, to each his own. If it works perfect, it's a great invention.

[nightflyr]

Assuming it is a mating unit to the CPII most likely plugs into the avionics computer

[burntclutch]

..............

...................

[Rototerrier]

I assume you have to set the "deck" to the lowest safe level. I could see this not working in situations where there are obstacles. Shrubs, trees, hills. Does it have obstacle detection

[Big Fil]

Originally Posted by nightflyr

The 3 mistake rule now becomes passe'

Sounds like you have flown this and have experience with the system. So what is the lower limit of the deck?

[nightflyr]

Assume it to be adjustable.. but with a safe margin to the ground

[nightflyr]

Originally Posted by Rototerrier

I assume you have to set the "deck" to the lowest safe level. I could see this not working in situations where there are obstacles. Shrubs, trees, hills. Does it have obstacle detection

Don't have hills here much on the south shore of Long Island... mostly flat lands,

As to trees and such I usually try to go to areas that are wide open myself

[CeeveeSiN]

Originally Posted by nightflyr

That is your choice and opinion to have,
I have both setups ( Direct SATs and Rx> Controller) on several machines and have yet to have any issues with either.
Hardware will fail no argument on that point, weither it be Controller, ESC, servos or ball link.
I don't build and fly worrying about such matters... it is part of the hobby we chose to enter.

who said anything about issues with an external RX except more wires to worry about getting loose.. not to mention the cost of an RX adds to build as well. when Sats are cheaper.
I said going back and using an RX especially a full size on todays aircraft is impractical and in some cases removes functionality ( SK540 you lose gov if you go external rx) The box I'm worried about failing is a second box in line with the FBL controller. the CP2.. same as Dom said.. it just isnt practical.. now if they integrate that tech into one of the big FBL systems you will hit a grand slam.

[Rototerrier]

I think it would be perfect if rather than there being a "deck", it could just avoid obstacles. The ground being the major one. Maybe a 360 degree sensor. Probably just wishful thinking.

With something like this there would be no more crashing into the ground, or people, or trees, or cars, or houses, or even other helis and planes.

No more mid air collisions.

This would be amazing if achievable.

[Helicopper]

I have crashed my T-Rex 450 once and now I'm afraid of hitting the ground again. I'm very interested....

[mr008]

[Big Fil]

Originally Posted by nightflyr

Assume it to be adjustable.. but with a safe margin to the ground

Ah OK, your previous statements made it sound as if you'd had first hand experience with the system and had seen it in action.

[nightflyr]

What I know of and what experience I do have concerning these flight platforms is as much as could be expected with new technology

[Heli Maine]

Neat technology – but I’ll pass as well. I like that stomach in the throat feeling I get when trying something new. The day I get that nervous about putting a heli into the ground is the day I take up model railroading.
But of course each to there own…

[im4711]

If someone likes it and feels better having such system installed ... fine.
But revolutionize heli flying???? Such features are available for years now so what is really new?

[DominicD]

Originally Posted by -kenny-

Because they can both fail in exactly the same way. In theory. You said that you wouldn't buy this unit because it has total control over the servo's. If anything goes wrong with it, you have no control over the servo's. Exactly the same with a fbl unit. Hence the comparison.

You are still missing my point, maybe i wasn't clear in explaining it. People generally buy a FBL unit to improve performance. If you crash due to the FBL unit you can consider that part of the price you pay for better performance. The stab on the other hand only has the 1 purpose... to prevent crashes. How silly is it to crash in the pursuit of preventing crashes.

Originally Posted by nightflyr

This is new technology, lost orientation, dumb thumbs.. situations that usually lead to crashes are now limited to mechanical electrical failure..

Let us not confuse a new technology with a new implementation, this type of product has been around for years.