Model memories?

[Frank Skilbeck]

Isn't it great to have a choice, I remember when we only had non programmable radios without digital trims.

 

I used to fly my large scale glider (HP-18 with flaps) and to get crow braking meant using two separate controls and then compensating for the elevator trim, on my computer set it's all set up on one control (throttle stick in this instance) to operate the crow, and I have the flap slider set so I can just give a little flap only for extra lift if required.

 

Also it you want separate aileron or elevator servos then a programmable radio makes setting them up much easier. What next I'm sure somebody will be saying we don't need reversing switches just reverse rotation servos......................

 

For me programmable radios are very useful and have expanded the range of models i would have normally flown.

[Tom Wright 2]

Thanks Steve Martin Ralph and Frank.

The R/C manufacturers can breathe a sigh of relief then,they seem to be getting it about right for the majority.

One more question though don't you find mechanical trims more convenient when test flying a new model?

 

TW2.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Tom Wright 2]

Thanks Eric.

I take it you approve of modern gear but without the built in phone and french cake maker!.

 

TW2.

[Steve W-O]

Posted by tom wright 2 on 08/04/2011 13:16:45:

Thanks Steve Martin Ralph and Frank.

The R/C manufacturers can breathe a sigh of relief then,they seem to be getting it about right for the majority.

One more question though don't you find mechanical trims more convenient when test flying a new model?

 

TW2.

 

 

I like mechanicl trims, but on my tx, I just hold the model in straight and level flight with the sticks, flick a switch, and it is trimmed, the stick positions are transferred to the trim.

 

 

!and it only cost £60 )

[Tom Wright 2]

Thanks Steve.

About time i got the manuals out and make the best of my screen sets then ,at my age any thing to make things easier cant be bad.

 

TW2,

[Steve W-O]

Posted by tom wright 2 on 08/04/2011 13:44:38:

Thanks Steve.

About time i got the manuals out and make the best of my screen sets then ,at my age any thing to make things easier cant be bad.

 

TW2,

 

 

If you have some of the TH9X, it is not a feature on the standard one, but on the ER9X firmware.

 

I also have som backlights for the screen on their way, which will be very useful.

[kc]

. How many of us would pay extra for a 2.4 ghz Tx with manual trims instead of digital?

 

.

 

I just cannot see the difficulty in providing an equivalent to model match on other makes. If the Rx can be bound only to one particular Tx why cannot this be just that particular memory on the TX? Whats the difference in principle between binding to a TX and binding only to a specific memory on that TX?

 

I looked up the suggested list of Japanese "inventions" and no wonder the first line on Wikipedia says this is contested! To my mind everything listed is just a slightly different version of someone elses prior invention. ( I wont comment on the drugs because that is something I know little about. One of those drugs noted as a Japanese invention is a substance that seems to be causing addiction & devastation in western countries! )

 

 

But after a lot of thinking I will concede one possible Jap invention might be the Topcon Wink Mirror of the early 1960's This is the instant return mirror on all modern SLR cameras. Prior to this development a SLR needed the mirror to be reset for viewing by initially pushing a lever and later models by winding the film on. Topcon just added a spring or something to flick the mirror back. Every other camera maker has had this ever since, maybe it was not patentable..

[Ultymate]

Why would you want manual trims? guess you're going to say in your opinion they're better. As for model match it's a fairly good feature but if as a pilot you're incapable of checking a model name/number on the screen should you really be out flying anyway? If you've got a decent trannie you can set up high idle for flying, a low idle for landing, and total closure (engine cut) of the throttle all at the flick of a switch without touching trims. The trims incidentally can have the amount of movement per bleep varied by the program as well.

[mal brewer]

Posted by Eric Bray on 08/04/2011 13:19:46:

 

Then I moved on to a four-channel Futaba, cannot recall the model, but it was before the 'M' series, with slider trims.

!)

 

!
Hi Eric,

that would have been the 'Digimax',which was my first proportional outfit,that is if you discount a 'galloping Ghost' set-up.I previously flew a ten-channel OS reed outfit,where the trims were also set mechanically via the clevises ........that set used to keep me on my toes........................Mal.

[Tom Wright 2]

I test fly quite a lot of new models some are new designs , in fact two today,one was i bit hairy so the instant response of manual trims enables three channels to be trimmed very quickly,.

I have often seen other people get into trouble holding a bit of stick in on two channels while trying to trim out with bleeping trimmers.

 

TW2.

[leccyflyer]

Posted by kc on 08/04/2011 19:21:03:

. How many of us would pay extra for a 2.4 ghz Tx with manual trims instead of digital?

 

.

 

I just cannot see the difficulty in providing an equivalent to model match on other makes. If the Rx can be bound only to one particular Tx why cannot this be just that particular memory on the TX? Whats the difference in principle between binding to a TX and binding only to a specific memory on that TX?

 

I looked up the suggested list of Japanese "inventions" and no wonder the first line on Wikipedia says this is contested! To my mind everything listed is just a slightly different version of someone elses prior invention. ( I wont comment on the drugs because that is something I know little about. One of those drugs noted as a Japanese invention is a substance that seems to be causing addiction & devastation in western countries! )

 

 

But after a lot of thinking I will concede one possible Jap invention might be the Topcon Wink Mirror of the early 1960's This is the instant return mirror on all modern SLR cameras. Prior to this development a SLR needed the mirror to be reset for viewing by initially pushing a lever and later models by winding the film on. Topcon just added a spring or something to flick the mirror back. Every other camera maker has had this ever since, maybe it was not patentable..

Perhaps you missed all of the technological inventions that were listed. There were quite a few of them. Anyway that's well off topic. You asked to name a single Japanese invention and I provided a list of them.

 

Model Match is a feature that HH designed and it remains their intellectual property. It is clearly a different feature than just matching a whole bunch of receivers to a single transmitter. Other manufacturers have their own bespoke software, it just so happens the HH decided to register Model Match to protect that feature and market it as an advantage. Just the same as RCM&E register the trademark on the front of the magazine. I expect that someone will produce a knock off version for their own radio system.

[Ultymate]

So Tom if you're using digital trims just increase the increments per bleep to a high level for trimming / maiden flights absolutely no difference, just a case of acquainting oneself with the technology and then reset the trims to a lesser rate once the models trimmed out .

Edited By Ultymate on 08/04/2011 20:37:40

[Tom Wright 2]

Thanks for that Ultymate  I think the full size flying has influenced my reluctance to embrace the modern transmitters as there are very few digital gizmo's in  most  full size taildraggers ,except maybe the nav aids when fitted!

 Stick throttle rudder bar and manual trims,thats all you get.

Tom.

Edited By tom wright 2 on 08/04/2011 21:18:56

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

I've fully embraced computer transmitters but Tom does have a couple of points. There's no argument that if each model is tuned to standard transmitter settings you will never take off with anything set wrong or wildly wrongly trimmed. Proper pre-flight checks, rigidly adhered to, are the answer here.

 

Yes, I will admit to having damaged a model taking off with the wrong aircraft selected, kicked myself afterwards of course but it can and will happen unless you have a Spektrum set. Quite how major manufacturers haven't found a way round the patent is a mystery to me - Model Match must be very cleverly specified! This sort of incident should be addressed by better pre-flight discipline and is equivalent to familiarising yourself with operating speeds and limits in full size before flying each different aircraft.

 

Secondly, they do make for laziness in radio installations. Fine for those of us brought up in the days when you needed to plan carefully to adjust throws and directions manually before ATVs and reversing and I automatically try to use 100% movement for my initial settings but I do see some horrible installations where movements and angles have been compensated to excess by programming adjustments.

 

But when it comes to fine tuning, neat installation, clever mixes to achieve ease of operation, then the computer radio is a powerful and useful tool. While you can make complex operation work mechanically (the flap and aileron interaction on my ASW20 glider which raised the ailerons wnen the flaps were extended beyond the thermalling position was an excellent example) modelling this sort of thing is much more practical with mixes.

Edited By Martin Harris on 09/04/2011 22:42:02

[Tom Wright 2]

Martin.

Thank you for that balanced ,and informed take on the subject, i find it hard to believe anyone could argue otherwise,you have interpreted my ramblings ,that on first sight may seem a bit eccentric ,but never the less do have some substance that has been formed from a long association with things that fly.

 

TW2.

[TonyS]

Hopping onto this one late but my 2 p as a relative newbie is that whilst you can't beat keeping things as simple as possible, I can't see how you'd manage without all the bells and whistles. To explain, I started flying with a Spektrum DX7. it now has 15 models in memory from a PZ Mustang through to my home-built EDFs , Funjet, Blizzard, little Blade MSR heli, Twister etc . Switching from a V-tail to a delta with elevons only,To a plane with spoilerons, to a trad aileron/flaps/elevator/rudder set-up on a basic trannie with no memories would be a nightmare. I've even inherited an off-road buggy that someone was throwing away and I'll be using the DX7 for that too!
No, I couldn't do all that on a trad tx with no memories it would be too hard.

[kc]

People are assuming that model match is patented or copyright and nobody else can make one, but it may not be so. Maybe the rest just never thought of it and have not got round to making it yet! I cannot see a fundamental difference between binding a Tx with Rx or binding a Tx memory with Rx. Its the same principle. Maybe just takes more bits of information.

[leccyflyer]

There's no assumption involved.

 

Model Match (TM) Patent Pending

 

Indicates that the name is trademarked an a patent has been applied for.

 

I flew every one of the five models I had with me in a superb day at the field today. Without model memories, and a decent transmitter, with model names visible on screen, that would have been far less straightforward and likely to result in problems. The Model Match technology wasn't called on at all -due to the normal pre-flights - but it's noce to have as a backstop.