Beginners and "flying aids"

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

We're living through a fast changing period in our hobby. And new developments impinge on beginners as much as anyone else. Obviously if some new dvelopment helps beginners learn to fly faster, better and at less risk to their model then we should embrace it. But is that always the case?

Lately I've been thinking about various aids and their use by beginners - I'm using the word "aid" here in a very wide sense to include; varying rates, expo, gyro-stablisation and finally so-called "anti-crash" technology. What follows are just my views - I'd be interested to hear what others think.

1. Expo - generally I'm not a bif fan of expo for complete beginners. My opinion is that exploring expo is a step at the back end of the initial learning process not the front. The reason is - how can you truely assess the effect of expo if you don't know what a model really feels like without it? Also, most trainers simply don't need expo - they can sometimes be "mushy" enough without making them more so! Finally, I really think that a beginner will learn the feel of the controls best with nothing between them and the aeroplane other then a "clean" radio link! Some will say "but beginners tend to over control, expo helps with that" - but I feel its better for them to learn not to over-control in the first place!

2. Stabilisation - now I have more of a problem with this than expo! I can see a benefit for the beginner with no instructor - but otherwise not. Trainers are naturally very stable - try flying one inverted for any length of time! I know the degree of stabilisation is selectable and there could be an argument that says stabilsation systems will help increase stick-time by allowing learning to go on in windier conditions than might otherwise be possible. But even allowing this, I really don't think that adding artificial extra stability helps beginners. In windy conditions its only really the landing, and to a lesser degree the take-off, that cause any real problems - I actually think its good for beginners to experience the model being blown about a bit in the air - and its not really dangerous when on a buddy lead. Artificial stabilisation is a big "interference" in the natural feel of the model in my view, helpful for the experienced flyer when handling a tricky model yes, but not for beginners.

3. Anti-crash systems. No, No, No. Here I really do draw the line! Firstly most of them are very simple and don't work that well - basically they just say "if the sky isn't above us we're in trouble"! Mmmm? Beginners at the very outset of learning with an instructor will be bailed out of any but the most extreme of siuations so don't need it. In my opinion a good instructor on a buddy lead is 100 times more likely to save a model then any anti-crash system! But, perhaps more importantly, the real point is that as learning progresses its vital that the tyro pilot learns how to get himself out of sticky situations. A good human instructor will start to delay any intervention until the last possible moment thus giving the new pilot a chance to spot the problem and sort it. No anti-crash system I've seen can do this.

As I say, there might be an argument for stabilsation and anti-crash for the beginner learning on his or her own - but even there I'm not so sure either has a role much beyond the first few flights even if then.

I'd be interested to hear other peple's views on this. Am I just a hard-nosed old fuddy-duddy reluctant to embrace new technology? Or are sometimes the basics and traditional approaches worth sticking with?

BEB

[Tony Bennett]

I whole heartily agree with you.

how can you learn to control a model properly if a doo dad (technical term) is doing most of the work for you.

what happens if it goes wrong, you will have no idea what to do.

the only reason forartificial stabilization that i can see, would be if you built a scale model of an aircraft that uses it in real life.

[Bob Cotsford]

Maybe you are being a bit hard-line BEB, certainly with older flyers dexterity and sensitivity can be declining and expo is a real boon here.

Anti-crash - got to agree here, isn't that what a buddy lead is for?

Stabilisation - if it's being done for you, how can you learn?

Simulators - that's a different story, and a useful aid for learners and experienced flyers alike.

[Phil 9]

Stabilisation I dont see the problem with this

I have seen guys who have been struggling to learn buy models with increasing amounts of dihedral if this is done electronically whats the difference

the best aid to learning is still a good instructor though

Edited By Phil 9 on 28/08/2013 13:05:23

[Pete B]

Some interesting points there, BEB. I think I'd have to break it down to the two separate circumstances - those who teach themselves to fly without assistance and those who go through the club/instructor system.

Firstly, the self-taught.

The most important thing is to survive the first few flights until the tyro has some familiarity with the model, There's a strong possibility that the model will not be well-trimmed and pleasant to fly anyway, and anything that can be done to ensure survivability will at least give them the chance to keep flying until they get to grips with it. You'll never learn to fly without a flying model!

EXPO. Even a relatively small amount of expo can make a huge difference to the twitchiness and reduce the need for the inevitable overcontrolling. An over-sensitive elevator on a first flight almost guarantees PIO - even for experienced flyers! I know how expo works but I see it, in some senses, as a degree of 'gearing' which will, ideally, reduce the need for extreme stick compensations.

Verdict - yes, recommended.

STABILISER. Unless you are flying in windy conditions (not recommended for the novice) my experience is that they don't reduce the need to 'fly' the model. They'll make the flight appear smoother, certainly, but I don't see them as particularly useful for a beginner. Fine for refining the flight pattern once you have the experience but add nothing to the learning curve.

Verdict - not much help, if any.

ANTI-CRASH TECHNOLOGY. No experience of them but my suspicions are that none of them will work if the model doesn't have enough height in the first place! Solo beginners seem to try to fly either too far away for effective control or so close to themselves or the ground that they don't have time to correct the model when it's getting out of shape. In ideal circumstances they might help a solo novice but I'd say the only real advantage is they might just save the model for another flight.

Verdict - Well, the novice has probably already bought the model so if it's there, leave it - but just don't expect it to work!

Secondly, the club/instructor scenario.

What we have to assume here is that the instructor has done everything necessary to ensure that the model is of a suitable type to train on and that it has been well set up and trimmed to give a stable, predictable flight pattern. Control throws should be such as to allow sufficient, proportional response for the planned manoeuvres and not much more.

IMHO, unless a model is set up to achieve this ideal, then the instructor is failing in his task and making it so much more difficult for the novice - and the instructor himself.

EXPO. Once that is achieved, I think it is down to the particular model - and flyer - as to whether any expo is needed. A small amount may just be enough to eliminate the minute centre-stick movements that less-than-steady fingers might induce. Again, this is something for the instructor to determine.

Verdict - absolutely fine if applied where appropriate.

STABILISER. Verdict - No, not needed in the instructor situation, largely for all the reasons stated above. It will add nothing to the learning process in the early stages. If the tyro later wants to experience solo flight in windier conditions, or improve the serenity of the flight path, that's fine - he's got a lifetime of flying in front of him!

ANTI-CRASH TECHNOLOGY. Verdict - When there's a fully-functioning 'auto-pilot' standing next to the tyro? - no, no and thrice no!

Pete

[IanR]

Re Stabilisers. What's the position regarding stabilisers and the A and B tests? Are they allowed?

[Olly P]

No.

[Wingman]

My view is that model flying - emphasise "flying" - is a hobby i.e. something we do for our own pleasure in our spare time. As such, anything and everything that makes it easier is OK by me and the concept of "cheating" does not exist. If it allows somebody, who's always fancied model flying and finally gets the time to do it, fly his own plane without help then that's just great. I've known people who call expo "cheating" while at the same time holding a 14 channel megabucks transmitter in their mitts!

For myself, I just use expo (up to 80% sometimes) and my Rippy Spit has a gyro on ailerons but I was flying (self taught) before gadget assistance was available.

[Willyuk]

so I guess we could ban ABS brakes for car drivers too, after all if you dont learn to control a skid without abs, how will you know what its like without it?

Sorry only kidding

[Essjay]

I'm not saying that I'm either in favour or against, but for those who haven't seen it, this is worth watching:

**LINK**

[Wingman]

[Spikey]

Posted by Pete B - Moderator on 28/08/2013 14:01:18:

An over-sensitive elevator on a first flight almost guarantees PIO ...

Please sir, what is "PIO"?

Whatever, when faced with the prospect of teaching myself to fly an RC aeroplane on my own, I had no interest in any of these "aids". I couldn't see the point. Maybe that was simply because I'm a boring old fart, but I have a feeling the main reason was that to my mind it would make it a two-stage process - learn to fly with the gubbins, then learn again to fly without the gubbins.

Having said that, though, I do think that a certain amount (like 25% or so) of expo is helpful at first, but I'm gubbered if I could be doing with dual rates. I had enough fun getting the feel of the controls as they were without scrolling my nerd with a set of different responses at the flick of a switch. Besides, I'd probably be forever checking which way the switch was.

No, AFAIC a beginner needs to keep it as simple as possible, and I reckon that's far more to do with a model which is stable and is happy to fly slowly than any clever electronics.

BTW, how on earth does the "panic mode" in that video work? How does it sense the model's attitude?

[Bob Archbold]

In my opinion, anything that helps someone through the early pitfalls of this hobby has to be applauded.

People who spend hard earned cash buying a model and associated equipment only perhaps to see it in splinters or foam granules is only going to stay in the hobby for so long before leaving dispirited, especially if they are the go it alone type.

We see new electronic gadgets on a regular basis in the modelling press and we are probably getting to a point with the more complex models I.e jets and large scale planes where they would be difficult to control without gizzmos.

At the end of the day you don't undo technology and nobody forces someone to buy or use equipment against their will...

I think that most people will see the challenges that the hobby throws at you and will face them head on as their experience and knowledge grows, lets just hope they stay with it...

[Pete B]

Sorry, Skippy - I thought I had enough verbal runaway as it was.... PIO is Pilot-Induced Oscillation - when your elevator application is half a wave-length behind the model's pitch attitude!

Model climbs - you apply down elevator to correct but that pushes it over into a dive, and so on....

I have no problem whatsoever with using modern technology where appropriate or where I choose to - I currently have 4 models with stabilisers, which I can switch on and off at will. I tend to not use them throughout the flight as they do apply something of a damping effect and slow down the control response, as a far as I can tell. They do help considerably reducing the bumpiness with aerial videos, for just one exampleof their usefulness.

However, as I said in my first post, some automation may help a self-taught beginner preserve the model long enough to gain some experience. It shouldn't be necessary in an instructor-based learning programme.

The SAFE Apprentice is a remarkable bit of kit, though. I suspect the 'panic mode' relies upon the model being switched on in a 'level flight' attitude, which will give the gyros a reference point for straight and level flight.

If the stabilising functions are used progressively, as in the video, then it can probably assist a solo learner to fly with reduced risk to the model. The problems might arise when a novice relies too heavily on automation to give him confidence, then finds his next model is an entirely different kettle of fish....

Pete

[Johnnie]

Isnt thisjust the old vs new technology argument. When does new technology become old technologly.

As model aircraft flying has progressed from chucking a paper airplane to highly sophisticated computer controlled shrink wrapped foam models so has the technology. And as each advance comes allong there will be those that wont embrace it and use it for what it is.

In the final analysis its a hobby and whatever way people get their enjoyment out of the hobby is fine by me as long as its done safely. I dont think there is a right and wrong way - just a different way! Oh I am sure some ways are better than others - but for every opinion on a particulay way there will be plenty who have a different opinion about it.

[Ian Jones]

Only in a few exceptional cases do I find these aids useful when instructing. If someone is finding it exceptionally difficult I might use a very small amount of expo but really a trainer model doesn't need it and there's something else wrong if it appears that it does. Not learning on a trainer? Well... it can be done and it has all be said and argued before but it remains the case that a pupose designed model is better than one that is not.

By some coincidence I have just arrived home after instructing someone on a foamie "glassair" or similar sounding thing which has "ACT" available. I didn't use and the trainee didn't need it. I did check the control response on the ground before flying and noticed that with the ACT switched on there was a defininate lag in the response time. Thankfully the trainee has a Tutor 2 in the pipeline.

One of the biggest problems with new pilots is orientation and co-ordinating inputs to the control surfaces. These things have to be learned, that's the flying part of flying.

[IanR]

In another thread, we've been pointed at a Youtube film showing a builder's truly remarkable scale model. Its a jet and even has working instruments in the fascia and a working radio. I don't know anything about the prototype in question but it would be interesting to know whether or not it is fly-by-wire where, as I've heard it said, it would be impossible to fly without the on-board computer controlling things. ( I've seen film of an Airbus passenger jet performing a low-level harrier controlled by computer - very low and slow with the engines screaming at full power)

Would the builder of the scale jet have fitted fly-by-wire control to maximise his scale effort if he could have?

As regards our models, I'm with Johnnie and for anything that makes it easier to control an aeroplane in the air so that it goes where I want it to.

Expo? Definitely.

Anti-Crash System? Gimmick.

Stabilisation? Personally, I believe that in, say, another 5 years, we won't be able to buy a receiver that doesn't have (switchable) stabilisation.

Edited By IanR on 28/08/2013 20:16:07

[Tony Bennett]

once you have learned the basics, then use as many "gimicks" as you want.

but learn without first, cos one day they might go wrong.

[SkippyUK]

Posted by Pete B - Moderator on 28/08/2013 19:04:21:

Sorry, Skippy - I thought I had enough verbal runaway as it was.... PIO is Pilot-Induced Oscillation - when your elevator application is half a wave-length behind the model's pitch attitude!

Model climbs - you apply down elevator to correct but that pushes it over into a dive, and so on....

Oh! have I been posting in my sleep?

Anyway, only plane I have with gyros etc. is the Visionaire and that's allowed me to be far more adventurous probably because it's foam and easier to repair (and it has had it's share!),.

Would not attempt to fly the Wot4 or Acrowot the same way even tho' they could probably do the same manoeuvres.

As others have said - tis 'orses for courses.

IMHO confidence is a big thing when learning anything especially flying so gaining confidence on those first few flights can make so much difference in the long run.

If someone cannot fly a plane without all these gizmos, it don't make them less of a flyer in my eyes - it is a hobby.....

Skippy

[Pete B]

Nurse! Where's my tablets!?

[Peter Jenkins]

Skippy, you raise a good point about the fear of trying new manoeuvres with a crunchie model. I see people trying to fly new manoeuvres when they are not 2 mistakes high and when they get disorientated part way through they either frighten themselves or prang the aeroplane. Most problems can be resolved if you have enough height to begin with. I was going to say all problems but there will always be equipment or structural failure to which there may be no solution. So, stay high till you are confident that you will not need the safety margin.

On the main topic, I think that people who fly on their own will find this Apprentice a god send. For club pilots, it may help but if you have a good instructor they are better. They can at least tell you why you got into that odd position rather than just relying on the Panic button and not knowing why you ended up in that position and what was done to recover the situation.

A further thought concerns a learner who cannot get out to fly regularly. I think these aids would help them to feel at least they are making progress and so encourage them to keep flying. However, they must wean themselves off these aids before they can be considered safe to fly solo or attempt an A test.

[IanR]

Hmm. I'm not entirely convinced that stabilisation should be seen purely as a beginner thing and something to be weaned off.

Personally, what thrills me about rc flying is making my plane obey my commands and seeing it swoop, loop, roll and low fly past me etc. Whilst the ultimate satisfaction would probably be gained by being good enough to do this without any aids I don't think the thrill would be dimimished by having stabilisation to help me.

From what I've read on the forum it seems that some of the stabilisation units are a bit temperemental and difficult to set up, and so on, but I would only expect them to get better/cheaper in future. If there were a rock solid stabilisation unit/rx that worked just so, available now, I'd be sticking one in all my planes.

I've been driving for 46 years and have had something approaching 20 vehicles in that time. My current vehicle is my first automatic and, having got thoroughly spoiled by it, I curse my stupidity for not having automatics all those years ago.

Perhaps the A and B tests will become 2 tier in future, with or without stabilisation. One thing I think is for sure - the cat is out of the bag, now, and stabilisation won't go away.

[Mark a]

My view is this if your flying with these aids then your not really flying and in full control of your model. I think you need to almost feel how your model fly's to fly it well so these aids are a no no in my book.

Mark.

[graeme jones]

Two points -

1. This reminds me of why the RAF thought the DH Tiger Moth made such a good trainer. It's not easy to fly correctly.

2. I struggled for years to master knife-edge flight until I fitted my Osmose with a heading-hold gyro on rudder. After a few flights with that I had the confidence to remove the gyro and can now fly knife-edge with no problem.

Graeme

[Andrew767]

I'm with you BEB. If you need Expo on a trainer,there is something very wrong with it!.

Andrew