The power of circuits

[feathering]

Seasoned 3d pilots don't show much turning or orientation preferences. The fact that the helicopter is flying backwards/forwards or inverted/upright seems irrelevant. The body of the helicopter simply functions as a "handle" giving the pilot control of the disk. Ultimately disk management is what matters most.

For those of us who are learning and want to iron out preferences I find that circuits are particularly helpful. There are many orientations and turning directions involved: CW, CCW, inverted, upright, forward and backward circles together with nose-in and tail-in funnels. It is interesting that, as far as the disk is concerned, all orientations are nearly identical. Yet, stick position is different for each orientation and pilot preferences take over. (Helicopter asymmetries would also play a role but in general piro compensation makes these differences secondary. My hcp80, however, does not seem to have piro comp and the asymmetries are "killing" me).

I have summarised the stick position for all circuit orientations in the attached image. Each pair of thick squares represent the two sticks (mode 2, throttle left) and each stick is split into 4 quadrants. The position of the left stick is represented by a solid circle while the letters on each of the quadrants of the right stick indicate the type of circuit associated with that cyclic position. For example, an upright CW forward circle would require positive pitch and right rudder (solid circle on right upper quadrant of the throttle stick) together with a touch of right aileron and aft elevator (F for “Forward circle” on the right bottom quadrant of the cyclic stick).

[Peteski]

That's very useful thanks. For some reason I've never actually thought about stick directions. I just learn each orientation from trial and error until it eventually clicks and becomes automatic. But I've been struggling a bit with inverted circuits, so might try using these as an aid to help my brain understand what I'm supposed to be doing with the sticks!

[pooleman]

Interesting thanks! A bit like Peteski I only think about stick positions in a very limited way and tend to sim until the crashing stops and it seems to work out!!

I have started messing with inverted Peteski and I think about rudder and cyclic sticks together or sticks apart for turning and then inverted hover nose in pull the nose in towards me (so stick down to pull) or push it away (stick up to push) the rest is based around opposite of that until it clicks! I tend to trim the rudder over to a slow piro and just keep working that until I can 'hover' round the place without crashing then work on deliberate moving from there... seems to work for me

[Peteski]

Yeah I use the push/pull thing for inverted nose in hovering too and it does help. Funnily enough that's about the only time I consciously think about stick movements!

[feathering]

I have also used the pull-push method when inverted. It gives comfort being able to push the heli away when it gets too close.

The mental tricks that I find most useful are the ones that give information about rotation rather than translation. Tricks such as "when sideways, if heli drifts away from you move stick towards nose" or the "pull-push" method above are based on a certain drift that needs to be corrected. But when deciding how to initiate a move what I need is to know how to rotate the heli about one of its axes. For example, something like "forward elevator moves nose away from disk" or "forward elevator move mast forward" give hints on how to initiate a rotation. Some sims such as Heli-X or IndoorHeliSim in Android allow you to fix the position of the heli which is ideal for getting used to the rotational response to stick movements.

Anyway, when we look back in a year or so we won't believe that we had to do all this thinking to just move a heli around...

[pooleman]

Anyway, when we look back in a year or so we won't believe that we had to do all this thinking to just move a heli around...

And won't that be nice!! Cant wait

[tourerjim]

Interesting subject, I fly 3D & correcting mistakes I find easier than doing slow level flights.
Various 3D manuevers imo you do on the spur as it comes to mind, but I also like to be in control of my flights often starting with a very slow nose-in lift offs then starting with samll circuits & increasing on each one staying at same level throughout to very large circuits then maybe some 3d finishing with very slow nose-in landing.

[feathering]

Interesting subject, I fly 3D & correcting mistakes I find easier than doing slow level flights.
Various 3D manuevers imo you do on the spur as it comes to mind, but I also like to be in control of my flights often starting with a very slow nose-in lift offs then starting with samll circuits & increasing on each one staying at same level throughout to very large circuits then maybe some 3d finishing with very slow nose-in landing.

It is interesting that despite the complexity and skills required to fly 3d it is necessary to supplement 3d practice with slow circuits and other precision flying. I am finding that although it was 3D flying what caught my attention and got me into the hobby when I started several months ago I now don't mind delaying my 3d learning as long as I can get more exposure to precision flying. Besides, precise maneuvers such as some of the circuits by Kyle in this video look as great as the more aggressive 3d flying.

[myxiplx]

It is interesting that despite the complexity and skills required to fly 3d it is necessary to supplement 3d practice with slow circuits and other precision flying. I am finding that although it was 3D flying what caught my attention and got me into the hobby when I started several months ago I now don't mind delaying my 3d learning as long as I can get more exposure to precision flying. Besides, precise maneuvers such as some of the circuits by Kyle in this video look as great as the more aggressive 3d flying.

Yup, they're different, but related skills. Pulling off 3D manoeuvres requires good spacial awareness and orientation skills, but it doesn't necessarily teach you precise, fine control. And the best pilots can do intense 3D with incredible fine control. I saw a great quote yesterday from FailureToFly over on Helifreak that for me captures it perfectly:

It's funny because you need to go through the 'I can fly 3D' phase and the 'I can fly hard' phase and then move back to 'I am working to fly 3D precisely' phase.

I'm at the "I can fly 3D" phase now, reckon it's going to take me a couple of years to get to each of the next two :-)

[Peteski]

Yes I'm finding this too. I can do ham-fisted 3D on the sim by banging the sticks around and kind of learn the rough stick movements required for the move without any real reference to how the heli is actually responding to them on a micro scale. So for example I can do tic-tocs but as soon as the heli starts to drift a little I can't correct for the drift while simultaneously continuing with the tic-tocs. I just don't have that level of control yet.

I find that if I practice slow piros without losing position, all my normal flying straight afterwards feels much more precise. It really has a big and surprising effect, so I keep on doing slow piros on the sim. But I rarely practice slow piros at the field, maybe I should?

[myxiplx]

I find that if I practice slow piros without losing position, all my normal flying straight afterwards feels much more precise. It really has a big and surprising effect, so I keep on doing slow piros on the sim. But I rarely practice slow piros at the field, maybe I should?

I find they're a great practice move at the field, and incredibly hard to do well. One of my flying sites for my X3 is a local football pitch, I use the centreline as a reference and do slow travelling piros along it. Bloody hard to do in the wind I can tell you!