BMFA 'achievement' grades and fbl

[waveydavey]

Don't forget it wouldn't necessarily be set up by the person taking the test.

I actually was talking about the Beast x. If you read the thread that I linked to, it really does sound as though this thing is self levelling and automatically correcting for wind gusts.

From what I have read on this forum, V bar behaves like its name, ie it is a virtual bar, rather than self levelling and wind correcting, so I have less of an issue with it.

I did read the thread that you linked to and I fly a 600 with BeastX it doesn't self level, far from it. If you achieve a level stable hover and it's not too windy, yes you would say that it is holding position for you as little input is required. However, put left aileron in and it will maintain this and if left un-corrected will career down the field quicker than you can say flybarless. It replaces the flybar and acts like a very stable setup, nothing more.

As for Heli-Command, it depends upon which version your flying. I've witnessed first hand the best 3D pilot in the country flying HC and he certainly doesn't need self levelling. In fact he reckoned it was one of the best for flybar feel, feeling analogous rather than digital.

[frog]

This is my point. I think some fbl systems are analogous to stabilisers on the back wheel.

As far as I know, the Beast does not contain the required hardware to take control, unlike the Helicommad and the SK720. I feel a bit sorry for examiners having to spot what systems the candidate might have hidden away between his frames. But at the end of the day, it's still just a hobby and the only person you would be cheating is yourself.

[ChrisB]

All i know is when i started practising for my B test the week before i took it i found it easier to do the hovering stuff with a flybar raptor 50 that i used in the test than it was to do them with either my V Bar Logo 500 or 700N.

So in my experience my flybar`d model made my life easier than the fbl ones i tried,reason being the fbl ones were more inclined to drift off line and were more agile although stay level than my Raptor did with its mechanical flybar to stabilise it.

This applied in gusty and calmer conditions.

[Andy from Sandy]

I feel a bit sorry for examiners having to spot what systems the candidate might have hidden away between his frames.

From what I have seen it is for the candidate to prove that the fitted system has no autonomous flight capability. If the examiner is not happy then he just fails the pilot on the spot.

As you say if someone is so desperate to pass that they have to cheat then what is this hobby coming to?

[Rotorhead]

One thing that has to be considered is the direction the hobby is going, in five or so years I can see the majority of manufacturers not even bothering to produce flybared models at all, so what then, what about in ten or more years, do people have to then go looking through ebay to find an old flybared model just to do a test?

I've even seen a fixed pitch flybarless model, which says a lot, if someone thinks thats worth doing on a small indoor electric, then it indicates its going to become the norm.

It makes sense to allow them now so that the BMFA and the examiners can get used to the idea before its forced on them by the manufacturers not making flybar helis.

BTW did my B on a flybared heli, so couldn't care less personally but if this was not allowed and doggedly resisted it will eventually prevent people from doing a B at all without buying an appropriate model just for the test, again if at that time they can easily find one.

[gorber]

There's a lot of sense in this post, sadly.

I should make it clear again, I don't have anything against fbl. Just some of the more 'active' systems, for want of a better word, seem to diminish the qualification.

It would be a shame if flybarred helis disappeared completely. I will definitely hold on to mine though.

Andrew

One thing that has to be considered is the direction the hobby is going, in five or so years I can see the majority of manufacturers not even bothering to produce flybared models at all, so what then, what about in ten or more years, do people have to then go looking through ebay to find an old flybared model just to do a test?

I've even seen a fixed pitch flybarless model, which says a lot, if someone thinks thats worth doing on a small indoor electric, then it indicates its going to become the norm.

It makes sense to allow them now so that the BMFA and the examiners can get used to the idea before its forced on them by the manufacturers not making flybar helis.

BTW did my B on a flybared heli, so couldn't care less personally but if this was not allowed and doggedly resisted it will eventually prevent people from doing a B at all without buying an appropriate model just for the test, again if at that time they can easily find one.

[callum]

Having Flown Both...

FBL Has a slight advantage over Flybar.. Not much though.

You still have to fly it..

In terms of locked in feeling?

I've had my heli's locked in better hands off hover than the FBL system.


FBL System's don't detect "slide" on the axis. whereas using a flybar counter-acts this better.

[waveydavey]

Actually when I think about it. How much time do you spend hovering, me only whilst I check how much fuel I've got left before I wrag the beJesus out of the damn thing. Beast X hovering, good, Beast X flying, outstanding.

[pchristy]

(Switch on "Old Git" mode)

When I started out in Radio Control, you could not buy a radio system ready wired to go.

If you were rich enough to be able to afford multi-channel (not many were) you might be able to buy a transmitter and receiver from the same manufacturer, but then you would have to buy, and solder up, a 7 cell nicad pack, with multiple taps, and between three and five servos. The servos probably wouldn't come with amplifiers, which you would have to build and install seperately, and source 7-pin connectors to connect each one to the receiver - that's a lot of soldering!

Once you had it all wired up, you would then have to tune the receiver to the transmitter - not only the RF section, but the tone generators for each of the six to twelve channels, to ensure that not only did the controls respond, but that they still responded if you tried to apply two at once! This latter was always something of a compromise!

Most of us stuck with single channel, usually operating just the rudder via a rubber driven escapement.

If you managed to land in the same county, you were considered an accomplished pilot. If you could land in the same field, you were an EXPERT!

But you would not believe how much SHEER FUN we had with those crude systems, where every flight was a momentous adventure.

Now I have a ready wired system that I just switch on and it works! I can program umpteen model into my transmitter, and the models themselves are of a mechanical complexity that rivals the full size.

If I want to, I can add stability systems that will do all the hard work for me.

But am I having any more FUN?

I don't think so!

(Switch off "Old Git" mode!)

[Milamber]

Thanks for more good memories Pete. I too flew single channel rudder only and it was also super-regen with ground based valve Tx and Valve Rx too! It seemed more the case that you didn't get a full flight, so on the call "lost it", you switched off your Tx and, depending on numbers, each modeller tried, in turn, by switching on *their* Tx to see if they could "control" the model. If all else failed, in went the trimming tool for a "dynamic retune" when, hopefully control could be regained. The "quick blip" for 2 position throttle seemed a huge step forward in those days. All this happened at Ta Qali airfield on the glorious [back then anyway] island of Malta. Happy Days indeed.

Maurice.

[Mark Chaplin]

(Switch on "Old Git" mode)

When I started out in Radio Control, you could not buy a radio system ready wired to go.

If you were rich enough to be able to afford multi-channel (not many were) you might be able to buy a transmitter and receiver from the same manufacturer, but then you would have to buy, and solder up, a 7 cell nicad pack, with multiple taps, and between three and five servos. The servos probably wouldn't come with amplifiers, which you would have to build and install seperately, and source 7-pin connectors to connect each one to the receiver - that's a lot of soldering!

Once you had it all wired up, you would then have to tune the receiver to the transmitter - not only the RF section, but the tone generators for each of the six to twelve channels, to ensure that not only did the controls respond, but that they still responded if you tried to apply two at once! This latter was always something of a compromise!

Most of us stuck with single channel, usually operating just the rudder via a rubber driven escapement.

If you managed to land in the same county, you were considered an accomplished pilot. If you could land in the same field, you were an EXPERT!

But you would not believe how much SHEER FUN we had with those crude systems, where every flight was a momentous adventure.

Now I have a ready wired system that I just switch on and it works! I can program umpteen model into my transmitter, and the models themselves are of a mechanical complexity that rivals the full size.

If I want to, I can add stability systems that will do all the hard work for me.

But am I having any more FUN?

I don't think so!

(Switch off "Old Git" mode!)

Hi Pete,

Not old git mode really, i have been modelling only 38 years and for someone who is only 45 years old that's not bad! Luckily my father started me with f/flight etc and then at that tender age of seven he let me loose with a system called, yes you guessed it bang bang. The joys once for left, two for right if that exscatement decided to skip.... Then as you say run out of winds or Dad over zelous with the amount of fuel and me chasing what was basically a free flight model. We still have one today too. I would not trade those years for anything. I grew up with some of the greats helping me and guiding me.
I think with all the electronic enharncements we have today is wonderful and just goes to show how our hobby has progressed and is still progressing. I remember the first multi set we had which was a Swan black set, we spent more time sitting in the office at Buckingham waiting for it to be repaired than flying it!
I believe that the FBL systems are wonderful and a big step forward. You still have to be able to fly the heli at the end of the day.
As for the auto stabilazation ones well enough said. In my day we used a training u/c progress is not always good.
I still like my vintage models with a flybar. Not brave enough like you to fly vintage FBL. Thank god I started helis in the 80's with a Concept complete with a revolutionary thing called a 'flybar' and cast alloy paddles!


Regards,

Mark.

[1chris]

BMFA Achievement.......

Have read all these "technical" posts, dont forget guys at the end of all this pontification this is "just" a hobby

Who cares in the cold light of day

[SRH990]

I'm another 'old git' who first started flying a fixed pitch MFA Sport 500 without a gyro. I've been through the early days of 'spinning wheels in a box' gyro's, on to piezo gyros, the big breakthrough of heading hold gyros and now 3 axis FBL systems. If you add in fast tail servos ( a world ahead of the Futaba 148 I used to use), fast & torquey cyclic servos and reliable, powerful engines then sprinkle on a few lipo's esc's & brushless motors we've come a very long way but I certainly wouldn't go back!

With all these aids the standard of my flying has improved immensely and I also feel that even with all the upside down & rondy roundy stuff we do these days, I'm a safer flyer too and isn't this a large part of the BMFA A & B test? It's been said above, a FBL system makes it a little easier to fly but you still have to fly the damn thing. The days are not very far off when newcomers to heli flying will never fly a flybarred heli as FBL gets more & more into the mainstream so lets embrace it, not moan about whichcraft

The A & B tests have changed over the years and I'm sure they will change in the future to reflect the technology of the day.