BMFA , Flybarless and "B" tests ?

[heligray]

[QUOTE=rachel;740338]I am banned from reverse parking

Dead right there lol

[Aidi]

I wonder if the likes of Mattie Lodge and Richie Clarke who are both examiners and as we all know are two of the highest profile heli flyers in the Uk to date could inject their knowledge of flybarless systems to the BMFA.

These two guys know what they are talking about, they have probably flown the majority of FBL systems available on the market today. They know the difference between a FBL system and a system that is there to aid the pilot.

They might have already injected to BMFA their thoughts and opinions which is why the rules were changed with the evoloution of FBL systems in the first place, but if something was in black and white as to what is deemed to be a suitable FBL system which a pilot can use for a test, then it would eliminate any "assumptions" to whether the examiner feels that what is being presented for the test could in fact be a flying aid.

I am lucky enough to know them personally, and fly with them many times in the year, and know that if i ask either of them a question, the answer is solid and based on fact which is why BMFA should listen to them in instances like this.

Rgds
Aidi

[Mark_T]

... but if something was in black and white as to what is deemed to be a suitable FBL system which a pilot can use for a test, then it would eliminate any "assumptions" to whether the examiner feels that what is being presented for the test could in fact be a flying aid.

I'm trying to reserve judgement until Richard has had a chance to respond, but I really don't think the BMFA needs any more input on this topic as the changes have all been made and unless you are actively looking for a reason not to allow FBL to be used I'm struggling to see a problem with the wording as it is.

The aim of these changes was to come up with wording that didn't need to be updated every few minutes much like the wording around tail gyros.

We don't need a list of 'approved' tail gyros and we shouldn't need a list of 'approved' FBL devices either, but let's hear Richards perspective and see if it is something that can be resolved with clearer wording.

[pchristy]

This was always going to be a can of worms, and the only surprise is that it has taken so long to rear its ugly head!

Many of the people on this forum are very familiar with flybar-less systems and are aware of the capabilities of each. But beware of assuming that everyone - even examiners - have such in-depth knowledge.

The BMFA and (I believe) most examiners are not anti-fbl per se. But they are aware that it is much easier to "cheat" with such a system than with a purely mechanical set-up. And it is very difficult to demonstrate that any system has no "self-righting" capabilities. Even if you do overcome this, how do you prove that such a capability cannot be re-introduced at the flick of a switch? And with new systems coming on the market all the time, how do you seriously expect the examiners to keep track of all the different variations? A real can of worms!

But the question you should be asking is "why does this matter?", because it probably doesn't! The BMFA are very emphatic that the "A" and "B" certificates are there purely as a measure of personal achievement, and are not intended to indicate any particular level of ability. If you stick to this strict definition of the tests - and the BMFA and Achievement Scheme bods have repeated it on the record over and over again - then the argument become irrelevant.

It only matters if you are using the tests to indicate the level of ability for a particular purpose. And this is precisely what the BMFA does NOT endorse. If you do it, its you or your club's decision, and not the BMFAs!

I know, I know, I've had this argument with them time and time again, and I certainly wouldn't want to be in their shoes if - God forbid - there is a serious accident, and the CAA get involved. But that is the BMFAs position, as has been stated repeatedly over the years.

And I wish it weren't!

[Dion]

I passsed mine on a trexc 550 with a VBar! With the area cheif examiner.

[LaurenceGough]

FBL actually makes hovering much worse than a very well set-up flybar heli, especially depending on the weight of the flybar and the various ratios etc.

Nothing sits like a well set-up F3C machine, especially in the wind too.

It's the only thing I miss.


But hell, hovering and slow stuff is boring anyway right guys and gals!!

[Mark_T]

And it is very difficult to demonstrate that any system has no "self-righting" capabilities. Even if you do overcome this, how do you prove that such a capability cannot be re-introduced at the flick of a switch?

I completely agree that where such systems have such a capability available I'd have a lot of sympathy with an Examiner declining to proceed, but where the device in question can be clearly shown from the published specifications to lack such abilities then there should be no debate about it.

After all, if we head down that path why aren't we asking those with a fly-bar to show that the tail gyro isn't also offering cyclic control? Having a fly-bar doesn't mean you can't also fit a 3-axis gyro for stability.

The real nonsense though as you say is that as per the BMFA both the A and B are measures of personal achievement so the only person you'd be cheating is yourself if you did try to slip one past the Examiner.

[jwatts007]

There far too many old plankers in the BMFA they cause all the problems, should be an age limit for service...........

[Rainman]

HI all I just popped this up as I have recently been in discussions with our club examiner ref B tests and Flybarless.

I have added Richard Budd's name to the title as I regard him as an expert :-)
So what I am being told is FBL can no longer be used for a "B" test as the candidate has to prove the system acts as a flybar (or somthing like that)
This can be hard / impossable .
so BMFA dudes and Dudettes whats the up to date gen on taking your test with FBL ????

Thanks in advance
Rachel

Now that I am finally at home (much earlier than usual) and not typing from a phone keyboard, I can now answer this in full.

Replying to Rachels first post

An expert???? ex - is something that was, and a spert is a drip under pressure! so may be your right!


The guidance given out to by the BMFA to candidates and examiners are as follows:

Gyros and Electronic Stabilisation

Where a fly bar is fitted, it is acceptable to use an electro-mechanical or solid state gyro in a
helicopter being used to take the test although electronic stabilisation is restricted to a single
sensor acting in rotation around the yaw axis only. This allows a range of gyros to be fitted,
from simple yaw dampers to solid state heading lock units but only acting on the tail rotor.


If the helicopter does not have a fly bar fitted it is acceptable to use extra electronic
stabilisation, however the extra electronic stabilisation must only be acting as a fly bar
replacement system and must not take over control from the pilot or achieve automated
flight.

The use of any autopilot and/or artificial stability features which are (or may be) designed
into such units beyond definition above is not acceptable during the test and is not allowed.

Now to correct some of the misinformation / misconceptions that has followed - life is too short to answer everything!

Firstly, I am and always have been fully aware of the test criteria as detailed by the BMFA. I was present and vocal at a number of Achievement Scheme Committee meetings over the last few years, where this has been discused.

I personally have yet to be asked to take any candidate for a test who would be flying a flybarless helicopter.

My personal view is when I am finally asked to take a candidate for any heli test, who will be flying a flybarless helicopter, then it is up to the candidate to demonstrate to me that the helicopter meets my interpretation of the BMFA guide lines as detailed above. If someone convinces me that their flybarless system meets my interpretation of the above rule in that it does not take control away from the pilot amongst the other set criteria, then I would be more than willing to conduct the test.

My club mate and friend John, was not forced to buy a flybarred helicopter to complete his test with me, He has been fully aware of my personal stance regarding flybarless and the achievement scheme for a few years and decided to buy a flybarred machine, despite my offer of an extended loan of one of my own helicopters.

I am not anti - flybarless......... I first flew flybarless over a dozen years ago and have had personal experience with many of the systems that are currently available. As I look at my workshop behind me, I can see 9 flybarless machines (most of which are actually mine!!)on the shelves.

I very much doubt the BMFA would ever consider releasing a list of flybarless controllers that are deemed acceptable for the achievment scheme.

I know that not everyone will agree with me, but thats life! If we all agreed all of the time, where would forums like this be?

Now time for me to sit back and enjoy the :lurk5:





Richard

[Mark_T]

There far too many old plankers in the BMFA they cause all the problems, should be an age limit for service...........

Because there are loads of younger members fighting for the committee places each year and they are being kept out by these older guys .... ?

Let's not head down that path, it isn't a BMFA establishment problem, the use of FBL has been approved, let's try to focus on why it seems to be a problem for some Examiners.

[scallybert]

FBL actually makes hovering much worse than a very well set-up flybar heli, especially depending on the weight of the flybar and the various ratios etc.

I respect your abilities, and I'm sure this is statement is based on your experience, but it really ought not to be the case in general.

If a FBL controller is genuinely emulating a flybar, it should obviously not be worse - especially since it has the option of changing parameters that you actually can't change on a mechanical set-up.

However, of the ones I've looked at only the SK720 has parameters that seem to relate to mechanical flybar parameters (Bell Gain, Hiller Gain, Control Rate, and the ace Hiller Decay). IMO, these should be tweakable to do exactly what you say (above). ie (IMO) stability & 'nudgeability' for precision hovering.

My pet theory is that a lot of FBL systems effectively give you a Hiller set-up, rather than Bell-Hiller, ie 'heading hold' cyclic, plus some tweaks to speed up the response. Bell-Hiller should be quite different.

Anyway, much as I'd love to (respectfully) argue flybar & FBL dynamics; I think what you're saying isn't in general correct in the context of this thread.

[Mark_T]

I very much doubt the BMFA would ever consider releasing a list of flybarless controllers that are deemed acceptable for the achievment scheme.

Thanks for the post Richard, the detail does help.

Just one question, as someone who is clearly aware of the capabilities of FBL systems, are you aware of any currently available FBL system that would meet your personal criteria and be allowed by you in an A or B test?

[LaurenceGough]

Much worse was a bit strong, along with bad English . Worse would have been better...

Every flybarless system I've flown (on all kinds of helis).

A don't know the reasons why, as there are delays in different types in both kinds, I just think that mechanical delay (inertia) is better than electrical delay in hovering terms. Perhaps it's also to do with the missing flybar surface which can correct better at lower head speeds.

I'm not alone either, my experience has been the same with quite a few others I have spoke to.

[Rainman]

Thanks for the post Richard, the detail does help.

Just one question, as someone who is clearly aware of the capabilities of FBL systems, are you aware of any currently available FBL system that would meet your personal criteria and be allowed by you in an A or B test?

Now that is the million dollar question, but do you really expect me to answer that one?

I should point out though, It is not my personal criteria, but the criteria of the BMFA. I merely follow my interpretation of the that criteria!



Richard

[Mark_T]

Now that is the million dollar question, but do you really expect me to answer that one?

Yes I do.

This isn't some game of semantics, you are an Examiner representing the BMFA and it is both reasonable and logical given your apparent stance on this issue to expect a straight answer to a straight question.

Why wouldn't you want people to know in advance what they should be practicing with if they plan to ask you to examine them?