Quick background...my first introduction to heli's was when I was a kid (about 1980 +- a few) and saw a guy hovering at the local school yard on summer day.
Forgot all about it until a couple years later when I saw folks flying planes at the local fair grounds. That got me real interested in R/C, but alas, never did get anything. But I had a subscription to a modeller magazine for a few years.
Then about 1991 or so I saw an electric heli in a hobby shop. Was interested but didn't like the idea that it could barely hold it's own weight for almost 2 minutes!!! (heavy NiCad's back then still)
So then it's all forgot again until a few months ago. My have things changed!! And then I see all this 3D flying in YouTube videos. Now, I knew model heli's could do things that real one's couldn't, like inverted flight and loops and rolls and such. But I had no idea they could THAT!
OK, my question is, when did this type of flying get started? I'm sure it's real easy (relatively) with all the fancy electronics and gyros and such. But what about a long long time ago when all there was was nitro and mechanical mixing? Did people do 3D back then? Or did it only come about when all the fancy gizmos arrived?
> Quick background...my first introduction to heli's was when I was > a kid (about 1980 +- a few) and saw a guy hovering at the local > school yard on summer day.
> Forgot all about it until a couple years later when I saw folks > flying planes at the local fair grounds. That got me real interested > in R/C, but alas, never did get anything. But I had a subscription > to a modeller magazine for a few years.
> Then about 1991 or so I saw an electric heli in a hobby shop. > Was interested but didn't like the idea that it could barely > hold it's own weight for almost 2 minutes!!! (heavy NiCad's back > then still)
> So then it's all forgot again until a few months ago. My have > things changed!! And then I see all this 3D flying in YouTube > videos. Now, I knew model heli's could do things that real one's > couldn't, like inverted flight and loops and rolls and such. But > I had no idea they could THAT!
> OK, my question is, when did this type of flying get started? I'm > sure it's real easy (relatively) with all the fancy electronics > and gyros and such.
If only. Lots of flyers THINK they can fly "3D", but thinking is a far cry from actually doing.
TRUE 3D flying is probably best described as being in control of the heli when it's flying in ANY direction in ANY orientation at any speed, so that could be backwards while upside down, or sideways while sideways to the ground, spinning in either direction while flying mutliple loops etc. ANY position at ANY time. No electronics package (presently) can allow a shite flyer to do that, so talent is still the major factor in proper 3D flying. Well talent and (nowadays) heavy simulator practice.
As for when it started, it was shortly after the invention (by Colin Mills) of the heading lock gyro which would be sometime in the eary/mid 90's. Prior to that, we were flying upside down and doing a raft of other manoeuvres, but high speed backwards flight was a dream, even with the best gyro's and fastest servo's available at the time. As soon as it was possible to control the tail during high speed backwards flight, the 3D world opened up. As did a lot of huge holes in the ground and in people's wallets:-)
>But what about a long long time ago when all > there was was nitro and mechanical mixing? Did people do 3D back > then?
No, but they did do "conventional" aerobatics. Loops, rolls, stall turns and a combination of the three. The main "thrust" was for people to fly a helicopter as a close emulation of a fixed wing plane as possible, so perfectly round loop (at a constant speed) and perfectly axial rolls (at a constant altitude) were deemd the pinacle of control and in lots of people's eyes, still are. there's a majesty and grace seeing a helicopter fly the FAI manoeuvres that can't possibly be copied in a 3D demonstration.
>Or did it only come about when all the fancy gizmos arrived?
More or less. Now some people could still make a heli look exciting, even without the gizmo's, but those gizmo's made 3D more attainable and a LOT easier for those who took the bull by the horns and committed their heli's to the maximum. The esarly days were FUCKING expensive though. It wasn't unusual to come back from the field faced with a repair buill well over 1000 quid (2000 dollars).
> No, but they did do "conventional" aerobatics. Loops, rolls, stall turns > and a combination of the three. The main "thrust" was for people to fly a > helicopter as a close emulation of a fixed wing plane as possible, so > perfectly round loop (at a constant speed) and perfectly axial rolls (at a > constant altitude) were deemd the pinacle of control and in lots of > people's eyes, still are. there's a majesty and grace seeing a helicopter > fly the FAI manoeuvres that can't possibly be copied in a 3D > demonstration.
> -- > Beav
There's a precision to FAI style flying that "most" 3Der's never achieve. However, I've seen a "few" 3Der's that did their routines in a relatively slow and much more controlled fashion that were a true pleasure to watch. The hard core stick bangers have their appeal at times, just from a thrill point of view, but I'm much more impressed with whose who are obviously "flying" the bird through it's paces in a manner that I can actually see what it's doing.
The funny part for me is, in the past few years, I've had several folks come up and compliment those of us that fly more of an FAI style on how smooth the bird looks or how fast they were flying, etc. It's not that I'm that great of a pilot but I am competent within the limits of how "I" like to fly. It's just that these folks had never seen a helicopter do anything but flip and tumble around. Seeing one flying flat out in forward flight and stretching out a series of rolls across the full length of the RC field was totally different for them and they were unaware of just how fast a model helicopter can fly. I guess it all depends on what you're used to seeing but it almost feels sometimes like the pendulum is starting to swing back the other way a bit!
>> No, but they did do "conventional" aerobatics. Loops, rolls, stall turns >> and a combination of the three. The main "thrust" was for people to fly a >> helicopter as a close emulation of a fixed wing plane as possible, so >> perfectly round loop (at a constant speed) and perfectly axial rolls (at >> a constant altitude) were deemd the pinacle of control and in lots of >> people's eyes, still are. there's a majesty and grace seeing a helicopter >> fly the FAI manoeuvres that can't possibly be copied in a 3D >> demonstration.
>> -- >> Beav
> There's a precision to FAI style flying that "most" 3Der's never achieve.
Absolutely correct Steve.
> However, I've seen a "few" 3Der's that did their routines in a relatively > slow and much more controlled fashion that were a true pleasure to watch. > The hard core stick bangers have their appeal at times, just from a thrill > point of view, but I'm much more impressed with whose who are obviously > "flying" the bird through it's paces in a manner that I can actually see > what it's doing.
I think a LOT of 3D flying is nothing more than a series of pre-programmed stick movements which result in a particular "display" If ANYTHING happens to disrupt the flow of those stick movements, the heli lawn darts with a vengeance. I've seen too many REALLY impressive crashes because something didn't work "quite" right and the flyer had no time to straighten things out. Simulators are magic for working out those "pre-prograsmmed" stick movements, but they're not much use for "failures in the system" training.
> The funny part for me is, in the past few years, I've had several folks > come up and compliment those of us that fly more of an FAI style on how > smooth the bird looks or how fast they were flying, etc. It's not that > I'm that great of a pilot but I am competent within the limits of how "I" > like to fly. It's just that these folks had never seen a helicopter do > anything but flip and tumble around. Seeing one flying flat out in > forward flight and stretching out a series of rolls across the full length > of the RC field was totally different for them and they were unaware of > just how fast a model helicopter can fly.
Yep. Lots of non heli flyers seem to think that 3D flying is little more than an out of control heli and for the most part, they could well be right. If flying 3D means counting seconds and moving sticks within a specific time frame in order to complete a manoeuvre, then it's not what I want to do (anymore). I'm still in favour of smooth and relatively large manoeuvres, even if they're done with the heli flying backwards and/or upside down.
> I guess it all depends on what you're used to seeing but it almost feels > sometimes like the pendulum is starting to swing back the other way a bit!
Indeed. And so it should :-) Us old fuckers just can't keep up:-))
> I think a LOT of 3D flying is nothing more than a series of pre-programmed > stick movements which result in a particular "display" If ANYTHING happens > to disrupt the flow of those stick movements, the heli lawn darts with a > vengeance. I've seen too many REALLY impressive crashes because something > didn't work "quite" right and the flyer had no time to straighten things > out. Simulators are magic for working out those "pre-prograsmmed" stick > movements, but they're not much use for "failures in the system" training.
I can vouch for that! I can "sometimes" do a pretty decent kaos but it depends on the day. The frustrating part is that I have "moments of clarity" with the maneuver. There are times when I can see what it's doing and what my control inputs are doing and I can actually make the bird move one way or the other or climb or descend. The problem is, those moments are always fleeting. I need a LOT more time with it. In the mean time, I've totally trashed two 90 sized birds in the last year and a half. I mean to the point that it was cheaper to just buy another kit than try to buy all the parts. OUCH! I'm not worrying about that as much any more. It's just not worth the hits to my budget! :-)
>> I think a LOT of 3D flying is nothing more than a series of >> pre-programmed stick movements which result in a particular "display" If >> ANYTHING happens to disrupt the flow of those stick movements, the heli >> lawn darts with a vengeance. I've seen too many REALLY impressive crashes >> because something didn't work "quite" right and the flyer had no time to >> straighten things out. Simulators are magic for working out those >> "pre-prograsmmed" stick movements, but they're not much use for "failures >> in the system" training.
> I can vouch for that! I can "sometimes" do a pretty decent kaos but it > depends on the day. The frustrating part is that I have "moments of > clarity" with the maneuver. There are times when I can see what it's > doing and what my control inputs are doing and I can actually make the > bird move one way or the other or climb or descend. The problem is, those > moments are always fleeting. I need a LOT more time with it. In the mean > time, I've totally trashed two 90 sized birds in the last year and a half. > I mean to the point that it was cheaper to just buy another kit than try > to buy all the parts. OUCH! I'm not worrying about that as much any > more. It's just not worth the hits to my budget! :-)
When you see a world class 3D-er stick the heli in the deck within half a second of the tail rotor failing, it becomes obvious that simulators pay a MAJOR part in developing the head/stick movements, but does fuck all for those "what if" moments.
I can honestly say that every manoeuvre I've ever flown was flown in real life first, and then "sweetened" with a simulator. As it happens, I've had a few spectacular smacks too :-)
> A lot of times the guys I fly with will say something like "That was > some pretty agressive flying, but pretty smooth too.." when I land.. > I like to be as precise as I can.. Loops are pretty round on a > consistent basis and I can hold altitude through 6-7 consecutive rolls > (which are pretty axial to both sides FINALLY!)
I've had similar comments. My favorite occurance happened at a fun-fly that was "overrun" with rather agressive 3Der's. I used one of the cones we use for FAI practice and just did some hover exercises around it. I like to do nose-in circles around it and it's fun to knock it over and then used the skids to set it upright again. I flew most of that tank of fuel doing that with a few laps around the sky, auto's, etc. when the 3Der's gave me room to. After the flight, I was carrying the bird back to the pit area and some guy came up to me and was "singing my praises" on how impressed he was with the flight. It was embarrasing as I didn't think I was doing anything that great but he sure enjoyed it and that was good to know. Anyway, the funny part was the look on all the 3D type flyers standing behind him that were looking at him like he was crazy or something. They simply didn't get the fact that he'd never seen a model helicopter in anything resembling a precision hover before. I'll always remember their look, it was just too funny at the time.
> My inverted circuits are still a bit "fuzzy" but I've been doing > pretty good on my outside loops and "inside outside" cubans 8s..
> Backwards inverted is still befuddling me, but my invered hovers are > pretty solid now... Still haven't got the "brass" to cut grass, but I > will at sometime this summer..
Likewise. I'm feeling a lot more confident with sustained inverted flight but I'm still thinking about it too much. I fell out of a kaos the other day, got disoriented with it and almost plowed it "big time" until I realized I was inverted and punched full negative about 20 feet off the ground. The frustrating part is, I can do most of this stuff (forward/backwards, inverted and right side up) on the sim. Doing it in real life is just not in the works for now, but I'm working on it! :-)
