I had never flown a plane and built the GWS tigermoth, Then I practiced
flying this plane on FMS for quite a few hours. The first time I threw my
Moth into the air and flew it for real , it was as if I was behind my PC. No
problem at all. With no help or instruction, thanks to FMS, I became a RC
Sorry to be so late to get on this topic, but don't read the n.g. like
I used to.
Anyhow, my 2 bits worth - I've been flying R/C models since the days
of escapement (far too long to have to admit it) and when my son gave
me FMS, plus some planes, I sort of snickered at it. But after a
while, and trying dozens of planes, I discovered a few that really did
fly realistically, like some R/C models I've owned or at least flown.
To list a few of these better ones:
B-1B (VERY close to many R/C models, IMO)
PBY (or similar)
Pteractodyl (sp?), (but the winged dinosaur)
Then there were far too many that were so jerky, they had no
comparison to a real R/C model. Some that were actually supposed to
be of planes that I currently own and fly. One of the most
disappointing in this category is the Sukhoi aerobatic, think it is
the 27. Whoever put this in FMS did it a terrible disservice, the
real thing is a pleasure to fly with a 1.20 4 stroke.
Olin McDaniel, AMA 30932
| Anyhow, my 2 bits worth - I've been flying R/C models since the days
| of escapement
| But after a while, and trying dozens of planes, I discovered a few
| that really did fly realistically, like some R/C models I've owned
| or at least flown.
| To list a few of these better ones:
| B-1B (VERY close to many R/C models, IMO)
| PBY (or similar)
| Pteractodyl (sp?), (but the winged dinosaur)
Just how many pterodactyls have you flown? :)
| Then there were far too many that were so jerky, they had no
| comparison to a real R/C model.
To be fair, a plane in FMS is just a few paramters, and some graphics
images. Adjusting the parameters is relatively simple, and you can
make the planes fly any way you want.
The Slope Soaring Simulator is another good free R/C flight simulator.
Personally, I'm a bit surprised that FMS gets so much more attention
Doug McLaren, email@example.com If it ain't broke, fix it till it is.
Heh...short version: a button on the transmitter toggles the rudder
between center, left, center, right, center, etc. Learning to fly meant
learning how many button presses between where the rudder was and where
you wanted it to be.
If memory serves, next came reeds, for independent control of other
surfaces, and then something really nifty: "proportional," in which a
control surface moved in proportion to the movement of a stick on the
transmitter. But I may be misremembering.
St. John the elder
"There is only one boss: The Customer. And he can fire everybody
Yep, that pretty well summarizes the evolution of R/C model flying.
And to clarify, I did fly all of those you listed above from mid
1950's until about 1963 when I took up other sports (duck hunting, off
shore fishing, etc.) Upon retiring from a 40 year long engineering
career in 1985, I once again took up R/C - felt like Rip Van Winkle,
and had to relearn all the "right moves". A couple of years ago,
hunting and serious fishing were relegated to "fond memories" and
other less strenuous activities became the order of the day. When I
feel really lazy, I fly FMS rather than load up and haul my usual
stable of planes to our distant R/C site for a few flights.
To Doug - sorry about the misspelling of the winged dinosaur's name,
and no - I've never actually flown one of them. But I have flown an
R/C lawn mower!
I have flown several models both in the real world and on FMS. I'll give
one example. I built and flew the SPAD Debonair for many, many flights
before it bit the dust. I also have flown the FMS version. My model was
more lively than FMS in both acceleration and roll rate. I physically upped
the thrust factor to compensate as well as reduce the roll inertia.
I believe the modeling in FMS solves the six degrees of freedom and does it
well. These equations need the physical (weight and moments of inertia) and
a complete description of the aerodynamics and propulsion system. The tough
job is to figure out what they are and then input them into FMS. Lift and
drag can be estimated, but where do you get the roll dampening or the aero
cross coupling? All the flight simulation programs have the same problem
... good data input gives realistic flight characteristics, otherwise
garbage in/garbage out.
Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.