New item on my want list!

[Saracen]

Larger helicopters do have a degree of stabilisation built in, but the training process starts with flying unstabilised.

Of course the same pilot training might be applied to flying the quad opted with less stabilisations (although some electronics will be needed just to control the relative motor speeds. On the other hand, you could have degrees of licence that permit flying only in stabilised mode - in much the same way that you can have a driving licence that only permits you to drive a vehicle with an automatic gearbox.

The rational for being able to fly in unstabilised mode is in case the stabilisation system fails, but with an all electronic system, it is easier to implement redundant systems, and stabilisation is an integral part of the flight control system. The most likely components to fail are the accelerometers and gyros that give attitude feedback to the control system, which can be duplicated.

It is certainly possible to have fully mechanical helicopters without computer stabilisation, as we had them before we had computers. But increasingly, we're seeing more and more 'fly by wire' where any linkage between pilot (or indeed, car driver) and the resultant reaction of the vehicle, is electronic. Indeed, it just cost my brother a large wedge of cash because a "throttle sensor" went, and it turns out, throttle (on his distinctly non-fancy, middle of the range, normal car) is computer controlled, not the old-fashioned cable and a bit of metal linkage it used to be, when you could replace a cable for £1.50. Now, it's a £500 job requiring the entire pedal assemby because you csn't buy the stupid sensor separately.

Sorry, got sidetracked.

But on point, most modern airliners are fly by wire, and they deal with the "if the system fails" issue with multi-level redundancies.

So ..... flight assist? Why not? After all, if you have computerised and/or electrical sensor/motor control systems, if they and all the backup fail, you're no worse off than if a cable broke in the old days. Either way, you're probably coming down .... inelegantly.

There's a direct analogy with learning to fly model heli's. Some people say to learn on twin-rotor coaxials, because they're far easier, being vastly more stable.

Others, including me, say that they don't teach you to fly 'proper' helis because you don't develop the feel for a highly unstable craft, and when you do step up, you have to unlearn bad habits. Rather, learn in a highly unstable collective pitch model BUT with a degree of stabilisation, and with both range limits and control sensitivites turned well down. After you've got the basic feel, turn the stabilisation off, and prepare for some crashes. After you've got that, start increasing control sensitivites (I.e. the amount the aircraft responds to a given amount of stick movement). Once you've got that, reduce then remove range limits and you've got full control.

You can do that with model helis because of motorised control linkages, computerised radios and on-board stabilisation software. However, if you want full acrobatic capabilities, you have to have sensitive controls and the AI turned off.

What I've never seen, if they exist, is a quad with manual linkages, etc. Is it even possible to fly a quad without at least basic AI to turn stick movements into respective motor reactions? Could a human react fast enough to directly control all four motors?

If not, then there's always a degree of computer control and the only issue is the balance between what it HAS to do, and the degree to which we override it.

I can fly a drone and get it to do basically what I want. But ever seen the Drone Racing League? Current season just showing on TV now. Can I fly a (FPV) drone like that? Hell, no. I mean, I can drive a car on the roads, but it doesn't make me capable of driving an F1 car.

Anyone interested in drones, check out what those DRL guys can do. It's eye-opening, and rather jaw-dropping just how fast those things are. The world final was at Alexandra Palace (London) recently (just checked, 13tb June), and is showing (IIRC) next week, with the Berlin semi's I think last night.

[DanceswithUnix]

Indeed, it just cost my brother a large wedge of cash because a "throttle sensor" went, and it turns out, throttle (on his distinctly non-fancy, middle of the range, normal car) is computer controlled, not the old-fashioned cable and a bit of metal linkage it used to be, when you could replace a cable for £1.50. Now, it's a £500 job requiring the entire pedal assemby because you csn't buy the stupid sensor separately.

Not seen a cable in a car for about 20 years, my current car doesn't even have a throttle so there wouldn't be anywhere for it to go to The accelerator pedal tells the engine management to directly vary the intake valve lift which does the job of a throttle.

The replacement of the old mechanical distributor, carburettor and throttle linkage has made modern cars way more reliable.

[Ttaskmaster]

not the old-fashioned cable and a bit of metal linkage it used to be, when you could replace a cable for £1.50.

My old carbed bike with throttle cable still needed a throttle position sensor... and that was designed in 1978!!
I think cables went out as Cruise Control came in.

[Saracen]

....

The replacement of the old mechanical distributor, carburettor and throttle linkage has made modern cars way more reliable.

And far more expensive to fix.

But that wasn't really my point, which was that pretty much everything, including basic cars, are going, or gone, fly by wire. For any chance of autonomous driving, they'll need to be.

[spacein_vader]

Well this thread is certainly enlightening for. Those of us who've never had much involvement with rotor lift aircraft.

I'm keeping my irrational suspicion of them and sticking to stuff that uses wings for lift though.

[Ttaskmaster]

I'm keeping my irrational suspicion of them and sticking to stuff that uses wings for lift though.

I remember when I felt like that... it evaporated first time I watched an Apache pop up from cover, unload on a target and then slink off casually like a cat. I knew then that I wanted to fly helicopters!!

[TeePee]

Well this thread is certainly enlightening for. Those of us who've never had much involvement with rotor lift aircraft.

I'm keeping my irrational suspicion of them and sticking to stuff that uses wings for lift though.

It's an entirely rational suspicion. Helicopters were invented because someone saw an airplane, wanted to make it cooler and scarier, and decided practicality, usability and safety were entirely unimportant.

[peterb]

It's an entirely rational suspicion. Helicopters were invented because someone saw an airplane, wanted to make it cooler and scarier, and decided practicality, usability and safety were entirely unimportant.

Tell that to Leonardo da Vinci!

On the practicality and usability points, try plucking someone off a ship/cliff-edge/roadside or out of a stormy sea with a fixed wing aircraft!

[TeePee]

You're right, but I still can't resist....

[peterb]

Slightly more successful than this (1983)

[DanceswithUnix]

And far more expensive to fix.

But that wasn't really my point, which was that pretty much everything, including basic cars, are going, or gone, fly by wire. For any chance of autonomous driving, they'll need to be.

But there isn't really any choice, the new way is why we have excellent fuel economy, 18 month service intervals and an expectation that the car will last 150K miles. I have had the throttle cable stick open on me in three cars, the last one was a Renault Clio and could have gotten nasty. I have yet to experience a bad problem in a modern style car with throttle servo (usually you just get an iffy mass air flow sensor and it runs rough enough that you drive the car to the garage before more damage is done).

[Saracen]

I hear you, but a sticky throttle cable says to me one if two things ...

1) Old, maybe frayed cable with a 'strand' sticking out. Solution = replace, which is cheap and easy to do. Couple of quid, and 5 to 30 minutes.

2) Dirty cable. Solution = regular, preventative maintenance, check cable not kinked, andxadequately clean and grease.

But I agree, in most respects, engines are much more fuel efficient. But for most people, complexity means the days of servicing and/or repairing your own, are a thing of the past.

I'm not entirely convinced progress is necessarily progress .... unless you own a garage business.

[Ttaskmaster]

I'm not entirely convinced progress is necessarily progress .... unless you own a garage business.

Less so, actually, as you now need to get in all this computery stuff on top and people think you can just fix a fractured oil sump by plugging something in the USB slot...!

[peterb]

Less so, actually, as you now need to get in all this computery stuff on top and people think you can just fix a fractured oil sump by plugging something in the USB slot...!

Like chewing gum?

[Lucio]

I miss the older cars, even someone who lets face it, is as ham-fisted as I am, was able to do repairs on older cars and the main barrier was usually a) Understanding what the damned Haines manual was trying to say and b) Getting hold of the right tools.

These days, the Haines manuals might as well say "First you plug your computer into the ODBC port, and then read the fault code. Then phone the main dealer for a patronising explanation as to why you can only come and see them and pay three times as much for the privilage of them turning it off and on again."

[Ttaskmaster]

Like chewing gum?

If you want to put chewing gum in your USBs, feel free... I'm not fixing it afterward, though.

I miss the older cars, even someone who lets face it, is as ham-fisted as I am, was able to do repairs on older cars and the main barrier was usually a) Understanding what the damned Haines manual was trying to say and b) Getting hold of the right tools.

Progress and improvements demand better parts with specialist tools, though... and computermabobbed things even more so, for better or worse. But a brake caliper is still a brake caliper and no amount of Googling is going to change your oil.

These days, the Haines manuals might as well say "First you plug your computer into the ODBC port, and then read the fault code.

OBD - ODBC is summat else... if your car has Open Data Base Connectivity, I'll just assume it's a top-end Audi/Merc and charge you for those parts.
Besides - Haynes/Clymer is for amateurs and full of errors... You should really have a copy of the official Workshop Manual!!

Then phone the main dealer for a patronising explanation as to why you can only come and see them and pay three times as much for the privilage of them turning it off and on again."

Or just Google it and see what the problem is, before replacing the appropriate recirc flap motor/lambda sensor/fuse/whatever.