Glassdogangle, when a person who has taken instruction from you is ready to solo, would the be able to: 1) taxi from the pit to the end of the runway, 2) initiate a ground roll that results in attaining flight speed, 3) take off, 4) fly at least two complete circuits, 5) set up a landing approach, 6) land, 7) taxi back to the pit?

Nice debating with ya. That's what makes these forums fun.

Originally Posted by Logan4169

Glassdogangle, when a person who has taken instruction from you is ready to solo, would the be able to: 1) taxi from the pit to the end of the runway, 2) initiate a ground roll that results in attaining flight speed, 3) take off, 4) fly at least two complete circuits, 5) set up a landing approach, 6) land, 7) taxi back to the pit?

Yes, except for the taxiing to and from the pit area. I teach my guys to carry their planes to the taxiway just before taking off, and to carry their plane (or at least roll it on the ground with a hand bracing the plane at all times) when returning to the pits. We don't allow taxiing in pit areas. That's for safety.

In addition, a person who is ready to solo (come off the buddy box) after I teach them also knows how to do basic aerobatics, like loops, rolls, stalls, etc. I don't take them off the box until I am sure they can not only do circuits, but also get themselves out of any messes they have gotten into.

The only casualties I have had while teaching is 1) A wing snapped on a trainer with a known issue, and 2) I had a guy's nitro engine fly out due to structural failure (I landed the extremely tail heavy trainer uneventfully, surprising even myself!)

Sometimes I irritate my students because I keep them tethered for up to 40-50 flights before I let them solo, since they always seem to think they have flying mastered after 10 or so. They never appreciate how important it is to stay on the box that long. Then again, how could they if they go on to never crash their 2nd or 3rd planes? For all they knew, they had it down all along!

The last 10 flights or so, I don't even have to touch the controls as they take off, fly, do mild aerobatics, and land without issue. Also, my students have full grasp of what a flare is, and a few other important concepts such as tip stalls, before I let them solo.

Originally Posted by chucksolo69

Nice debating with ya. That's what makes these forums fun.

Yeah I'm not sure how I could be any more clear and still have someone completely miss the point, but it is fun to try.

I got some infractions for telling a couple of people they were talking rubbish. Months after I said this, I got points. I also got a point for calling a racist an idiot. Finally, I got 3 point for over reporting.

And that was all the result of a very personal vendetta by a very disturbed member. Jerry has NEVER been offensive even though he tends to be honest and forthright, obviously dishonorable traits. I, however, applaud him as a man who is not afraid to share the room with an opinion. Sometimes moderators just don't get things right, being on the receiving end of a person with a vendetta, and that's fine. Nobody's perfect and it's not the moderators' fault.

I fall in line that the way controls work in mode 2 is for the primary roll control to be on the right stick. With a 4-channel plane that's aileron. With a 3-channel plane that's rudder. But roll control is roll control and the plane absolutely does not care from which control surface it comes.

To prove it, an experiment is in order. Take a Super Cub, modified with ailerons. Hook it up three channel, aileron, elevator throttle and fly it around. Land and hook her up rudder (right stick), elevator throttle. It will fly so close to identical in both configurations you'll be horrified. Primary roll control on the right stick. It's the right way to go. Yes, assignment of sticks is arbitrary. But let's get real here.

Originally Posted by Logan4169

Glassdogangle, when a person who has taken instruction from you is ready to solo, would the be able to: 1) taxi from the pit to the end of the runway, 2) initiate a ground roll that results in attaining flight speed, 3) take off, 4) fly at least two complete circuits, 5) set up a landing approach, 6) land, 7) taxi back to the pit?

One of my favorite things to do these days, before I buddy-box a beginner on a real rc airplane, is, I turn them loose on RealFlight. I hand them the controls, give them a big easy plane to fly, and then turn them loose.

Sometimes I don't even give them any instructions beyond "This is throttle up, and pull back here to take off". Then I leave the room and go make lunch.

By the time the soup is done I can hear less and less crashing coming from the computer's speakers. I come in now and then to encourage them.

One of the best things to do with a beginner is to put them right in the cockpit with "cockpit view", especially if they are having a hard time. It is easier to fly from the cockpit, and it is the simplest way to give the student an idea of how the control sticks move the plane (bank and pull back slightly). When they get good at that, I switch them to 3rd person perspective and they get the hang of flying quicker.

Only after I see some basic ability (usually an hour or two), do I then take them to the flying field and hook them up to the box to fly a real rc plane. By the time they are in the air with a real plane they can do fairly well. I might rescue them 10-15 times during their first flight, which is about average depending on their ability (and IQ, I think).

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

To prove it, an experiment is in order. Take a Super Cub, modified with ailerons. Hook it up three channel, aileron, elevator throttle and fly it around. Land and hook her up rudder (right stick), elevator throttle. It will fly so close to identical in both configurations you'll be horrified. Primary roll control on the right stick. It's the right way to go. Yes, assignment of sticks is arbitrary. But let's get real here.

Since I did not learn on a 3-channel plane (my first was an Aerostar .40 4-channel), I probably don't have enough experience in the whole "transitioning from 3-channel to 4" arena, as you guys have shown me.

I would not be surprised at all at the results of the experiment above. The two riggings would have nearly identical behaviours.

When I first voiced my opinion on this matter, I said:

Originally Posted by glassdogangle

If I ruled the world, all 3 channel rc planes AND 3 channel rc helicopters would place the rudder control on the left.

My main gripe at the beginning of all this (although unstated) was how difficult it is to transition from a 3-channel helicopter (with rudder control a.k.a. tail rotor control on the right stick) to a 4-channel heli (with rudder control on the left, where it normally goes).

When you fly a helicopter, the primary direction control (heading control) is your rudder, or tail rotor. It is essential to learn how to turn a heli with rudder in order to advance to more difficult concepts, like cyclic control (aka elevator or aileron). That is why beginner helicopters have only rudder control, no real cyclic (although they imitate some cyclic by using a horizontal tail rotor, which causes the heli to pitch forward or backward, which in turn causes it to move fore or aft).

For helicopters, a rudder deflection results in a pure spin about the z-axis, and only that, whereas an aileron deflection results in a pure roll about the y-axis.

So, if a person transitioning from 3-ch to 4-ch (with the tail rotor control suddenly swapped) attempts to spin to the left, he finds himself immediately ROLLING to the left instead!

Case in point, and MY EXPERIMENT (which I already did, btw): I can do some pretty good aerobatics with my Blade 450 X flybarless heli, after a year or so of flying helis. However, the other day one of my nephews asked me to fix their 3-channel coaxial toy heli. I fixed it with a new battery and tried to fly it, and ended up crashing it all over the place at first! Why? Because the stupid tail rotor didn't yaw the helicopter, and the cyclic controls spun it around instead of banking! It was like riding a bike backwards all of a sudden! I almost broke the left stick trying to put some tail rotor control in!

So, I will agree that learning 3-ch plane flying is fine if the rudder control is on the right.

For helicopters, however, I stand my ground! All 3-ch helicopters should have rudder on the left!

Originally Posted by glassdogangle

Case in point, and MY EXPERIMENT (which I already did, btw): I can do some pretty good aerobatics with my Blade 450 X flybarless heli, after a year or so of flying helis. However, the other day one of my nephews asked me to fix their 3-channel coaxial toy heli. I fixed it with a new battery and tried to fly it, and ended up crashing it all over the place at first! Why? Because the stupid tail rotor didn't yaw the helicopter, and the cyclic controls spun it around instead of banking! It was like riding a bike backwards all of a sudden! I almost broke the left stick trying to put some tail rotor control in!

So, I will agree that learning 3-ch plane flying is fine if the rudder control is on the right.

For helicopters, however, I stand my ground! All 3-ch helicopters should have rudder on the left!

Well that explains it. You wanted some connection between helicopters and winged things.

Glassdogangle I just asked to verify that in the end your students do get the instruction that they need. The "yes" was good enough, but your explanation was great, and I like the other things that you do as well (simulator and soup, etc.) For the record we don't ground handle IN the pits either, but outside the fence is rolling territory.
I have to say that the forum is making a much bigger deal out of the 3 ch. situation than even remotely necessary. If I had a student that took as long to "get it" as some people are spending describing the impending doom, then I would highly encourage them to work harder at other aspects of the hobby. Spectating maybe? It is just very difficult to believe that a person could overcome the other obstacles to becoming a pilot, orientation, wind, approaches, etc. but then struggle with this little detail to the point of failure.

I have said it before and I will repeat it now, 3 ch. helis are a completely different situation! I can only imagine that the manufacturers of those don't want their toys to look too "cheap" by only having one stick. Maybe?

All right! We're all on the same page.

Now, thanks and a tip of the hat to Bert Lahr

All together now!

If I were the King of the Fore-e-e-e-e-e-e-est,
Not queen, not duke, not prince
My rudder sticks of the fore-e-e-e-e-e-e-est
Would be left, not center, not right
I'd command each craft, be it copter or plane
With a woof and a woof and a royal growl----woof.

Thumbs up to you, and salute, glassdogangle!

Originally Posted by Logan4169

I have said it before and I will repeat it now, 3 ch. helis are a completely different situation! I can only imagine that the manufacturers of those don't want their toys to look too "cheap" by only having one stick. Maybe?

It's done to make it easier to fly. The easier it is, the more popular it will be, and I've had a lot of inexperienced people fail to understand why rudder on the right is incorrect on helicopters. It is pretty easy to explain though when you bring in the 4-channel helicopters and explain how cyclic works.

For helicopters, I agree, rudder should be on the left stick always... but for planes it really depends on what kind of plane it is.

Ha ha ha, it's all good. And to think I got on here originally to tell everyone (brag to everyone) that the new photo field "Douglas Lake" in RealFlight 6 is actually a spot on the Willamette River in Albany Oregon, where I live! It is located just north of the Bryant's Park softball fields!

When I first saw the photo field in RealFlight 6, I immediately thought it was Bryant's Park, but then my reason overruled my intuition (of course it's not Bryant's Park, when was the last time anyone ever took notice of little old Albany, OR?) Another thing that threw me is that RF 6 has a fake 3D model of a dock right on the edge of the river, but in real life there is no dock.

Well, I flew my heli there for the first time ever yesterday. Then, later that night when I fired up RF 6, I just happened to load "Douglas Lake" at random, and then it hit me! I was like, Oh my gawd, I just flew there right at that spot!

I did a quick google search on "douglas lake bryant park willamette river" and other such terms, but i found nothing.

Since I have never seen anyone fly out of this spot before (it is DEFINITELY not a well know area for flying), I guess I felt kinda special knowing that the guys at RealFlight would take special interest in this little spot on the river, and make it a background for one of their photo fields!

It really is a fun place to fly in real life...

As I mentioned a lot earlier in this 'thread', (more like a ball of tangled wool ), when I learned to fly RC it was rudder only, there were no computers for a flight sim, no buddy box. Yet strangely many many of us old foggies learned to fly model planes.

Going by the advancements in technology, beginner should by now be able to fly a model in about 5 minutes.

I wonder why they can't

One word elfight, FEAR. So many newbs are terrified that they are gonna crash, it causes them to..............crash. My cousin is a perfect example. A friend built him a GWS Slow Stick and he spen around $200.00 for the whole RTF package. He has flown it once with the builder. The builder took the plane off the ground, got about 2 mistakes high, handed the TX to my cousing who, after about a minute, promptly handed the TX back to the builder. He's basically scared to fly the plane.

Originally Posted by eflightray

As I mentioned a lot earlier in this 'thread', (more like a ball of tangled wool ), when I learned to fly RC it was rudder only, there were no computers for a flight sim, no buddy box. Yet strangely many many of us old foggies learned to fly model planes.

Going by the advancements in technology, beginner should by now be able to fly a model in about 5 minutes.

I wonder why they can't

Because you (and I) had unfair advantage: building and flying free flight airplanes. Then your rudder plane was a free flight plane that you could steer! Incredible!

But we weren't afraid of our planes because they already demonstrated they could fly themselves. We hand launched our planes and trimmed them to death until we were satisfied. We had lots of experience with power so we knew what to expect there. Heck powered free flight planes were old hat.

Here we were with a plane that if the radio failed the worst that could happen was a landing somewhere we didn't really want, perhaps an uncomfortable distance away. We figured our fuel load accordingly.

Then we launched, diddled with the rudder when necessary and were amazed that finally we could guide our plane to land generally where we wanted to land instead of having to chase the thing.

What if people today were to start with one of the old free flight airplanes with a 3 or 4 channel radio? It would be a no-brainer if....... because shortcuts make the job harder. Trim and setup are major parts of what gets accepted as flying skill. Without free flight experience, modelers today learn by trial and terror.