Do not Google me...stay here, read on.



The Double Horse 9100 arrived from China in just under 2 weeks, in a fairly sturdy box.

why doesn't somebody just call XHeli and ask?

I find it funny that we're spending so much time discussing a single rotor in a co-ax forum when we should be talking about this bad boy. But what the heck!

Ed

Originally Posted by Kurt

why doesn't somebody just call XHeli and ask?

What fun would that be? Isn't that sort of like "Real men don't ask directions?"

Because you would be on HOLD forever, for something that is pretty EASY to deduce, and move on.



The Double Horse 9100 inner packaging (the display box) was crumpled on one corner, but luckily, nothing had been damaged inside, outside of a foam packing block.

Originally Posted by edwong3

I find it funny that we're spending so much time discussing a single rotor in a co-ax forum when we should be talking about this bad boy. But what the heck!

Ed

Because it's control scheme is likely identical to our coax 3-channels, making a relevant link in interest.


The Double Horse 9100 is larger than a Syma S006g or a similar-sized CostcoCopter. The thing DWARFS an S107, and my toy car is just here because it was the right colors.

That servo is mounted quite offset on the right side of the heli so that output shaft must be pretty long in order to actuate the horn on the other side of the frame.

I don't know, it looks weird.

Ed

Edit: Oh never mind KB. I see what you're saying. The horn, and rod are actually within the frame. We're just seeing it through an opening in the frame.

Originally Posted by killbucket

The white arm you see here...


is mounted to this servo, under the word hover.

It think you "see" the servo ARM outside the sideplate...it is between them.

Originally Posted by killbucket

It's obviously got fake front ball-links, folks.

It's a HobbleCopter.

The "NEWS" here, is it's a "Hobby Grade" airframe from a cheapie maker, apparently.

I wonder if it has front servo locations.

Who's the first to order one up to see what this thing really is ?!?

Originally Posted by jtravel

This is what I see in the photos.
The swash has two linkages one connected to a servo and one fixed mounted.
The swash also has a center Anti-rotation pin.
Two buckles are also connected from the swash to the rotor blades.

These are the specs off XHeli:

Feature:

-Alloy structure, unique design
-Electronic fine-tuning, flying more stable
-All-round 3 channel control
-Advanced intelligent balance system
-New digital full 3 Channel control remotely
-Full function: up/down, forward/backward, turning left and right, fixed-point hovering

Based on the description of the movements in the specs, it sounds like a 3-channel. A 4-channel would have an added direction of "move left or right". So maybe the main blades actually do just tilt for and aft, and the tail rotor gives the yaw.

Maybe the "extra linkages" are just for added stabilization of the mechanism and don't really move anything around.

The mystery continues ....

Oh cool! We now have a new RC helicopter term, '3 Channel FP"!

Ed

I noticed the printing on the box...

"High degree of carbon fiber pattern simulation aluminum"

Does that translate to a printed sticker on aluminum?

If its not a coax (and it obviously isn't) then the tail rotor has to be cancelling the torque from the main rotor, but won't that make it the world's most unstable 3-channel? I mean I always thought that 3-channels were coaxes because without the dual rotors the heli would need the 4th channel to be able to control its stability.

It is "self stabilizing", meaning it has a gyro to manage the differences between the torque from the main rotor, and the thrust from the tail rotor. Makes it almost if not as stable as a coax.

Ed

Originally Posted by overedline

If its not a coax (and it obviously isn't) then the tail rotor has to be cancelling the torque from the main rotor, but won't that make it the world's most unstable 3-channel? I mean I always thought that 3-channels were coaxes because without the dual rotors the heli would need the 4th channel to be able to control its stability.

Originally Posted by edwong3

It is "self stabilizing", meaning it has a gyro to manage the differences between the torque from the main rotor, and the thrust from the tail rotor. Makes it almost if not as stable as a coax.

Ed

That isn't what self-stabilizing means at all. All single rotor helis have a gyro to hold the tail and 95% of them are not self-stabilizing. But, your confusion is justified, because it's a misused term. In simple terms, it means the heli will attempt to cancel movement, much like a coax does. It has also been used to describe helis that attempt to remain upright (due to long center of gravity), also much like a coax. There are several helis that do both. There are lots of people who won't buy a self-stabilizing heli because they assume that if it has a 45° offset flybar or head, that it will try to remain upright, which is a physical impossibility.

A geared tail doesn't seem to me like a very efficient method, and also noisy. But we'll see when it gets there. Still think it's a little premature to call this a FAKE 4 channel. I think it was just listed wrong on that webpage. Happens more often, some advertise the Revell Proto Max as Bell Hiller and Heading Hold gyro, while it's head design is Bell, and it has a rate gyro. Can't blame the company that makes this heli for that, and this seems like a similar case...