Espritmodel.com Telemetry Radio
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Nov 21, 2006, 02:19 PM
Registered User
Joined Sep 2002
2,136 Posts
>What is the practical range of the drag coefficient?
From 0 (no drag) to 0.4 I would say, when it feels like it is restrained by too much resistance. This is purelly matter of perception, so pick the value you feel represents your model behavior the best. Lower value makes flying bit more challenging, higher value helps a lot while learning because the heli will not accelerate that quick.

>Both the Raptor and the T-Rex is less twitchy now. The T-Rex is probably too calm.
It replesents mild setup, I may look at it again.

>The upward acceleration on high pitch is better now.
I agree, others also like it like that now, so it will become default value.

>What exacltly Idle up is doing, I can't see any diferrence if it is on or off (Raptor60).
You can't see the difference because the governor is on and the pitch curves for idle on and off are set the same. If you turn the governor off, the throttle in idle off will be controled by the throttle curve and the model will not be able to fly inverted.

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com
skirtz is online now Find More Posts by skirtz
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Nov 21, 2006, 02:28 PM
Registered User
Joined Mar 2005
32 Posts
I got the right side up spin perfect now (left rudder, left aileron, and up elevator), but I think there is a glitch when inverted. With either left or right rudder (full) and full down elevator with no throttle at almost zero forward speed, the plane will act up.

Thanks,
Russell
rumadaaerowings is offline Find More Posts by rumadaaerowings
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 21, 2006, 02:38 PM
Registered User
Joined Sep 2002
2,136 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by rumadaaerowings
I got the right side up spin perfect now (left rudder, left aileron, and up elevator), but I think there is a glitch when inverted. With either left or right rudder (full) and full down elevator with no throttle at almost zero forward speed, the plane will act up.

Thanks,
Russell
Can you please make short recording and e-mail it to me at 123support@rcflightsim.com (remove 123).

Also, try it with Edge 25% and with Edge 33% and tell me if there is a difference. The flight models for these planes are slightly different. I will keep them different until I decide which flight model is better. IMHO they both fly very well now and is a hard to pick one against the other.


Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com
skirtz is online now Find More Posts by skirtz
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 21, 2006, 03:43 PM
Registered User
mmormota's Avatar
Budapest
Joined Jul 2003
2,569 Posts
My dragCoeff choices:
T-Rex: 0.1
Raptor 60: 0.15

About the T-Rex: In any other aspects but forward speed I prefer 0.15, but for better forward speed my final choice is 0.1
Hovering is ok.
I feel, that in forward flight, when I pull the elevator stick and the heli enters into a loop, there is an acceleration, and this is different to the real heli behavior. Maybe because of the same reason, maybe not, but in the sim I can easily fly bigger loops then with the real heli. The real one looses speed faster when it climbs upwards in the loop, I can't draw such big, impressive loops.

Unfortunately the weather is cold. The test could be more interesting and more reliable, if I can take my notebook, and switch to the sim and back to the real in the flying field ...

I have an idea:
A data logger on the real heli with acceleration sensors, gyro turning sensors and pitot speed sensor, and it logs the channel values as well. Fly some clean actions, collect the data. This way the collected data is objective, without feelings, no more maybe, not sure, etc.
In the sim you probably handle similar data, therefore there is the possibility to check if the data set is similar, and to fine tune the parameters.
Ok, it is easy to say...
mmormota is offline Find More Posts by mmormota
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 21, 2006, 03:57 PM
Registered User
Joined Sep 2002
2,136 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmormota
My dragCoeff choices:
....
....
I feel, that in forward flight, when I pull the elevator stick and the heli enters into a loop, there is an acceleration, and this is different to the real heli behavior. Maybe because of the same reason, maybe not, but in the sim I can easily fly bigger loops then with the real heli. The real one looses speed faster when it climbs upwards in the loop, I can't draw such big, impressive loops.
....
....
Lower this parameter:
translationalThrustCoef xxx

This will take care of the big loops. Please let me know the preffered value for you.


Regarding the drag coef, I think you may be right, I may lower it some in the next release. The thing is, when I get flying and go back to the sim again, I may preffer another value. It is somewhat subjective, because depending to the adrenaline level when flying, our perception of time and model reaction is different from the perception we get sitting comfortable in front of the screen, where the model is not in any real danger.

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com
skirtz is online now Find More Posts by skirtz
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 23, 2006, 01:50 AM
garage flyer
Chico, Ca
Joined Jul 2002
92 Posts
Hi Stefan,

Just wanted to thank you again for an outstanding product. I bought a new radio a couple months ago (RD6000 super) and used your instructions to build an interface cable for smartpropo. Works fantastic and version 4.59 is much better than the last one I played with. (I think 4.01 or so)

Keep up the good work,

Al
Spekter is offline Find More Posts by Spekter
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 23, 2006, 02:18 AM
garage flyer
Chico, Ca
Joined Jul 2002
92 Posts
Just installed 4.60 and noticed the following:
Blade CP flight physics are much better, much more stable now. Hard to explain but the distance and speed are correct now. With the last version, once I flew far out, it took much longer to get back to near. This is corrected now! Good work Stefan.
Spekter is offline Find More Posts by Spekter
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 23, 2006, 02:46 AM
garage flyer
Chico, Ca
Joined Jul 2002
92 Posts
Stefan,

I found that taming the "cyclic power" was the key to tuning the twitchiness of the heli's. Do you have a list of all the parameters and what they do? (Never mind...I found it on your website

Thanks,

Al
Spekter is offline Find More Posts by Spekter
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 26, 2006, 08:01 AM
Registered User
othmanskn's Avatar
Petagas, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia
Joined Sep 2003
489 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spekter
Stefan,

I found that taming the "cyclic power" was the key to tuning the twitchiness of the heli's. Do you have a list of all the parameters and what they do? (Never mind...I found it on your website

Thanks,

Al
Maybe it is also time to explain the PlaneParamModel.ac file is for.

I've finisned animating moveable surafaces for a scaled down Su-37 using Blender, using ShockFlier Edge parameter files including its PlaneParamModel.ac.

My next task is to scale this parameter.ac file in order to give a more correct feel for light planes. Most of the provided models are given masses of more than 3kg.

My planes and helis, are mostly less than 500g with lengths of less than 1m.

A few questions on this parameter graphic file:
1. What are these front elevator and rudder plates? Why do we need extras when we already have the rear elevator and rudder?

2. Why do we need the XYZGroups for main wing and body? Are they moveable as well?

Based on my earlier experiments, I cannot just delete these groups. It crashes Clearview.
othmanskn is offline Find More Posts by othmanskn
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 26, 2006, 01:41 PM
Registered User
Joined Sep 2002
2,136 Posts
The answer to question #1 is, that the front elevator and rudder plates are used by the program as sensors to measure rotational speeds at these points and for finer tuning the CG in some planes. For q #2, XYZGroups for main wing and the body are used by the program to compute the spatial position of the body and the wings to the main model coordinate system. As general rule, PlaneParamModel.ac should not be changed in any way since it contains some very important model relations. There is no reason to document it's structure since it must not be modified.

Thanks,
Stefan
http://rcflightsim.cin
skirtz is online now Find More Posts by skirtz
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 26, 2006, 02:14 PM
Heli-addict in training
TheWolfen's Avatar
Flagstaff, AZ
Joined Oct 2006
68 Posts
I'm a pretty new Clearview flyer and a new heli pilot as well. I think one of the biggest features I'd like to see that some of the more expensive sims have is realistic damage models and crash effects. It is probably something that requires a ton of work for an event we want to avoid, but it would add a lot to the sim, in my opinion.

More models is always good, too! I'm still trying to figure out which one is the closest to my heli (E-Sky Honey Bee FP2). I thought Ken's Dragonfly would be pretty close, but so far it doesn't feel quite right to me (but then I'm very much a rookie).

Anyway, keep up the good work! So far I've managed to avoid buying one of the really expensive sims, and I'd like to keep it that way (more money for my heli)!

David
TheWolfen is offline Find More Posts by TheWolfen
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 26, 2006, 02:53 PM
Registered User
Joined Sep 2002
2,136 Posts
Some simulators, instead trying to improve their flight model (from being poor to at least acceptable) created all these fake game like features to create an image of improvement. I for one think that simulator is a tool that must be realistic above all. All there features are bloatware and belong to cheap video games and not to an RC simulator. Sorry for being blunt but that is not the direction I see ClearView going.

Stefan
http://rcflighsim.com
skirtz is online now Find More Posts by skirtz
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 26, 2006, 05:32 PM
Registered User
matthew954's Avatar
Joined Oct 2005
1,537 Posts
The more realistic the better. I had just gotten Clearview not too long ago and find it to be more realistic than FMS. Just my opinion mind you. FMS is a good program, but Clearview is more expansive on what I can do. I like being able to select the types of servos I can use in my flights. I noticed right away there is a difference between analog and digital servos. Never knew that before. When I get my new Stearman sometime next winter I know that what I should get are digital servos and receiver. So far Clearview has taught me alot more than flying flying. It has taught me the most efficient types of radio gear to use in my real life models.

If I had to have a wishlist for Clearview, I would have to say have a few more Biplanes other than the ones on Ken's site. Namely a giant scale Stearman. Not too mention a nice old Piper Cub. But what would really be nicer more so than the gas planes would be some more Coaxial Helis, since now just about every company has atleast one Coax heli either in stores now or on their way for the holidays.

But either way Clearview as yet is the best tool I have bought for the hobby. Now i just need to get a faster pc, since some of the models stutter and loading times suck. But the flying fun is well worth the wait. Thanks to skirtz and everyone else who works on Clearview!
matthew954 is offline Find More Posts by matthew954
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 26, 2006, 05:38 PM
Hotep
ShuNut's Avatar
UK
Joined Dec 2005
2,395 Posts
Hey Stefan

I'd like to give a little feed back on the heli side.

My experience is only about 6 months with a CP heli and a few months before that i had a cheepo FP heli and quite a few yrs before that i had a few flights of my freinds raptor 30, tail in hovering only.

So far with my T-Rex SE i can do all the normal upright stuff including backward flight-fig 8's, and i can now loop quite good and i'm getting much better at rolls & flips, i can hover inverted nose in and resently (past few days) tail in.

What i think Clearview need is more realistic handling when it comes to fliping and rolling
.
The problem is its way too easy to flip and roll on the sim, main point is when you give the wrong pitch movements it will still flip and roll easy with any heli, where as in real like my heli will lose loads of hight and\or nearly crash because of it.

I dont know if its because the helis dont bog during manouvers of if the gravity code needs work. CV is a great sim and i love and use it everyday if i can, but if this pt of the sim could be improved it would make the world of difference. I have had over 700 flights on my Rex and i try to fly every day, so would be happy to give input to help getting this part improved.

I've been using CV for nearly 1 year now, and i used to use the T-Rex 95% of the time, but a few months ago i started mainly useing the Raptor 90, mostly just because you can see it much better and seems more eqiverlent on screen to my Rex 450 off screen if you get what i mean.

With V4.60 i like how the Raptor climbs better, but it seems too stable now and way too easy to do 3D to me, but i've never flown one so i cant really say, the T-Rex flys much better now, not so twitchy so i've been using that a lot lately as the Rappy seems to easy and i cant learn enough from it, i like my modles to be harder to fly than in real life.

Also i think CV need blades sounds when changing pitch, thats one of the many things i love about helis is that flapping sound.

So basicly i'm say the 2 areas that i think need most work is
1: The helis sounds, and
2: The helis need to be able to bog down and harder to flip if u give the wrong pitch.

I'm not really looking to get any CV models to fly exactly like mine, just more like real life.

And i must say agian that i love CV and am in no way complaining about it, those point are just my wish list.

Thx

Peace
ShuNut is offline Find More Posts by ShuNut
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2006, 05:24 AM
Registered User
othmanskn's Avatar
Petagas, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia
Joined Sep 2003
489 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by skirtz
The answer to question #1 is, that the front elevator and rudder plates are used by the program as sensors to measure rotational speeds at these points and for finer tuning the CG in some planes.
Thanks. I'll experiment.

Quote:

For q #2, XYZGroups for main wing and the body are used by the program to compute the spatial position of the body and the wings to the main model coordinate system. As general rule, PlaneParamModel.ac should not be changed in any way since it contains some very important model relations. There is no reason to document it's structure since it must not be modified.

Thanks,
Stefan
http://rcflightsim.cin
If users have some ideas what they're for, they can at least choose which ones to use for their own models.

My interests are:
1. ducted fans, 500g elevon controlled.
I notice that only the turbine powered F15 uses elevons, ala Nelson's Su-27 foam planes, 24in wing span
(under construction )

I'd like to use Clearview to estimate its flight performance, given physical dimensions and mass distribution, as well as given thrust and orientation.

2. 2-ch V-tail pusher ala Firebird series, 500g, I've 3 at home

3. 2-ch 2-engine vectored thrust 250g
I've 3 hanging on my ceiling .

4. 2-ch 2-engine 20g, X-twin or Aeroace.
Got one, and the only model that I managed to fly reasonably well.

My intention is not just for me, but to train my children and nephews, younger than 10 to fly these planes rather than destroying them.

Creating 3D models is no longer a problem. All are available for FMS exect X-twin, which I'm still constructing while improving my Blender skills.

You'd help me a lot if you could provide me with correct param.ac files for classes of these planes, where I can use correct masses, without major tweaks in the coefficients.

I notice that most Clearview models use masses of more than 3kg, (which is too heavy for me), even electric planes.

FMS allows me to specify physical dimensions. Similarly for all flight simulators that I had known.
I may start with FMS but I'd prefer to use Clearview with its better graphics.

For more realistic flying, sound effects are important. Phoenix shows the way.

Helis need it more than planes.
othmanskn is offline Find More Posts by othmanskn
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Discussion Blade CX on Clearview Flight Sim skorp_ian Simulators 6 Feb 09, 2008 02:46 AM
FMS flight sim Steven9026 Beginner Training Area (Aircraft-Electric) 10 Oct 25, 2001 12:03 PM
Real Flight Sim rckid Electric Heli Talk 0 Jul 30, 2001 10:46 PM
FMS - The free R/C flight sim - Why does it crash on me ! steve lewin Electric Plane Talk 2 Jun 19, 2001 12:52 AM