Thread Tools
May 21, 2013, 12:45 AM
Pure soaring - no motor
Thread OP

Gyros in F3F?

How do you interpret the F3F rules? Gyros allowed or not?

Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
May 21, 2013, 02:52 AM
Registered User

The rules have some paragraphs that could be interpreted as gyros are forbidden.

Article 5.8.1 states:

"This contest is a speed event for radio controlled slope gliders."

And some may say this cover prohibitition against gyros, since this paragraph states "radio controlled slope gliders", and gyro controlled would be an addition to this.

The other article in the FAI F3F rules 5.8.2 that states reason for controversy regarding gyro use:

"Variation of geometry or area is allowed only if it is actuated at distance by radio control."

From this article, it could also be interpreted that, yes when gyros are used,
you indeed have a input from the gyro inside plane, that actuate control surface movement, and variation of geometry that have not origin from distance radio control.

Regarding the variation of geometry, the controversy some years ago was that the the wing area was adjusted (increased/decreased), but of course, this was radio controlled, at distance, so this rule would not prohibit this either, as it is written in the rules now.

So even a flap coming out of the wing, increasing wing area, would be allowed, if this system could be made light enough, to make it applicable, so this change of rule clearified, this could be used if one desired to do it, since it would be operated from the transmitter.

In my personal opinion, these articles were not written as they are, meant to prohibit use of gyro, and were not the intention of these articles.

Also my personal opinion, there are no controversy against aids used in F3X classes for years; snap flap in turns, pre-defined flight phases etc. which are pre-defined programmed settings in the transmitter, that in my personal view, is in practice as well not operated by the pilot directly, as it also would be with use of gyros.

These are simply aids that hopefully allow us to fly faster, and I call it advance in technology and welcome both.

The simularity of these are: Both aids to improve handling of plane without not being directly controlled by pilot.

Difference: For pre-defined settings in transmitter, the input signal origin from distance by radio Control inside the transmitter. With use of gyro, the origin of input signal origin from inside the gyro mounted in the plane itself.

FAI should re-write rules in regards to use of gyros, clearly stating it is either prohibited or allowed to use.

As the rules are today, it could be interpreted both ways, depending what your wish are, my conclusion is that it is not prohibited since no mention of gyros are stated in the rules, but due to controversy, there should be a clearification regarding use of gyros in F3F contests from the FAI.
Last edited by krvedaa; May 21, 2013 at 03:03 AM.
May 21, 2013, 04:13 AM
satinet's Avatar
I don't see how using snap flap is not ok. Moving the elevator happens by moving the stick on the tx. Moving the trailing edge of the wing (aka snap flap) works by moving the stick on the transmitter. By that logic vtails should not be allowed either as they work on a computer "mix" off the elevator stick.

Are you saying one servo per control, because twin ailerons shouldn't be allowed either then. Moving the flaps to a certain position (e.g using a flight phase) is done by the piliot remotely. It's completely different to something been done inside the model that the pilot is not aware of.

I doubt most CDs would allow gyros to be used.

FAI should re-write rules in regards to use of gyros, clearly stating it is either prohibited or allowed to use.
May 21, 2013, 06:16 AM
Registered User
mlachow's Avatar
That was on the agenda for the most recent CIAM meeting. It was a proposal to modify the rules in the general section for Model Aircraft. Germany had a proposal.

1.1 General Definitions of Model Aircraft
Amend the 5th paragraphs as follows
A model aircraft shall not be equipped with any electronic device which
i) stabilizes automatically roll, pitch or yaw, or
ii) that allows it to be flown automatically to a selected location.
Exceptions from i) are to be stated for the particular class
Latest blog entry: Is-4 Jastrzab Build
May 21, 2013, 06:28 AM
Registered User
prondel's Avatar
And ?

Was the proposal adopted ?

May 21, 2013, 06:40 AM
isoaritfirst's Avatar
So if I fly with a Gyro can I plead the "fith amendment"?
May 21, 2013, 07:16 AM
Woodstock 1's Avatar
Mike, your'e in the wrong business ...
May 21, 2013, 02:28 PM
Registered User
reto.blumer's Avatar
There's a hot debate going on in the German RC-Network forum for a few days now. Same situation, it's a problem of interpretation, so some think it's not allowed, some it is. Finally, everybody would like some official statement. It seems the German proposal was finally rejected at the CIAM meeting. In my humble opinion, there is a big difference between activating camber through a switch on the Tx, or having the model correcting attitude (even partially) from it's Rx. In the latter case the signal is NOT actuated AT DISTANCE through radio control.
Just my 2cts, though.
May 21, 2013, 07:50 PM
Registered User
Avaldes's Avatar
If there is any question, you should try flying with a yaw gyro. It is interesting but not the end-all pilot aid. We discussed this a few years ago in the context of using them to keep models flying straight in their lanes for the F3J mass launch. At the end of the day the best pilots are going to win, with or without pilot aids. The spirit of RC soaring is to fly the model yourself.
May 22, 2013, 02:02 AM
Registered User
To answer Satinet's comment, yes, there is indeed a difference of using gyro and
mix input from the transmitter.

But if the reason for being against use of gyro is:

Originally Posted by Avaldes
The spirit of RC soaring is to fly the model yourself.
I am still in the strong opinion that some of the pre-defined settings, that are actuated from transmitter, but not directly controlled by the pilot, like snapflap do deviate from from this beautiful slogan. So if this is the argument against gyro, yes, we should logical forbid some of the today used pre-defined mixes.

So to use snapflap during flight operated by the pilot, ideally it should be operated from the throttle stick when turning to comply to this saying. But it is very conveniant to let the snap flap automatical operate together with the elevator stick, like it would also be very conveniant to let the gyro operate together with the aileron, elevator stick etc.
Last edited by krvedaa; May 22, 2013 at 02:08 AM.
May 22, 2013, 02:47 AM
closed due to popular demand
Last edited by ibuild; Oct 19, 2013 at 05:08 PM.
May 22, 2013, 03:00 AM
Registered User
jolucapo's Avatar
IMHO flying your model yourself means that your brain is the only processing unit that take the decisions needed to correct the trajectories of the model and the sensor that determines the attitude, speed, position, etc of the model are your eyes. Your hands operate the sticks, switches, knobs of the transmitter and after some mixers, trims, etc, the receiver commands the servos. The mixers are necessary, we can not operate in each servo individually.

The real difference is that the gyros have its own sensors and another sensors are possible also. With gyroscopes, accelerometers, speed sensors, altitude sensors, etc and a small processing unit in the model, our gliders can enter in the category of drones and can fly autonomous.

IMHO the solution to this problem is simple: all sensors, of any kind, must be forbidden in the model.
May 22, 2013, 03:20 AM
Registered User
prondel's Avatar
Do you know why the proposal has been rejected at the CIAM planetary meeting ?

Curiously, the real benefit of the Gyro I see in F3F, it during the landing in turbulent area we often have behind the edge of the slope.

For the rest, there are still limitations/constraints on the current Gyros that make them not really convenient on a F3X sailplane: V -tail mixing, quadro flap, travel settings, etc ...

I have a Guardian from Eagle Tree, but have not installed it on a F3F. I'm using it on foamies (easystar, Parkmaster, etc ...).

my 2 cents.

May 22, 2013, 04:18 AM
Deniable plausibility
Shedofdread's Avatar
From what I read, gyros can't be allowed because they give a control input from within the airframe. Or put another way it's a control input NOT coming via the radio link.

Of course the way around this is to send the gyro data back to the TX, process it there and send the composite signal back to the airframe...
May 22, 2013, 06:18 AM
Registered User
I agree with you Pierre.

The little experience I have with ET guardian, and the
new serie GYA futaba gyro, I am quite disapppoited that
they are quite diffucult to set up, and simply ignoring
settings from transmitter.

So I think as well on the edge on the slope, one is better of having the benefit of a well set up model.

I am curious of the Graupner HOTT receivers with 3 axis stabilization, could cope with this better.

For now my gyros goes in planes to be used for DS and pure leisure.

Quick Reply

Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New Product BL-3GRC ICE-MAN Gyro available in Australia IceManPro Australia 0 Apr 25, 2013 01:13 AM
Discussion Dont know if i posted in the right forum Fusion Gyro mrkeyboardman07 Coaxial Helicopters 0 Feb 25, 2013 01:01 PM
Sold 2 Phoenixtech Gyros new in box garrettt04s Aircraft - Electric - Helis (FS/W) 2 Jan 23, 2013 08:15 PM
Poll is there any intrest in a F3F clinic in So.Cal? seaspb Multi Task F3X 30 Aug 01, 2011 06:42 PM