ap2000 and 90 ccpm

[GJestico]

And once again Gary, you cannot handle a difference of opinion without resorting to personal attacks and insults. Is your position so weak it cannot withstand debate?
Lemme make sure I got his right:

A 90-degree eCCPM configuration has less interaction than a 120-degree setup. Most radios, with the exception of the 12MZ/14MZ and the new DX7, output servo commands serially, so there's always SOME interaction with eCCPM setups, there's just less with the 90-degree variety.


You are saying the 3 servo 90 deg ccpm setup is better, under loaded conditions, than a conventional 120 degree ccpm setup.


Finally, you obviously don't know squat about 3D setups


Then let me learn from the master. Show me some of your own designs of frames and ccpm systems, that you have built.
Heres some of mine.:
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=266753
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=315532

Have a nice day :twisted:

Greg

[Tonystott]

err Greg, just a comment from an "outsider".

Referring to people as "inferior Raptor half breeds :badair: " bears an uncanny resemblance to personal attacks and insults.

I am surprised that you got all huffy when someone inevitably took offence.

Tony Stott (just after a peaceful life)

[dreslism]

And once again Gary, you cannot handle a difference of opinion without resorting to personal attacks and insults.


C'mon, Greg, are you kidding me with the above statement?

What do you call your post below? I see no smiley or winkies there in your post, so that looks like personal attacks on everyone who posted in this thread.

I KNOW that everyone in this thread has a 9 CH Tx, but they are all needed when doing AP solo, so that is why there is the request to put the new swash type in the ap2000i that could control the gyro gain again.

Dont pooch it forthe rest of us just for a few inferior raptor half breeds. :badair: whos owners wont bother to buy a suitable 9ch radio.

[GGoodrum]

Hey, you started it. :) You not only insulted me, but many others here who use Raptors for AP/AV work.

With high torque digital servos, there's no problem with a 3-servo 90 degree setup. No need to "share the load", like the early days of eCCPM setups, which is why 120-degree layouts came about in the first place. With a 90 degree setup, elevator inputs don't require the aileron servos to move, so less interaction, in theory. The bottomline is that unless you use a DX7, or a 12/14MZ, which output three servo channels simultaneously, you will get some interaction with ANY eCCPM setup, 90, 120 or 140 degrees.

As for my designs, I've been doing Raptor conversions since 2003. My first used the "box" that Dana and I developed and a Hacker B50/C50-15XL motor and an 8s3p TP gen1 setup. Although Al Avalone did the design, I've been selling a 120-degree eCCPM conversion for the Raptors since the beginning. Later, I did a "V2" version of the "box"/Raptor conversion, that reduced weight and made more room for batteries. When outrunners and Steve Neu's 1900 series "ORK" started proving they could supply the same sort of torque without having to resort to two-stage gearing, I did a much simpler conversion that has proven to be quite popular. I've sold hundreds of them. I also participated in the development of the XeroG-600EP, with Dana. I was the one that hooked Dana up with XeroG.

I was lucky enough to get the 2nd e620SE in North America. I got a chance to test the 90-degree eCCPM setup, and found it worked quite well, especially with my 14MZ. My latest eTitan conversion came about after I had a heck-of-a-time getting a123 cells to fit in the new e550/e620SE frames. I also was aware that TT will not release a conversion for existing Raptors until mid-next year. In any case, I figured out how to do a simple 90-degree eCCPM conversion, using the standard mechanical CCPM parts, moved the motor up in back which freed up the whole lower section for batteries. I got Andrey to cut some new frames and what we now have is something very similar to the new eRaptors, but able to hold a123 "tandem"-style packs, right out of a DeWalt tool pack.

I helped my friend Ben do a Predator conversion in early 2004. It used a 32-3 and a 12s3p-6000 TP "gen2" setup and was about the most powerful helicopter out there at the time.

In any case, I'll match "resumes" with you any time. :)

You have a great day yourself. :lol:

-- Gary

[GJestico]

I can see how that statement could be taken the wrong way.
The "half breed" comment was referring to the E-raptors method of achieving eCCPM swash control using the existing geometry from the stock mCCPM setup, but leaving one swash control point off. Most likely so as to make the conversion kit cheap for existing glow raptors; no new swash needed.
Sorry for those that it offended. The comment was directed at the machinery, not the owner. Peace ! :smokin:
I must ask, Do you really need a seperate pan control for a single operator setup, when you have complete control over the pan with your left stick through the TR/Yaw control? Sounds like you are making a lot of work for yourself. I could be missing something on the technique. wouldnt be the first time I missed something :WOW
Also, if you had the choice between supporting inertial sensors and altitude hold capability, as Angelos has promised to do, or having a one brand heli specific swash function, which would you choose. read Angelos statement regarding the memory usage of the AP processor.

Greg.

[GGoodrum]

The new Raptors are also setup to use 140-degree eCCPM as well, but the 140-degree swashplates aren't available yet. I wouldn't bother. The 90 degree works great.

Angelos said there's probably 40% memory available, with some cleaning up, so I really think this is not such a big deal. I started life as an aerospace software engineer, programming computers for attack helicopters, anti-submarine warfare helicopters and fighters. Most systems including doing inertial-based nav solutions, with full Kalman-filtering. The computers used back then were 8-bit and 16-bit, and most only had 16k of memory, at best. All the software was written in assembly language. I remember having to rewrite code literally to save one or two words, so that we could squeeze one last change in. In any case, my point is that it doesn't necessarily take big chunks of memory to add the altitude hold and inertial functions. In a lot of cases, the user interface stuff takes more memory.

As for making room for "one brand heli", Angelos could always remove one or two of the more obscure swashplate settings.

-- Gary

[Angelos]

Firmware 1.11 and updated user guide now available to download. This adds the S-3 swash type. http://www.spartan-rc.com/products/ap2000i/ap2000i.htm

-Angelos

[dreslism]

Firmware 1.11 and updated user guide now available to download. This adds the S-3 swash type. http://www.spartan-rc.com/products/ap2000i/ap2000i.htm

-Angelos

From the 1.11 user guide.

If any glitches or frame errors are detected during the flight, Gxx and Fxx will be also appear in rotation after the voltage display.

Thanks Angelos. You're the best! :mrgreen:

So from what I can see that is new in the firmware are the following 3 things.

1) the glitch's will automatically display in Voltage rotation if there are any.
2) New S-3 swash type for the 90CCPM raptors.
3) I assume the EPH1 is back in the firmware.

[GGoodrum]

Wow, that was fast! Thanks a ton, Angelos! :D Amazing support, gotta love it!

-- Gary

[AZ ChopperCam]

I've flown 3 servo 90° as well as 120° and I can honestly say I felt no difference.

I'm not sure what a Raptor half breed is but if the Raptors I have are half breeds then I guess my being born in Alabama (insert incest joke here) fits right in line with flying half-breeds.

As for needing the 4th channel for gyro gain... why not just use a GY240? who really needs remote gain and digital servos for AP style flying anyway??

[MarkWebber]

As for needing the 4th channel for gyro gain... why not just use a GY240? who really needs remote gain and digital servos for AP style flying anyway??

Excellent point, DJ. And you'll save a bit vs. buying a 401.

[GGoodrum]

The 401s are designed to be used with digital servos. Besides, I already have a bunch of 401s.

Moot point now, I guess. ;)

[MarkWebber]

Moot point now, I guess

Too true, Gary. But worth concidering for those of us without a bunch of spares.

PS Want to sell one cheap?

[GGoodrum]

Sorry, all mine are in use. :)

I still would buy a 401 over a 240, for the reason I mentioned.

-- Gary