By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more
Forum sponsored by:
Forum sponsored by CML

fly away's

a thing of the past ?

All Topics | Latest Posts

Search for:  in Thread Title in  
john stones 116/04/2014 10:57:58
avatar
11102 forum posts
1498 photos

Not aimed anywhere folks just a general question

Are they a thing of the past in the 2.4 era ?

There are that many brands and types of rx's these days, do the likes of frsky orange etc come with failsafe function on full range gear ?

Its a given they still need to be set up, but is it one less thing to worry about now.

cymaz16/04/2014 11:15:33
avatar
9004 forum posts
1187 photos

I think it's called free flight nowblush

Bob Cotsford16/04/2014 11:37:01
avatar
8231 forum posts
454 photos

Failsafes don't do squat if your battery pack or switch fail regardless of whether it's failing to power a 35MHz or 2.4Ghz systemwink 2.

As far as I'm aware ALL FrSky receivers have a failsafe but I have no idea about Orange etc..

Pete B - Moderator16/04/2014 11:59:17
avatar
Moderator
7625 forum posts
733 photos

Sitting under the grey base of a cloud when it's a really thermally day doesn't stop a flyaway either, failsafe or not, once it's disappeared inside......crying 2

Orange DSM2/DSMX have a minimum of throttle cut on all their Rx's - I don't know if any have a pre-set option for the other surfaces - my DSM2 don't. Lemon Rx's have failsafe on all channels.

Pete

Masher16/04/2014 12:01:15
1106 forum posts
79 photos

Also failsafe only comes in if you lose radio range or you turn the Tx off! I've seen someone lose their model because they made mistakes and before they could get a grip, the model was out of sight. Radios are so good these days that radio range can be a lot further than you can see.

Rich too16/04/2014 16:23:30
avatar
3057 forum posts
1070 photos

not if you bungee launch your glider and forget to turn the receiver on sad

Rich

CARPERFECT16/04/2014 20:28:12
avatar
504 forum posts
9 photos

I had a fly away with a Futaba FTR reciever. They do not come with a failsafe.

Chuck Plains16/04/2014 21:43:32
avatar
1096 forum posts
244 photos

Masher is right. I use the Hitec Minima receivers and they have excellent range. I have almost lost sight of my 1.5mtr span Bixler and only just managed to see which way it responded to aileron commands to confirm it's direction. It took more than 2 mins to be back overhead at top speed.

The real Ron Truth03/01/2015 10:50:51
193 forum posts
9 photos

My diesel powered tomboy went awol when i forgot to turn the rx on, Not the fault of futaba this time!

Found it 2 miles away untouched after 2 hours searching ONLY to snap the tail off carrying it into the garage!

The FAAST rx copies do come with programmable failsafe on any channel, so in theory you can program a model to descend, i say in theory as if its in a thermal you doomed!

gangster03/01/2015 11:51:01
avatar
996 forum posts
17 photos

I suppose the next debate is how should you set up your failsafe I have used failsafe on both 35 and 2.4 and have always set for engine tickover or cut and neutral controls Maybe that is a recipe for creating a perfect flyaway.

What bothers me about this thread, and I really do not wish to be at all critical of the op, the point I am about to make is about radio control generally. Failsafe is not an complete panacea for all problems, in reality all makes of radio,regardless of some comments you read here and on other forums have been generally totally reliable for the last 30 years.

How many crashes are radio related ?, my guess is no more than 10%, and of that 10% maybe 90% of those are due to bad installation, poor battery care and lack of maintenance. Failsafe will only work on loss of rf path.

How many "interference" related crashes are really interference? maybe a fraction of a % with the exception of switch ons

Phil Green03/01/2015 12:04:25
avatar
1552 forum posts
315 photos
Posted by Bob Cotsford on 16/04/2014 11:37:01:
As far as I'm aware ALL FrSky receivers have a failsafe but I have no idea about Orange etc..

All except the VD5M Bob

My lad had his EasyCub go awol, it was an open-circuit Deans connector (as discussed in a previous thread) but unaided, it made his best landing ever!

Cheers
Phil

John Privett03/01/2015 12:44:00
avatar
6033 forum posts
239 photos
Posted by gangster on 03/01/2015 11:51:01:

I suppose the next debate is how should you set up your failsafe I have used failsafe on both 35 and 2.4 and have always set for engine tickover or cut and neutral controls Maybe that is a recipe for creating a perfect flyaway.

The real intention of "fail-safe" is not to 'save' the model, but to bring it down in the vicinity of the flying site and so prevent it from flying away and causing a problem somewhere else. So certainly, throttle to idle or cut as a minimum. There's guidance from Manny Williamson on the BMFA website here.

Talking about additional functions he says;

"The majority of R/C systems support a failsafe capability on the throttle channel only; however some of the higher specification sets have the option to determine the position of multiple control functions on loss or corruption of the signal.

Where this option is utilised there are a number of options and the final decision rests with the pilot, such operations as crossed controls, deployment of flaps or full up elevator can all be programmed depending on the perceived requirements and circumstances."

And whilst specifically talking about gliders the next bit is also relevant to other models;

"Where airbrakes are fitted it can be very worthwhile to set the airbrakes to deploy on activation of the failsafe as this potentially reduces the energy of the model and again prevents “fly aways”.

Some pilots programme crossed controls in order to bring the aircraft down as quickly as possible (for example full opposite rudder and ailerons combined with full up elevator in order to promote a full spin) but this is entirely down to the personal preference of the pilot."

Piers Bowlan03/01/2015 13:20:00
avatar
2038 forum posts
53 photos

For when your model gets caught in a 'boomer' thermal or simply it is lost OOS downwind, perhaps one of these could help you? Modern technology to the rescue if your wallet can manage it. At least it will bring the model back to the overhead, even if it is above cloud!

Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator03/01/2015 13:35:39
avatar
Moderator
15748 forum posts
1460 photos
Posted by gangster on 03/01/2015 11:51:01:

I suppose the next debate is how should you set up your failsafe I have used failsafe on both 35 and 2.4 and have always set for engine tickover or cut and neutral controls Maybe that is a recipe for creating a perfect flyaway.

What bothers me about this thread, and I really do not wish to be at all critical of the op, the point I am about to make is about radio control generally. Failsafe is not an complete panacea for all problems, in reality all makes of radio,regardless of some comments you read here and on other forums have been generally totally reliable for the last 30 years.

How many crashes are radio related ?, my guess is no more than 10%, and of that 10% maybe 90% of those are due to bad installation, poor battery care and lack of maintenance. Failsafe will only work on loss of rf path.

How many "interference" related crashes are really interference? maybe a fraction of a % with the exception of switch ons

I totally agree! The number of incidents that are genuinely due to "radio failure" or "interference" these days are, in my opinion, a tiny, tiny fraction of the whole population. Yet we still see lots of pilots grimly saying "I had nothing - radio failure" when its blindingly obvious that what happened was a good old fashioned stall! Or claiming "signal loss" when the problem was their own faulty installation etc.

Does it matter you might ask? If it makes them feel better blaming the radio. Well actually, yes I think it does matter for two reasons:

1. It unnecessarily undermines their confidence in their radio gear and far too often results in them undergoing additional expenditure because they erroneously believe there is "something wrong" with their radio.

2. More importantly we can't fix a problem until we truly understand what the problem is. By blaming the radio gear we avoid looking at our flying habits that led to the stall, or our dodgy installation practices that led to the malfunction. And that just means the "incidents" keep on coming!

BEB

gangster03/01/2015 13:55:44
avatar
996 forum posts
17 photos

1. It unnecessarily undermines their confidence in their radio gear and far too often results in them undergoing additional expenditure because they erroneously believe there is "something wrong" with their radio.

Quite so but worse than that it also undermines the confidence of others, particularly newcomers,if they are using the same brand.

Piers Bowlan03/01/2015 14:17:11
avatar
2038 forum posts
53 photos

This thread is about Fly Aways. If a model is out of sight due to pilot error - allowing the model to get too far downwind perhaps, with a subsequent loss of orientation and control, then a correctly set up failsafe can be of benefit. If the model does get out of range, particularly if a park flyer Rx is installed then the FS cutting the throttle to initiate a decent and an arrival in open countryside is clearly better than an extended uncontrolled flight and power dive into a neighbouring high street. I think that most people are aware that modern radio is very reliable and most crashes are either caused by pilot error, battery failure (for whatever reason) or poor installation. But this is not a reason to discourage people from setting the failsafe (which your post sounds like) indeed the BMFA insist on it! The setting of the failsafe prior to flight may also mean that the model and it's equipment may be recovered, rather than landing in the next county, even if the airframe is totaled in the subsequent 'arrival'.

Edited By Piers Bowlan on 03/01/2015 14:22:52

john stones 103/01/2015 14:41:49
avatar
11102 forum posts
1498 photos

The OP was written at a time when the merits of 35mhz v 2.4 MHz where being debated. Of course you must maintain your equipment and set the failsafewink and yes it is not an absolute guarantee. It is a useful addition though if used alongside good maintenance and installation and usage. I still use 35 MHz alongside 2.4 MHz but have never had a loss of signal. As to undermining others confidence in a brand, I think we soon spot the true reason for failures and alongside others using the brand safely don't believe it do's too much damage to the brand. Perhaps I should have said " What you going blame your fly aways on now you no longer use 35 MHz".

John

gangster03/01/2015 14:42:51
avatar
996 forum posts
17 photos

But this is not a reason to discourage people from setting the failsafe (which your post sounds like)

Piers I have just re-read the entire thread and cannot see a single post that discourages the use of fail safe, a few including mine do though warn against the complacency that it is a complete umbrella and will remove all danger.

It is as you say important to encourage its use if you have the facility and indeed in the case of an investigation for an insurance claim or worse it is possible that it would be taken into consideration.

Now how are we going to get people to do range checks regularly, I have seen sone cruel things done to 2.4 rx aerials that will untimately restrict range regardless of how much the radio costs

Dave Hopkin03/01/2015 14:46:11
3672 forum posts
294 photos

Perhaps it would be better named "fail less dramatically" as it certainly isn't a panacea for all eventualities!!!

But certainly well worth setting up though most advanced radios have a stab at it for you

Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator03/01/2015 14:57:12
avatar
Moderator
15748 forum posts
1460 photos

I certainly never intended in any way to discourage people from setting their failsafe - indeed as you say Piers it is a requirement to set it if the radio gear offers the facility. I'm not sure though how you read into the posts that anyone was suggesting otherwise?

BEB

All Topics | Latest Posts

Please login to post a reply.

Magazine Locator

Want the latest issue of RCM&E? Use our magazine locator link to find your nearest stockist!

Find RCM&E! 

Support Our Partners
electricwingman 2017
Wings & Wheels 2019
Slec
CADMA
CML
Cambridge Gliding Club
Sussex Model Centre
Advertise With Us
Sarik
Latest "For Sale" Ads
Has home isolation prompted you to start trad' building?
Q: The effects of Coronavirus

 Yes - for the first time
 Yes - but Ive bashed balsa before
 No - Ive existing projects on the bench
 No - Im strictly an ARTF person

Latest Reviews
Digital Back Issues

RCM&E Digital Back Issues

Contact us

Contact us