Cees,

I am not too sure what you mean by...


"It is interesting to know Orbit “reeds” was beaten by Telecont 9 during (one of) the latest world championships with tip-tip radio using pilots.
And were these systems reliable? Of course and also the Man Machine Communication was much easier. "

A given system isn't beaten by another system. It is a combination of Man, Machine, and Radio (and probably what they had for breakfast) that determines who wins a contest.

Isn't the Telecont 9 just the same as reeds but using tone filters instead of reeds for decoding? What about the Telecont 9 made the Man Machine Communication easier? I assume you meant it was easier than reeds. The system shown does show a stick that would trigger two control surfaces at one time instead of having a single toggle per control surface as the reeds did.

Ben

Ben,

Man Machine Communication is common used in industry and of all shown systems it was much better than we see of the radios these days, only even then there were important differences.
Already in 1960, world champs in Bern, Switserland we see the European OMU Stegmaier (tip-tip) transmitter with dual functional stick with 4 positions, see picture 1. All later European systems did have the same feature, see pictures 2, 3 and 4.
Orbit reeds did have different switches for each control function even the latest models (I think) . Ed Kazmirski did use full throw for most pattern figures so maybe the best way to use the Orbit radio, but with European sticks you nearly did not have to move your thumbs so you probably were much faster and maybe for that reason the winner when compete.
And now?

MMC, is biggest problem (I think) “wrong model selected”, "wrong flight mode selected" or “wrong position of a switch selected”
Problems I never did have with my radio during pattern flying in the past, impossible.

(Classic) pattern flying we normally did with one (type of) plane and when you were lucky you have an identical spare one.

Old radios:

My pattern transmitter was custom prepared for the plane for all main functions, see the picture 5, 4 channel proportional with touchable trim levers in the front plate of both sticks (not somewhere else on the transmitter!), preselected 4 position flaps: negative, neutral, 1 positive (Shown) and 2 positive, important battery indicator, but no exponential, no dual rate, no adjustable direction or throw, no combination switches or mixers, just like playing a violin.
The antenna connector is a fat steel bolt and the case is 1,5 mm thick aluminum, not look-a-like.

Cees

Hi Cees,

Your yellow metal case transmitter seems to really have been used alot. The most sturdy antenna mount I have seen on a hand held transmitter. How does it look inside? So You built ityourself? (as I understand it from your previous post you made a copycircuit board of a Simprop transmitter and mounted similar components on the board and used that in your yellow transmitter case). I see you used Simprop sticks also (at least they are verysimilar)- image below of a Simprop alpha 2007 from Simprop catalog 1973 where You can see similar sticks.

/Bo

Bo,

Old radio,

Pattern was "war" so I did use "military specifications" (LOL)

The circuit diagram is of the Simprop 2 + 1, an older transmitter of Simprop.
I do show the inside and you can read the diagram as easy as the written version.
The circuit board layout is of my own design to fit it in place. I did add two channels.

Working,

Start pulses generated each 20 msec by the a stable multivibrator, each channel an own one shot to generate time pulses depending of position of the stick or switch 1 - 2 msec, needle pulses are generated with each one shot on the rail to trigger the mono stable multivibrator on top to switch off the carrier wave for 0,05 msec with each needle pulse to generate the HF pulse train.

Below you see the 4 position flap selector, preselected with restrictors.
Antenna connector is visible on top connected with the pi filter circuit. (Rusty)

These are Simprop Sticks and respected for the simplicity, one potentiometer for stick and trim, we did turn the potentiometer casing with the trim lever.

Reliable as result of using lowest amount of components.

Cees

Good afternoon Cees,

" Ed Kazmirski did use full throw for most pattern figures so maybe the best way to use the Orbit radio, but with European sticks you nearly did not have to move your thumbs so you probably were much faster and maybe for that reason the winner when compete.
And now? "

The toggle switches for reeds made contact with very little movement of the toggle. I don't have one handy but if memory serves me right it was almost at the start of movement- maybe 1/4 inch at the tip of the toggle. You didn't have to move it an inch or more to make contact. The full throw that Ed mentioned in his article on the Taurus was a full throw of the elevator position, not the toggle switch. He probably would hold the toggle full over for a loop since that just lets the lever go to a physical stop and lets it be easier to hold, but electrical contact was made almost instantly as the toggle was moved.

"MMC, is biggest problem (I think) “wrong model selected”, "wrong flight mode selected" or “wrong position of a switch selected”
Problems I never did have with my radio during pattern flying in the past, impossible. "

I will grant you that if you don't have the features you don't have the problems - but - I so totally enjoy the features of today's radios, the JR12x for example, that I would not ever go back. With the JR 2.4ghz radio I don't have to worry about the wrong model - it is impossible to select a wrong model. Wrong flight modes and position of a switch - indeed that is a potential problem but a pre-flight check list will take care of that. Full scale pilots always go through a check list to avoid that kind of problem and it works fine. I find it works for me also. Let's face it, when you have a removable wing that has one servo per aileron and flaps and motor control for twin motor airplanes, you can have a half dozen plugs to attach before flying A pre-flight check list is a must. The list says to check all control movements and directions and to reset all "rate" switches to the low rate settings. The transmitter won't let me power up unless the throttle is in the low setting - a complex but great feature.

I have a fairly good brain and it can handle the complexity of the JR12x reasonably well, but when I have been flying for a couple of hours and am hot and tired I will miss things like selecting the right model - and I have done it, luckily it was with a small foamy airplane. A pre-flight check list would have prevented that. So I go with a complex transmitter and a pre-flight check list - a very good tradeoff. I do believe that simple is not necessarily not the best but of course it depends on what you wish to accomplish.

"(Classic) pattern flying we normally did with one (type of) plane and when you were lucky you have an identical spare one. "

I crashed so much with the simple but unreliable radios that I rarely had more than one good airplane at a time. I agree with you on that.

Old radios:

"My pattern transmitter was custom prepared for the plane for all main functions, see the picture 5, 4 channel proportional with touchable trim levers in the front plate of both sticks (not somewhere else on the transmitter!), preselected 4 position flaps: negative, neutral, 1 positive (Shown) and 2 positive, important battery indicator, but no exponential, no dual rate, no adjustable direction or throw, no combination switches or mixers, just like playing a violin.
The antenna connector is a fat steel bolt and the case is 1,5 mm thick aluminum, not look-a-like. "

I am honestly impressed that you made your own transmitter although you did need to clean it up for it's photograph :-) I made my first single channel transmitter (ground based tube with a 6 volt car battery and inverter for power) and receiver (a home made copy of Krafts single channel converted to relayless) and all the time I wished I had enough money to just buy one. In the early days of reeds my brother (and to a very small extent, me) packaged 10 channel reed relayless drivers into very small servos cases and I can appreciate the work you must have done on your systems. What you did is not a trivial thing to do.

Who was the man with the beard apparently flying it? I assume it was you.

As far as being simple and having functions go, the JR has all of those things and more but you don't have to use them if you don't wish to. I don't play any musical instruments so maybe that allows me to enjoy the extra features of the JR that much better. It has triple rate on the main controls - a feature all of my airplanes are set up to use. For airplanes that are set up to do high maneuverability 3D maneuvers exponential is awfully nice. Now that I have tried it I would hate to do without it. Switches and mixers are there if I want them but I don't have to use them.

I tend to look at the JR with all of it's features like a modern race car and it's driver They did away with having a clutch and just let the driver use paddles on the steering wheel. There is a rev limiter so he won't blow up the motor. There is a super exotic suspension system to let it handle corners, and so on. All of that "stuff" lets the driver drive to his full potential, not hold him back.

I guess it all depends on what you want your radio to do for you, I want mine to ease the pilot workload in flight and I am willing to use a pre-flight check list to do it.

Again I am impressed with the radio, but do give it a bath so it looks better!

Ben

Ben,
About the speed of toggling the switches.

Orbit, did use one switch for each control function. Ed K. did have two thumbs, one left side and one right side , so the transmitter has to be dual simultaneous at least and it was.
Telecont 9 did use one combined two functional stick and one single for the main control functions and for that the system was triple simultaneous.

Frits Bosch did have the possibility to input 3 control activities on the same moment, 50 % faster without the need to move his thumb from one stick or switch to another.

So in technical and operational way the Telecont 9 did beat the Orbit radio and result maybe was Frits on place 2 and Ed on place 3 of course we do not know for sure . The reason Ed did beat all the other 16 Taurus pilots is another story but did not have to do with the radio (future)!!

Old radios.

This is classic pattern flying and I did show me and my own old pattern transmitter the way I did store it 35 years ago, no more and no less.
For my Taurus of course I use my “modern” Multiplex Profi Modul transmitter with all my personal made features and for that reason I did write, “you have a long way to go”, also thinking about the story I did read about your Junkers-52,

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9739807

Do not forget, MMC most important of all.

Cees

Cees, are you saying that you flew it with it in that condition of dirt and grime all over? It looks like you have tied a rope on it and pulled it behind your car for a mile or so. I keep mine polished regardless of the age or lack of working right - which some of the did :-)

Relative to a dual input stick (Telecont) vs two separate sticks (reeds) With reeds if the pilot has ailerons on the right side and elevator on the left, then when blipping the toggles he has complete control of the two surfaces that are used in the majority of the flight, each control surface with one side of the brain. He can vary the blipping on right and left sides as needed fairly well. When I flew reeds it seemed very natural for that kind of system.

With the Telecont 9 if the ailerons are on the left stick and rudder and elevator on the right it gives you the same with respect to blipping and you have dual rudder/elevator for spins - this I would consider a better way. Also rudder/elevator on the left and ailerons on the right seems to work out well. It lets you have both brain sides work well.

But if I make an assumption that on the Telecont 9 that aileron and elevator were on the right stick and rudder is on the left, then blipping the right stick for left and right while and also blipping for up and down seems awkward. It makes me believe the Telecont 9 had ailerons on the single stick.

We accept the dual function (aileron and elevator on one stick) with modern propo because we don't have to blip, we just hold in the amount that is needed in a natural way, the one sided brain has time enough to process everything.

On the good old Ju-52 gyro thing you make a good point there. Certainly if I had paid more attention to the switch setting things would have been a lot better. I had practiced with Bonnie, My lovely wife and mechanic, who always reminds me to do the last second control surface check and right after takeoff she always said are you sure that you turned off the gyro - in a do it or else tone of voice. Without her there that was missing. That has been added to the check list also. It's not much different that having a retracting landing gear or flaps except those show you what you forgot!

I still fully believe that with modern equipment that Man-Machine-Communication is better than it has ever been. The radio no longer is a blockage in getting my ideas to the airplane. It doesn't hiccup or fail at the wrong moment. It does just what I direct it to do. I can think a maneuver and watch the airplane and it seems to do it. Not necessarily well at my practice level but the radio doesn't do anything to prohibit the airplane from flying well.

Ben

Ben,

My “Gulf of Mexico” transmitter and we Dutch engineers can show you how to handle some grease without any reduction of the reliability.(LOL)

When I read post 1 I only can add information about the “Old Radios” I know.

Dual functional sticks already were used (and excepted?) in 1960 during the world championships in Switzerland by OMU and later commonly by most manufacturers in Europe. .
Frits Bosch also did use OMU in 1962 but Telecont 9 in 1963, maybe for the reason the Telecont is triple simultaneous and so he could control aileron, elevator and rudder without any limitation of (triple) parallel input, no delay or hesitation however he did use the system.
Building a triple simultaneous transmitter with Orbit operator keyboard does not make sense so you need at least one double functional stick however you want to use them.
So triple simultaneous (single brain!) transmitters with dual function stick, I think it was the latest development step to proportional. At least Frits did reach second place with it after the proportional.

Picture , my circuit board for dual simultaneous, two tone generators to use on the same moment.
Second picture, as classic pattern flyer I am my own engineer and have all facilities so as in the good old days, the new Old Radio for the Simla in development. 4 channel proportional with black 1,5 mm aluminum casing.

Have fun with flying.

Cees

Cees,

I totally agree, surprised ?? One question - on the Telecount, was the elevator and rudder on the combination stick and the aileron on the single stick?

One thing that the modern radios have over any of the old radios is the smoothness of the stick assembly. Those old sticks, like shown in your back view of the transmitter, always seemed to have a little looseness between the stick extension and the yolk. I had a World Engines super transmitter that had the best mechanical stick they could make that still had that little bit of slop. In flight it made no difference (I doubt my flying ability was good enough to determine if it was there or not) but I certainly enjoy picking up my transmitter and finding that it is perfect in that regard. Even the very cheap plastic transmitter that came with one of my RTF models seems to be tighter.

You are indeed impressive in your willingness to try a new and different project. I would build a Simla and put the most modern equipment I could find in it - dual elevator servos and all that, use a JR 12 channel receiver with 3 satellite receivers and so on. Give me all of the redundancy I can get :-)

Good luck on the Simla and new/old radio project.

Ben

Ben,

I am never impressed and never surprised!

In the german transmitters Bellaphon, Variophon etc. we see the dual function stick on the right side and a (left/right) single stick on left side.
In the Telecont 9 transmitter the dual function stick seems to be mounted on the left side. In that case it looks normal to use left hand for elevator and rudder and the singlestick on the right side for aileron.

How did they fly the systems, how did fly Frits? I don’t know, maybe Frits did have a custom built.



Blab bla about Old Radio sticks?
We Dutch engineers can show you how to handle some grease without any reduction of the reliability.(LOL)

Here we are, look the picture.

Quality of the sticks of course was highly depending of design, material choices and manufacturing.
To show my old proportional dual stick.

About looseness between the stick extension and the yoke

After many many years of usage I can measure a play of 0,04 mm on the main mechanics, (a little looseness between the stick extension and the yoke) on a total travel of 26 mm. it is a hysteresis in centre position of 0,15 % to compare with 3 bits of a digital 2024 resolution, when count from centre position of the stick this is 1,5 digit of the 2024.

Design points:

The most important functions, ailerons and elevator do have the longest yoke and that is 28 mm.

The yoke isn’t a exact bow (see blue arc) so the point of contact of the stick extension in the yoke is different on each position of the stick to reduce wear.

The shortest yokes (throttle and rudder) does have a flat surface of the stick extension in the yoke to reduce wear, play is about the same.

We as pilot do recognize the position of the stick by the feedback force of the spring and the location of the stick by thumb or fingers, so also noting to do with that 0,15 % hysteresis of stick travel in the centre position, so in my opinion there is not much (I do not say "no"!!) negative influence on quality of pilot input.

Much more important is the centralization of the stick potentiometer and that does not have anything to do with this “play” and is 0 of all functions and does not change (see red circle on the picture).

The quality of the ball bearing is very important, and the only feed through to the outside of the transmitter case and that is important to keep rainwater and dust outside the casing of the transmitter. For this simple reason I prefer these sticks highly in real bad weather conditions above the modern stick.

Me as an instrumentation engineer always did have all kind of “greases” on different locations of the transmitter, so not only the outside grease but also on the stick extension and yoke and the ball bearing.

Each stick has two potentiometers so lowest possible amount

We can adjust the friction of both functions, for example to block the throttle position (a little) during aileron input.

The outside grease on the transmitter case is a result af the engine oil we did use in the past, the Dutch name is “wonderolie” the wonder effect is, it let underestimate my enemy in my pilot capabilities during war we all did call "Pattern flying".

Cees