flmgrip

My Feedback: (2)

After Rotory dragging CCPM totally through the dirt i am wondering what others think about CCPM ?

Thanks for the input

itsbent

I just started flying my first CCPM heli this season. To tell you the truth, once you get your radio sorted out, it's very easy to set up. A lot less linkages to worry about and a lot less parts to bend/replace later. My X-Treme uses exactly 3 rods and 6 links from the servos to the non-rotating ring on the swashplate. I dont fly hard so all I can say is it feels the same as mechanical mixing to me. I just use 9202 servos and get excellent response and centering. I don't know what Rotory is thinking but how can you trash anything so simple?

Maxx-RCU

ACCPM is just a "new" (?) way to move the swashplate. It does have interaction issues that need attention but so did most mechanical mix systems. The "old" mech. systems require care setting up the linkages to limit the interactions...the "new" ACCPM systems require the same diligence be observed when setting the radio itself up... the linkages are about the same in number (not including the REAL CCPM setups where the three servos had a three inch rod going to three balls on the swash!!!). To me; it's marketing pure and simple...both systems work well...but the ACCPM is "newer" and is much more desirible to some folks who MUST have the Newest thing on the Market! I fly the Robbe helis and like the push-pull mech. mix system they have...I've flown the Fury and it flew just as well as my SE. IMPO it's neither better or worse; it's just a different way to do the exact same thing! Buy what you want and have a ball flying it...until you get the rotors stopped, no one will know what type of control system you have, and if both were properly set up; you wouldn't either! Chris

Moore-VARIO

Ball links, belcranks and pushrods = slop. The more you have the sloppier it gets. Nothing like a simple CCPM setup. It's really not as hard to set up as it sounds, in fact, it's pretty simple.

volare

My Feedback: (1)

I have a question. What is the minimum torque per servo on a 60 with 120 degree CCPM? It seems like you could use less per servo becuase they all work together? Should all three servos be the same?

lowninverted

My Feedback: (2)

all 3 servos on 120 system must be identical if you expect same response times and torque.

You should use at least 80in/oz of torque on a .60size machine. You will discover that the mechanical advantage is less on the servos due to greater movement required by each one therefore the servo links will be further out on the arms = more torque required.

CCPM=less linkages therefore less slop especially over time.

A couple machines are touting the 140 degree CCPM the greatest since peanut butter... with .11second servos who in the real world will be able to tell the difference (I ain't no Gary Wright or Cliff Hyatt or Curtis Whatzisname!!!)

The 140 degree for those who don't know gives the same mainshaft to ball link on swashplate spacing (fore-aft) thus giving exact timing on elevator inputs (servo/servo that is... not thumb related)

DavidH

You should use at least 80in/oz of torque on a .60size machine.

Wonder how for all these years the Futaba 9202's stood up to the abuse of 60 size helis with only 69.5 ozs of torque. Gary Wright used 9202's till last year and some of the ones he was using was 5 or 6 years old. I have flown 3 or 4 Furys with 9202's on them and they fly just as good as the ones with the 9252's.
So I think the at least 80 ozs of torque statement is a little misleading.

David

Maxx-RCU

No meaning to be A PITA, but since the advent of ACCPM (American Collective Cyclic Pitch Mixing) I don't see the less linkage thing being as true as it was with the CCPM designs of the past. And REAL push/pull on the cyclics (like the Robbe birds) isn't possible. Maybe with the new Digital servos push/pull isn't needed anymore...in any case the ACCPM helos fly just as well as their older mechianical mix counterparts, I guess I like 'em both! Chris

flmgrip

My Feedback: (2)

Maxx
you are right, the ACCPM takes the advantage away. though i think the graupner/heim (or vario for that case) are as close as it gets to direct links. i have three pushrods total to my swashplate. and i have been using 9201 as well for years without problems.

cheers