Ok what's the deal with this. I've seen people refer to it as computerized collective pitch mixing, which I think is wrong. And I've seen it refered to as cyclic collective pitch mixing which I always thought it was. Now I'm also seeing where people are talking about mechanical ccpm and eccpm (electronic). Now as far as I knew there was either ccpm or non ccpm. I don't quite get this eccpm thing, the only way you can achieve ccpm is by electronic mixing of the servos, so esentially they are the same thing but some people are saying no that theres mechanical and electronic. The t-rex 450xl (CDE) ccpm kit is a perfect exp. I saw someone refer to it as being a mechanical ccpm set up, I think due to the fact that the servos aren't directly linked to the swashplate. The servos are located at the front of the heli and align used linkages and mixing arms to connect them to the swash. That to me doesn't make it mechanical cause like I said the only way you can get ccpm is by mixing of the servos, which is done via a tx and rx that are capable of ccpm mixing. If you could get ccpm mechanically then I wouldn't see heli specs say that you need a radio that has ccpm mixing capabilities. Any input on this would be great

That is an abbreviation for Collective Cyclic Pitch Mixing. To simplify, it is any control system that has the swashplate do both - it moves up and down for collective and tilts for the cyclic, then it is a CCPM system.

There are/where that used a swashplate that did not move up and down (e.g. the older Schluter Kalt, TSK and Kyosho competition helis) for collective. It only tilted to deliver cyclic commands to the rotor head. The collective was delivered by another control system that moves the washout hub or flybar up and and down seperately.

To further describe the CCPM type, there are two.

One classified as eCCPM, which uses three or four servos working together, and software inside the TX, to mix their commands so they will move the swashplate up and down for collective and tilt it for the cyclic.

The other is classified as the mCCPM system, which uses a single servo dedicated to follow only one command, and the mixing is done mechanically, by a more mechanical control system built into the heli mechanics.

In modern heli language, if someone says CCPM they are refering to eCCPM or 3 servo.

But Rotor is spot on, any model that moves the swash up and down for collective is a form of CCPM.

Old helis that were truely not ccpm had a hollow shaft with the collective control going up through the middle, or on a collar on the outside of the main shaft.

In addition to all the good stuff already posted, I'll add this.

Much of the confusion in the term CCPM (well defined by Rotor) is what some call mechanical CCPM, which IMO does not exist. Not trying to start an arugment, just trying to clarify the subject for Rcag. If you are controlling collective/throttle blade pitch with a seperate channel, and it is not Mixing with the cyclic blade pitch signal, then there is no CCPMixing going on.

By pure definition, CCPM is electronic. And mechanical collective pitch control is Non-CCPM.

The problem is there is no "pure definition" it started years ago as a marketing term. So the pure definition depends on who you ask.

Its not the fact you're using a separate channel, its that you're using a separate control mechanisim for collective.

Please re-read my earlier post - ANY heli that uses the swashplate to mix in the two types of pitch change (up and down for collective & tilt for cyclic) IS a CCPM system.

If all of this swashplate mixing movement is the result of mixing in the TX - then it is an electronic CCPM (eCCPM). If all this mixing movement is from mechanical systems below the sawshplate, then it is a mechanical CCPM system (mCCPM).

Do a search on the Concept 30 line of helicopters. Specifically the Concept 30 DX. on that helicopter the swashplate DID NOT MOVE up and down like the helis we have today. The collective imputs were archieved by moving the washout base up and down, the swasplate remained stationary. THAT is a Non-CCPM helicopter. I believe there are a few 400 clones that use a similar design, so you might be able to find one and see the difference.

Rafael

Ok, at least we can agree on that part. Without a pure definition, CCPM will always be confusing to most folks. And I do agree with you, it depends on who you ask. That's no good.

Eh who cares, c'mon down and fly with us some time, 20+ helis at the field on a weekend, drop the wife off at the zoo, its about 2 miles from our field

Exactlly

If your getting your cyclic and collective movements from two different systems then there isn't any mixing between the two there for would be non ccpm. I had an old kyosho hughes s300 about 12 yrs ago and that was a non ccpm heli. No where in the manual did it say anything about mccpm.

The mixing occurs when you use the same control system for both collective and cyclic (same rods, same mechanisim)

Yes, which would be ccpm. I have yet to see a heli that achieves that mechanically. It's always done through the servos, tx, and rx. Only reason I started this was on another forum some kid and I got into an arguement over it. He said that theres mccpm, eccpm, and that theres no such thing as a non ccpm heli. So I figured I asked the big ? on here

Its earlier in the thread but if the swash plate moves up and down to change collective pitch, its CCPM, whether you have one servo moving a pitch arm and the elevator and aileron links like a Raptor, or whether you have 3 servos and doing it electronically.

The Nexus, Concepts, Kalt Barons and some others used either a hollow main shaft with a rod up the center or two rods and a collar on the outside of the shaft to change collective pitch, and the swashplate remained stationary except for cyclic input, thats a non-ccpm heli.

This can go on for pages and nobody will agree but I can promise you the term CCPM was more of a marketing thing than anything else, the people that really understand helicopter control systems think the way I described above, and if you hear the term CCPM these days they are refering to 3 servo (though there's actually a number of variations of it)

Ok Barracuda, I'm trying to understand. I have a 450 T-Rex clone so understand how e CCPM works. I've seen a non-CCPM where there is a shaft inside of a shaft, and the swash doesn't move for collective.

But I can't understand how the swash moves for collective with only one servo (haven't seen a Raptor)(so I guess the mixing is in the swash). How do the other servos connected (pitch/elevator and roll/aileron) to the swash allow that? Or is the mixing in the pitch arm before the swash?

From what I've seen helis that use one servo for pitch, the swashplate does not move up and down, therefore there is no mixing between the cyclics and the collective and would be non ccpm. The t-rex 450 xl is a perfect exp. They have two version, a HDE which is a non ccpm, and the CDE which is a ccpm.

Thats just not accurate, sorry.

All of the current helis that use single servo for collective move the swash up and down.

In the Raptors case, the aileron servo sits in the pitch arm and rocks up and down with collective movement and there's a bell crank pivot on the elevator side so all the linkages go up and down at the same time.

Do a search on the Concept 30 line of helicopters. Specifically the Concept 30 DX. on that helicopter the swashplate DID NOT MOVE up and down like the helis we have today. The collective imputs were archieved by moving the washout base up and down, the swasplate remained stationary. THAT is a Non-CCPM helicopter. I believe there are a few 400 clones that use a similar design, so you might be able to find one and see the difference.

Rafael
[/quote] Rafael said it here. The swashplate doesn't move up and down, the washout base does. I also looked up the Raptor 50 titan kit on thunder tiger's page and the elevator and the aileron are a push pull system, which would not allow the swash to move up n down. If you look at the pic that shows the ail servo you'll see daul linkages coming off the servo going to two pivot arms then to the swash. Now if a servo went to move the swash up n down there would be an equal force put againts the ail linkages and you'd have issues. The same would apply to the elevator. The walkera creata 400 uses one servo for pitch and they call it a NOR or non ccpm. Align calls it HPM I believe, but yet again non ccpm, not mccpm

You're telling ME that the Raptor swash doesn't move up and down? Thats pretty funny.

Nothing personal but.......I've been around Raptors a few days here and there.

If I recall correctly, all models of the TRex 450 were CCPM. Some original ones were mCCPM like the Raptor, and the rest were/are eCCPM.

rcagpilot83: I suggest that you look at the number of posts and the information included below the avatar of the people providing information to you. Sometimes it provides very useful information about the credibility and experience of the person. Otherwise, you could do several things: 1. go to the member's page here in RCU and check out their "profile". This should provide with some hints about experience levels. 2. You could google the login name of the person. BarracudaHoickey uses the same login name in several helicopter related sites. His advice is normally taken seriously and typically not questioned.

Rafael

Eh, I don't have any problem with questioning my advice, I'm far from perfect.

We arent talking about one of the gray areas where different things work and you pick the one that works best for you. I give advice based on what works for me and encourage users to find what works best for them.

But we are talking about something cut and dried here, the Raptor swashplate is moved up and down via a pivoting pitch arm arrangement. It's really not open to interpretation. From the swashplate on up the control system works the same way as a Trex or Sceadu, or Vibe, the only difference is the servo arrangement to get the swash going up and down.

Is that extra linkage considered a bad thing? I mean does that add extra slop in the controls?

Actually most of the larger helicopters have bell crank arrangements they arent direct to the servo like the little 450s so I wouldn't say it makes any difference.

No actually, I've been on align's web site many times and they have two 450 XL models, one is a HPM, and the other one is a ccpm model. The HPM model mentions nothing about mccpm or even ccpm for that matter which made me belive that it would be a non ccpm. Walkera says the same thing about there creata 400. they call it a NOR system and they said other companies call it HPM. They also consider that set up to be non ccpm. I'm not tryin to step on ne ones toes here i just want to know whats what. I haven't been back into helis for to long and I'm hearing a million different things. About 13-14 yrs ago when I first got into helis, if I remember correctly there only was ccpm and non ccpm. And now I'm hearing mccpm ccpm eccpm. I am still a little stumped on how the raptors linkage system would allow the swash to move up n down, but from what cuda's sayin it does so I guess I'm wrong. I know on my old hughes s300 the swash didn't move up n down it was the washout base. The only movement in the swash was for cyclics.

You need to quit making assumptions. There is non-CCPM, eCCPM and mCCPM. There is no discussion about that. Your s300 and the Kyosho Concept line were non-CCPM. The Raptor, the Hirobo Freya, and the TREx 450 HDE (HPM) are mechanical (m)CCPM. The TRex 450 SE, the TRex 600 and several others are eCCPM.


There was no electronic (e) CCPM that long ago if I remember correctly.

Here is a little reading. Take a good look at the login names of the people posting. You will be pleasantly surprised.
[link]http://rc.runryder.com/helicopter/t499363p1/?top=1278041230[/link]

Rafael