RunRyder RC
WATCH
 3 pages [ <<    <    ( 1 )     2      3     NEXT    >> ] 6837 views POST REPLY
Home✈️Aircraft🚁HelicopterAudacity Models P6 Pantera - Tiger 50 › Why a 135° swashplate is superior to 120° or 140° units
09-20-2007 06:01 PM  12 years ago
Topic Vote0Post 1
ProModeler

rrElite Veteran

Sanford, FL (Orlando area)

MyPosts All Forum Topic
Why a 135° swashplate is superior to 120° or 140° units
We've made a 135° swashplate, PDR0081 Swashplate, Aluminum, 120°/135° and no, we're not the first to think of this because as in all model helicopter endeavors, and probably all other mechanical devices, we stand on the shoulders of giants.

Anyway, our 135° swashplate is in the hands of a few pilots to test. So far, the differences in flight are very slight . . . but mechanically it's a better and more pure device than either a 120° or a 140° swashplate. Then again, the differences in mechanical setup, i.e. ensuring the servos are perfectly at 90° when in the neutral position is very slight as well, but those seeking mechanical perfection work very hard to base their setups on a proper mechanical foundation whilst others don't even know to care. In my opinion, it's the cumulative effect of several very slight differences, which when combined, will result in differences even ordinary pilots can feel.

Anyway, it's a pretty big expense to CNC a swashplate, and because there will be those who don't understand the mathematics behind it we've made it versatile so as to satisfy both requirements, i.e. 120° and 135°. Regardless, here's a very well written thread by one of the fellows who pioneered in this area, which does a pretty decent job of explaining the whys of it.

Unfortunately, there will be those who simply can't follow middle school mathematics and thus, will argue what they don't understand. One thing is clear however, there are benefits derived from 135° and hence, we're making our unit as both 120°/135° for the obvious pecuniary reasons (and leaving discusions of which is better for others to persue). Ultimately, 135° is more pure mechanically, this makes it better, so we'll leave it at that. Those who seek every advantage, i.e. mechanical perfection on which to base their programming, will be quite satisfied. Furthermore, those whose radios aren't capable of using the advantages of 135° swashplates will be satisfied with the advantages brought about by the CNCed swashplate's precision even if they're relegated by technology to using 120°.

Frankly, it's not an easy thing to do from a manufacturing point of view because the benefits are tangible to only a few. For example, while we're going to offer it as an upgrade, we can't afford to, nor is it practical to, dump our tooling for 120° swashplates for our popularly priced helicopters.

Meanwhile, I've taken liberties with another fellow's picture where we've been discussing the pros and cons of swashplate (Main Discussion) for the purpose of this thread.

First of all, whether it's from the ball on the lower left, "or" the ball on the lower right (the aileron balls, if you will), if you measure the horizontal distance to the main shaft center; they're the same, i.e. exactly = X. Do you agree? These two servos act through an arm displaced from the mainshaft (X) along a vertical (yellow) line going through the main shaft center. The distance is equal and we've agreed to call this distance X.

Now measure the vertical distance to the main shaft center from the northernmost (elevator) ball and you'll see that again, the dimensions are the same, i.e. also exactly = X. This servo, just like the other two, is thus working through an arm which is displaced from main shaft center by distance X, but it's working along an axis which is horizontal (magenta) as opposed to vertical (as we view Roo's image).

Notice, how the distance from main shaft center to the center of the two southernmost balls (aileron) is also distance = X.

Consequently, presuming all three servos are working through the same servo arm length, then because the effective distance for each ball to its respective axis is the same for all three, the angular throws are exactly the same regardless of whether angular change is in the fore/aft axis (the magenta line extending horizontally through main shaft center), or in roll (the yellow line extending vertically through main shaft center).

However, if you examine the 120° swashplate, the fore-aft axis distance is X + Y, the for-aft distance form mani shaft center for the two southernmost servos are operating through an arm length = Z, hence you get interaction.

Here's a picture of the new aluminum swashplate.

They are clearing customs today, or tomorrow, and I expect them the first of the week. I trust it's been worth the wait. I'll put it on the website with the price once I've got my invoice in my hands and know exactly what they cost me.

Regards,

John Beech
AMA # 47381
IRCHA #745
SHARE  PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
09-21-2007 12:20 AM  12 years ago
djMidnight

rrApprentice

Petaluma, California

MyPosts All Forum Topic
Now you're going to have to come up with a way to explain to those same folks who don't get the math how to program their radio mixes to get 135-style movement on the swash. (My DX7 doesn't support it, but I understand how to program the mixes to make it work - should be pretty easy to post a how-to)

Jason
SHARE  PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  Attn:RR  Quote
09-21-2007 02:43 PM  12 years ago
ProModeler

rrElite Veteran

Sanford, FL (Orlando area)

MyPosts All Forum Topic
Frankly, for mere mortals, 120° works well enough. Especially since the radio software engineers know the mechanics of a 120° swashplate are wrong and thus, they compensate there. The 135° is really for the pilots who are good enough to tell the difference.

Here's the way I think of it. When setting up servos I stress in the instructions the importance of getting as perfect a 90° angle as possible at the neutral position. In reality, while the likes of Krause or Youngblood can feel if they are flying with center at 85° or 93°, I'm not really sure most of us are good enough to tell the difference! Nonetheless, I personally strive mightily to get it to 90° for two reasons. A) because I am anal and, B) because I know 90° is correct mechanically to prevent interaction!

Folks, the fact of the matter is "I" wanted a perfect swashplate. Unfortunately I didn't know where I could buy one so the only way I knew to get one was to make it myself! Unfortunately, what's available on the aftermarket are swashplates of either 120° or 140° mixing, both of which I knew positively are wrong. Anyway, we all know the mantra . . . "If you want something done right, do it yourself." so I ended up making the best swashplate I could. To be able to afford the development of it I had to make a bunch and offer them for sale!

Meanwhile, I don't own a DX7 . . . but I suspect perhaps you are also the anal type and thus, you won't be able to sleep until you figure it out. Subsequently, I'll prevail upon you to make a post in our forum at the Audacity website telling everybody how to do it! Jason, please keep me in the loop on your progress

Regards,

John Beech
AMA # 47381
IRCHA #745
SHARE  PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
09-21-2007 10:26 PM  12 years ago
Billebob

rrVeteran

Tim-buck-2

MyPosts All Forum Topic
Kinda of looks to me like 140 was actually 135 all along and there is nothing revolutionary here both for radio and swashplate.
what's available on the aftermarket are swashplates of either 120° or 140° mixing, both of which I knew positively are wrong. Anyway, we all know the mantra . . . "If you want something done right, do it yourself."
. . . no interaction when connected to the 135° balls! If you have a radio that can use 135° swashplates, you're the cat's meow! Also, for what it's worth, if your radio only does 140° swashplates, go for it because it's plenty close enough for mere mortals.
http://www.curtisyoungblood.com/faqs/search.php?id=948

Question # 948
dear Curtis , why its called 140 ccpm, i think its more geometrically correct to have 135 degrees ,am i missing something here? just curious.
ive read the manual for the 8103 and you get an option in the swash section to use exponential, but i can not figure out if i should use it
nor what it really does change
maybe you have some info. regarding this.
thanks a lot.
- martin nielsen
bergen, norway

Answer
The number 140 is fairly random. The idea is for the forward balls to be the same distance (front-back)from the main shaft as the rear balls. The exact angle would change depending on how wide the two front arms are apart. If you go wide enough it would be 120 degree again but that did not fit in a practical manner into the canopy.

When we made the 140 CCPM we just took the standard 120 and moved the front balls straight forward. We then measured the angle, like you said a little over 135 degrees. We decided to call it 140 CCPM just because it sounds better.

Answered on April 15, 2004

BB
SHARE  PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
09-22-2007 03:23 PM  12 years ago
ProModeler

rrElite Veteran

Sanford, FL (Orlando area)

MyPosts All Forum Topic
Billiebob,

Here you go again. You made disparaging comments about me and my company on this topic within the main discussion area. I refrained from saying anything because RR is populated by folks with varying levels of education. However, now you pursue into the Audacity forum and thus, I must respond to you directly.

Unfortunately, in your effort to contribute you now appear to be resorting to rooting around in Curtis' forum (for the above quote). Frankly, it not only seems like a desperate search for material to bolster your argument, but I've never believed in letting others do my thinking.

Look, the mathematics of this are quite simple. It's incredible not only that you seem to seriously believe what you've read, i.e. that 120° works simply by lengthening the arms, but that you don't mind showing us how badly you were cheated in middle school!

While your Billiebob screen name may be a pun, the unfortunate fact is all I can presently do is suggest remedial mathematics beginning with 7th grade pre-algebra or 8th grade geometry textbooks, which is beyond the scope of this thread. However, any local library will have copies of these books. If you need help with the material, contact me via PM and I'll be happy to make time.

Regards,

John Beech
AMA # 47381
IRCHA #745
SHARE  PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
09-23-2007 03:31 PM  12 years ago
spog

rrVeteran

Ontario, Canada

MyPosts All Forum Topic
Unfortunately, there will be those who simply can't follow middle school mathematics and thus, will argue what they don't understand.
While your Billiebob screen name may be a pun, the unfortunate fact is all I can presently do is suggest remedial mathematics beginning with 7th grade pre-algebra or 8th grade geometry textbooks,
Audacity needs to hire a competent marketing rep before John runs them out of business.
SHARE  PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
09-23-2007 04:45 PM  12 years ago
VSNT

rrNovice

Toms River, NJ

MyPosts All Forum Topic
For those of you who dont get it heres the simple skinny.

1. 120 is flawed (FACT)
if you look at johns 120 drawing, you will notice that the front arm and rear arms dont line up, thus with even linkage you will not get even throw.

2. Johns design removes this flaw by relocating the 2 rear links to an even position, thus if all linkages are even the throw will be even.

Billibob, you should go home until you learn to respect others!

Spog, I at least partialy agree with you, John, you cant back lash at people bad pr but John and His Wife are good people and mean well as well as offer solid products at good prices. No im not endorsed or paid by him, i do fly and sell his products and can say that he is truly an inovator and LOVES this hobby and business so much that he is often times misunderstood.
If Your Not Crashing, Your Not Trying!!!
SHARE  PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
09-23-2007 05:27 PM  12 years ago
ProModeler

rrElite Veteran

Sanford, FL (Orlando area)

MyPosts All Forum Topic
spog,

You are right, are you volunteering to help?

Folks, I'm sorry if you don't like my reponse but I tried hard to not lose my cool, and give him what help I can. But I'm human like everybody else and you can only goad me so long.

John Beech
AMA # 47381
IRCHA #745
SHARE  PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
09-23-2007 11:29 PM  12 years ago
kangarooster

rrApprentice

Orlando Fl-USA

MyPosts All Forum Topic
Answer
The number 140 is fairly random. The idea is for the forward balls to be the same distance (front-back)from the main shaft as the rear balls. The exact angle would change depending on how wide the two front arms are apart. If you go wide enough it would be 120 degree again but that did not fit in a practical manner into the canopy.
That is wrong.(His answer, not the 135 swashplate idea.)
Even CY doesn't understand what is going on.
SHARE  PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
09-24-2007 09:37 PM  12 years ago
classic

rrElite Veteran

All over the place!

MyPosts All Forum Topic
Even CY doesn't understand what is going on.

Why the 'audacity' of a newb thinking an engineer like Curtis doesn't know what he is talking about!

Personally,
From what I have seem up close at the field of your helis, nice helis but like all of them,
I would think there could be other more important inprovements you could be working on to better the heli than trying to make a 135 degree swashplate.

But don't misunderstand, I think any improvements are a good idea and a step in the right direction.

I didnt read Billybob's reply in the other post, but his reply here seemed pretty civil, not sure why the agressive personal attack from John??
Looked like he was just stating his opinion with an engineer's posted thought's on the matter? very unprofessional.

{edit} Ok, I just read Billibob's comments in the other post, and still think you are way off topic! John,
You make comments about topics and then find a way to almost always throw in a little advertising with it, things like "we at audicity feel this is the best...."
If your going to make a comment on something, GREAT!
But does it ALLWAYS have to be an 'advertising' plug??
Yes, he made a "blowing smoke" comment but you really have to be pretty thin skinned to think that was disparaging.

He didn't do what YOU did, he didn't make fun of your name, and he didn't imply to you {or anyone else here on RR} that his education was higher or better then yours or anyone elses.
Which is worse, ignorance or apathy? I don't know and I don't care!
SHARE  PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
09-25-2007 12:03 AM  12 years ago
ProModeler

rrElite Veteran

Sanford, FL (Orlando area)

MyPosts All Forum Topic
CJames,

a) There's a little history between myself and Billiebob.

b) Anyway, once he wrote (about me and my company) that, "Someone's pumping smoke again and my cheeks are squeezed very,very tightly." I refrained from saying anything whatsoever - and I'm proud of myself! Frankly, the discourse within the Main Forum was very, very civil and educated until Billiebob entered to make his crass commentary. Read it for yourself folks . . .

Main Forum - Paul Tradeliuss 135° CCPM Swashplate (page 3 of 3)

c) Meanwhile, I won't deny losing my cool and poking fun is pretty dumb. Only God is perfect and like the rest of us, I'm doing the best I can.

d) However, ultimately, the mathematics don't leave room for argument. You either understand, or you don't. But if you don't, then it's better to shut up, listen, and learn. Billiebob's searching for other's words to bolster his argument was a very lame attempt to drag mathematics into the area of opinion. Mathematics are not a matter of "opinion" - they are what they are.

Look, I know good and well everybody didn't pay attention in school. Heck I wasted my fair share of time there, so I know everybody doesn't understand the math - I said it at the very start! Furthermore, I even mentioned a picture would help in understanding what was going on because I knew quite well that once you see it you'll understand it. Hence, once the picture was posted, not understanding the math became a moot issue, i.e. end of argument.

Anyway, despite Billiebob's commentary in the Main Forum, as far as I was concerned that was the end of it. I simply ignored Billiebob's words as the product of what it obviously was, his opinion, i.e. "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me!"

Meanwhile, suspecting folks in the Audacity Forum likely didn't know about the 135°-thread, and thinking the information was germane to my customers, I made a post about the 135° Swashplate there. Now bear in mind I had refrained from saying anything whatsoever to Billiebob despite his unwarranted aggression in the Main Forum. But lo and behold, here comes Billiebob to add his 2¢ to the thread in the Audacity Forum!

Worse, he wasn't even using his own gray cells but was instead (somewhat lamely in my view) using the words of another to bolster his argument. Unbelieveably, the authority quoted was no less than Curtis Youngblood (who may have been quoted out of context for all I know). As if quoting Curtis would put paid to the mathematics - hah!

Anyway, I am quite cognizant of the fact that folks who visit the Audacity Forum are coming to learn about Audacity products. By analogy, Billiebob's post in the Main Forum was like speaking to me in public. But in the Audacity Forum it was like walking into my house to attack. Frankly, anybody would be wise to be loaded for bear under these circumstances, i.e. expect me to defend with more vigor. Quite simply, unlike in the Main Forum where I could ignore him, in the Audacity Forum I was "obligated" to defend because to ignore him was to leave the impression he was right. And nothing could be further from the truth!

Remember, the Audacity Forum is one of the places I not only perform support but where I inform folks about what's going on behind the scenes. Furthermore, I know well and good there are people lurking here who will "never" even ask a question. Yet they will devour everything written in an attempt to absorb everything they can. Unfortunately, some folks view what's written on RR as Gospel regardless of who has written it (largely because they don't know any better yet). This is especially the case when no less an authority than Curtis is invoked!

Nonetheless, while we "all" have an obligation to use the information posted on RR for the good of readers, I especially must do so because I own the company. If I don't know what's what, why would anybody have the confidence in my product to buy it? Frankly, Billiebob's ignorant opinion couldn't be allowed to remain unchallenged regardless of whom he tried to use (and I happen to know Curtis, like me, is an engineer as well. I assure you he understands the mathematics).

With me, pretty much what you see is what you get. I offer good products. They work. I'm proud of this. With respect to the new 135° swashplate, I spent good money to make it. To let someone who can't find their behind with either hand disparage me and my swashplate simply wasn't (and still isn't) in me because I'm an engineer - not a saint, PR flack, or maybe even all that smart a businessman!

Precisely because I'm an engineer instead of a PR flack, if you want to know what I think, ask me - you'll get the straight skinny - I assure you. And if you think I'm wrong, show me! But don't stand there without a clue about what you're talking about and expect me to handle you with kid gloves - not for very long that is - because ultimately I'm going to suggest you pound sand, which is what I did.

In closing, what's wrong with me directing Billiebob to middle school textbooks for the education he needs to understand the mathematics? Ignorance is cureable and since the subject isn't covered in grade school texts, but is covered in middle school texts, that's where I refered him. It's also covered (in more detail) in high school and college trigonometry as well, but you need a firm grounding in geometry and algebra before you attempt trig, so there was no point in referring him to a high school text as he obviously needed remediation at the middle school level. I don't see where I was insulting at all. I not only know quite well we're not born knowing anything, I was even willing to do him a service (despite his obvious enmity toward me and my products) when I offered to take time to help him with the math if he contacted me via PM!

Finally, as for my inquiring if his username of Billiebob was a pun, mea culpa, that was both mean on my part, and unwarranted. I apologize.

My 2¢

John Beech
AMA # 47381
IRCHA #745
SHARE  PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
09-25-2007 02:28 AM  12 years ago
kovar

rrApprentice

West Chester, Ohio

MyPosts All Forum Topic
Ok well I'll start off by saying I may have slacked off a bit in school and I didn't read this whole post or the one in the main forum completely. The picture comparing the two does a lot for me. I pretty much stopped reading at that point.

To me, to have a "perfect" setup would be to have 4 servos controlling the swash instead of 3. This would be simple enough but I'm sure there is a good reason why it hasn't been implemented already. Anyone care to comment?

I obviously don't know much on the subject so I'll shut up now. Sorry if this has been brought up already.

Thanks.
SHARE  PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
09-25-2007 03:07 AM  12 years ago
classic

rrElite Veteran

All over the place!

MyPosts All Forum Topic
Kovar,
It has been implimented already. I used to work on UAV helicopters, It had a four servo set up.
It had it's pros and cons also.
F.Y.I, The yamaha rmax also uses a four servo set up.{they dont actually use servos, more of an eleberate actuator push-pull thingy}

John,
I can see your point about the 135 and looking at the pics, but it does look to my simple, non engineer self that the 135 drawing you have sure looks like a JR swash.
I have to wonder, will a 135 really make that much differance?
For example,
Some of the arguments posted about how the swash will travel the main shaft differantly when at differant angles did seem pretty coherant, And there is always going to be some sort of interaction or 'slop' among the linkage that has to be taken into consideration.

Also,
You have to consider that all servos, even the same brand and style{ie,9252ect...} are Not created equal.
For example,
When setting up servos at exactly 90 degrees with a four sided horn, you don't always use the 1 an 3 arms on the horn. Sometimes you use the 2 an 4 arms to get that perfect 90 degrees.
My point is, they are not all perfectly equal, the tollerances in mass producing the servos out there is not machinest stringent.

Thats why my comment about are you really focusing on the 'right' or best improvment needed for your heli?
Which is worse, ignorance or apathy? I don't know and I don't care!
SHARE  PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
09-25-2007 04:34 PM  12 years ago
ProModeler

rrElite Veteran

Sanford, FL (Orlando area)

MyPosts All Forum Topic
Kovar, probably the glaring issue with a 4-servo swash is the 33% increase in the chances of servo failure using 4 servos instead of 3 to get the job done. Anyway, as CJames points out, it works, it's been done, but it doesn't do anything the 3-ball swashplate doesn't do . . . and as in all things, the fewer parts required, the better!

CJames, yes, that was a JR swash image, which I simply used for convenience because someone else had posted this basic drawing to aid the discussion. As I mentioned then, yes the JR swashplate is 140° instead of 135° and thus, when you measure carefully, the numbers don't come out quite right (though it's far closer than 120°). Hence, for convenience I used this image because it was there and served the purpose. I credited the fellow who posted it, or course.

Before we get started, let's reference the drawing and discuss "axis of motion". A swashplate moves through the three axis of space.

These are the:
A) Roll axis, which I've depicted with a YELLOW line.
B) Pitch axis, which I've depicted with a PINK line.
C) Collective-pitch axis, or vertical motion of the entire device.

Furthermore, don't confuse Pitch with Collective-pitch

Consequently,
a) On the roll axis, the model rolls axially, i.e pure aileron rolls.
b) On the pitch axis, the model tumbles, i.e. pure elevator inputs.
c) One the Collective Pitch axis, the model goes up and down.

I feel that where some folks are getting hung up is that in a 120° swashplate, the distance from the main shaft center to the ball center is the same in all three control ball, while in a 135° swashplate, it's about 40% longer (sqrt2 to be exact) for the two aft balls. This is simply a matter of confusing linear distance from main shaft center with effective distance of the control arm. Quite simply, THIS DOES NOT MATTER. What we need to concern ourselves with is the distance from the ball center to the respective AXIS, i.e. not to the main shaft center!

Let's discuss A) Roll axis.
The critical thing to realize is that during a pure aileron input, the forwardmost ball doesn't move. Only the two aft servos move. Once you realize that, then you need to get your brain around the concept of effective distance, i.e. the distance from the ball center to the roll axis . . . not the main shaft center!

What I mean is that the axis for the roll movement of the swashplate, the couple, is centered about an axis extending the length of the helicopter, which is the YELLOW axis on the drawing. Notice the YELLOW axis, or roll axis, goes straight through the main shaft and the forwardmost ball. This is the reason this ball doesn't move during a roll motion, i.e. it's stationary. When you look at the drawing you'll see the distance from ball center of those two aileron balls to the YELLOW, or roll axis is exactly the same as the distance from main shaft center to ball center of the forwardmost (non-moving ball). The swashplate is pivoting on the mainshaft center and the elevator ball.

This is why the swashplate angle change for a roll "or" a pitch input is the same for a 135° swashplate but not the same for a 120° or a 140° swashplate!

Remember, the important thing here is for the distance from ball center to the roll and pitch axis to be exactly the same. It's the only way to get roll and pitch swashplate angles to be the same for the amount of input. When you examine the drawing, you'll see how this is true for the pitch motion as well because the distance X is the same about the PINK, or pitch axis.

**********************************************************************
I'm sorry but we need a little bit of mathematics about now to finish nailing this down. Skip down if you don't abide mathematics.

We'll remember from geometry that the "only" right triangle where two legs can be the same exact length is the 45° angle. We also remeber how to calculate the length of the hypotenuse when the values of the two legs is know as being a derivative of the formula, a²+b²=c². The special case of the 45° angle is where a=b, in which case the formula is a²+a²=c², which can be re-written as 2a²=c².

When you solve for the hyppotenuse (c), you simple take the square root and since, sqrt(c²)=c and sqrt(a²)=a, we're really figuring the sqrt(2)*a=c (where c is the length of the hypotenuse).

In the drawings, the value X stands in for the length of the distance from ball center to each respective axis. Because this can only be true for a 45° right triangle, and when you add up two 45° angles (one for each aileron ball) you get a 90° angle, and because there are 360° in a circle, this means that 360°-90°=270°, which when we divide by 2 (since the angular distance from each aileron ball is replicated to the forwardmost ball, i.e. there is an aileron ball on each side of the model) you get 270°/2=135°.
**********************************************************************

Summarizing the mathematics section, the ONLY possible 3-input swashplate configuration, which results in putting ball centers such that roll input delivers the "exact" same anglular change as pitch inputs is a 135° swashplate. Consequently, a 120° swashplate and a 140° swashplate are quite simply, wrong . . . and it doesn't matter whether JR designed it, or anybody else, it's not right.

Finally, as to whether this is a productive place to spend time and money in improving the Pantera.

a) Customers have been asking for a better swashplate.
b) If I'm going to go through the effort and expense, I'm going to do it as "right" as I economically can - else, why bother?

Presently, we have other aluminum upgrades for the Pantera, specifically PDR0081 Seesaw Arms and PDR0023-2 Yoke. In time, others will follow . . . but give me time.

But remember, the whole goal of the Pantera is to deliver a beater, i.e. a great flying model that is relatively spaking, inexpensive. There are plenty of folks flying the stink out of this model without spending a dime on upgrades.

I attribute this to the basic and fundamental strength of this model. For example, the Pantera 50 clutch is "much" larger than that of a TRex600N. Do you ever hear of folks having trouble with the Pantera clutch? I don't think so. Furthermore, the bearings supporting the main shaft are 40% wider, but more importantly, there are three of them instead of two!

Furthermore, if you break a Pantera frame it costs you $29 to replace. On the popular carbon TRex 600N it's $165 (though significantly less on the sport model, but still not as inexpensive as a Pantera).

The dominant models the Pantera 50 competes against these days are the Raptor 50 and the TRex 600N. There are other players but these are the two biggies. Both of these are headquartered in Taiwan, but manufactured in Communist China and thus, you have precious little input to determine the future direction of the companies or their product. With the Pantera 50, if you don't like something, pick up the phone and speak with me - easy as that! Maybe your call moves us in a direction, maybe it doesn't, but this surely is more satisfying and beats the heck out of shouting at the Great Wall of China and being ignored!

Warmest regards,

John Beech
AMA # 47381
IRCHA #745
SHARE  PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
09-25-2007 07:22 PM  12 years ago
Al Austria

rrElite Veteran

Sacramento, CA - USA

MyPosts All Forum Topic
I agree with spog...

Otherwise, excellent info JB.
SHARE  PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
09-25-2007 09:41 PM  12 years ago
ProModeler

rrElite Veteran

Sanford, FL (Orlando area)

MyPosts All Forum Topic
Al

Actually, we both agree with spog. There is a small detail in this (the fly in the ointment), i.e. we can't afford a dedicated PR type and hence, we're stuck with me! I'm doing the best I can in an area for which I have precious little training, and what traniing I do have is essentially on-the-job training. I will claim to be doing better. For example, a year ago I wouldn't have bitten my tongue in the Main Forum with Billiebob. And in our forum, I was petty ni some respects with Billiebob, which I've both apologized for and will endeavor to learn from.

Regards,

John Beech
AMA # 47381
IRCHA #745
SHARE  PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
09-26-2007 06:06 AM  12 years ago
Rennster

rrVeteran

Hawaii

MyPosts All Forum Topic
Maybe you can follow ALIGN's marketing. Get a person who is a visible 'pilot' and fly him all over the place, get him/her a Myspace page, throw some groupies and flood hobby shops with products. Don't forget to employ the Taiwanese, they seem more adept to making toy products withOUT lead Or get a HOT female pilot that can rival the Szabos and Youngbloods.
One thing about ALIGN that I don't understand is that no matter what problems surface there seems to be a healthy following. ALIGN is quick to remedy the problem with version 1.2, 1,5, 2.0 etc.
SHARE  PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
09-26-2007 01:34 PM  12 years ago
VSNT

rrNovice

Toms River, NJ

MyPosts All Forum Topic
ALIGN manufactured junk items such as blenders and toys until the trex became popular in the us market and took off. They have money to throw away now, mainly due to the fact that there sales strategy is basically "Hello, Want to sell or get our products at wholesale, OK click here" Which has bolstered their market share and there wallet but for the people who care about where there stuff comes from, supporting their fellow modelers / stores and quality products, they just don’t cut the mustard. There are several other brands out there that offer a better flying product for a quarter of the price and provide more than a 1% margin for the retailer.

While all of that may sound silly it’s true and if Aligns heli’s ever fail they don’t care they made their money on it and will go back to pushing the blenders.

If Align is quick to remedy there problems then why are the flybars still loose and the tps's still binding.

This leads me back to point A. Align has a HUGE following because of their sell anything to anyone policy. About 1-2 years ago you could walk down any given block and knock on the doors by the time you got to the end of the street you would have come across at least one person who was selling Align products out of their living room.

Some people may think that doing business that way is good for the consumer and at first it is but in the long run what happens is the market gets flooded with these products pushing retailers and distributors away (which is what’s happening right now) and forcing other manufacturers with better cheaper products to up there prices to combat the lower market share and in some cases completely dropping lines.

Align has created just this kind of bubble scenario, just like the internet boom it will break soon and lots of people will be on their knees crying.

Most real retailers know this and will never divest a large sum into a market that has a very limited true following. The micro heli market as here in NJ is breaking right now, as those people realize that for the same as a decent TRex they can get a 50 size heli that actually flies like it should and can be flown all afternoon just by dumping in some gas.

I can’t say that I don’t have a TRex, I do but It sits and is at the bottom of my list of things to fly. I own every electric heli since the JR Voyager E and Most 50-90 helis since the TT Raptor 30 v1 so I’m not biased, It’s just that this very situation reminds me of the Thunder Tiger rise to stardom and there swan dive back down which wasn’t there fault if you understand what happened, if you don’t ill give you a hint there’s an online marketplace and an online dealer who has a tendency to sell below the map to bolster their own wallet by sheer volume and they continue to do it to this very day.

On to Audacity, John doesn’t want this to happen to audacity and he is not an overseas mega conglomerate that could care less about dropping a million on paid advertising. Since Audacity's start it has relied almost solely on word of mouth, small retailers and hard work. The original Tiger was a cheap entry into the market that introduced the world to Audacity, It was by far not the best heli on the market, no offence john, nor was it intended to be. Bear in mind this was the first heli from a brand spanking new company with the goal of providing affordable helis that fly well for the money, which is exactly what it did. Many people still have and fly the Tiger and it is a great beginner heli. The Pantera has expanded into the realm of an all out 3D machine that is very well thought out, flies very well for the price and with minor mods can quickly replace the best heli in anyone’s fleet.

John may not be the best at getting his thoughts across but I feel people should let that go and concentrate on making the community a better place and be a bit more understanding of how hard it is for Audacity to do what they’re doing.

P.S. MySpace is for children! Social networking just like the almighty "BLOG" (I hate that word) are children’s ways of communicating in a structured environment because they are not capable of posting in forums where actual conversations and sharing of information is key. This is why Microsoft, Novell, IBM, Corel etc... All have forums not "BLOG's" or Social Networking like MySpace.
If Your Not Crashing, Your Not Trying!!!
SHARE  PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
09-26-2007 01:58 PM  12 years ago
Rennster

rrVeteran

Hawaii

MyPosts All Forum Topic
I like Audacity's Tiger and was the reason I chose to buy one. Everyone at my field tried to sell me a Raptor 50 but looking at all those linkages made me think twice. The main reason that was offered to me was that everyone else had a Raptor...and now 'everyone' else has a TREX 600N. I may not be with the 'in' clique at the local field but I like the TIger for its simplicity.
I think there may be a market for a heli in between the 400 electric and 600. If Audacity were to make one I'd definitely look into buying one.
SHARE  PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
09-27-2007 12:12 AM  12 years ago
ghostrideroo7

rrNovice

perth amboy ,new jersey

MyPosts All Forum Topic
john, john, old buddy ,I have been doing this model thing since i was 8 years old and now I am 43,i understand the math behind this 135 degrees swashplate ,at 135 degrees the throws or angles of the swashplate are now even in all direction .hence a more precise control over pitch and roll couple that with the right throttle and collect pitch curves and you have a bodaciously perfect machine, thats of course you know how to set it up ,and you are not a neaderthal who just grew 2 ounces of brain matter overnite
SHARE  PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
WATCH
 3 pages [ <<    <    ( 1 )     2      3     NEXT    >> ] 6837 views POST REPLY
Home✈️Aircraft🚁HelicopterAudacity Models P6 Pantera - Tiger 50 › Why a 135° swashplate is superior to 120° or 140° units
 Print TOPIC  Make Suggestion 

 19  Topic Subscribe

Tuesday, November 12 - 6:06 am - Copyright © 2000-2019 RunRyder   EMAILEnable Cookies

Login Here
 New Subscriptions 
 Buddies Online