ErichF
Key Veteran
Location: Odessa, FL 33556 (Tampa Area)
| I think flybarless systems have a long ways to go before becoming mainstream.
1. The electronics are very expensive. Until systems can be consolidated and miniaturized at a reasonable cost, most people will not bother.
2. Reliability factors. Flybarless systems create yet another break in the receiver to servo connection, which is an added failure point. This not only includes the extra electrical connection, but the electronics of the system itself. Read all the issues, both user and manufacturer created, with the current crop of stabilizer systems (ie, AP2000i, Helicommand, etc). You can't beat the reliability of mechanics with electronics.
3. Complexity, of the other kind. Most people can assemble a flybar on a head and be successful. Many flybar systems have no or limited adjustability, and in most cases, can't get into too much trouble if not setup correctly. Most pilots don't need to know anything about the flybar for it to work correctly. Electronic, or virtual, flybars are just the opposite. Software setup programs are now required for use, asking pilots what ratios they want, how active vs stabile, etc, etc...Leaving a lot of room for error and steepening the learning curve for new pilots to setup. Nowadays, they have to learn various gyro setups, governors, mixture controls, etc. Now, we add the single most important flight control to the electronic mix, that will not suffer minor errors or confusion in setup.
So, IMO, flybarless machines may look better, in some ways perform better, etc...however they have a long way before we are setting up these systems right before we setup the gyro and governor. |
