Neanderthals and Failsafe
- Thread starter Hai-Lee
- Start date
Piotrsko
Master member
HEY I prefer 72 mhz. No goofy reflected signal issues or unexpected LOS. business band interference OTOH.....
It should really make a comeback. Think of the range you could get with 72mhz compared to 900mhz that is used for LR now!
LB
Last edited:
Tench745
Master member
I think the fundamental disconnect between the two methods is a sense of active avoidance.
(I should be clear that all references to "you" that follow are general and not directed at anyone in particular. Also, this is intended as a comment only on the safe use of radio procedures in ground handling, and does not touch on the benefits related to in-air radio failures.)
The transmitter first-on, last off procedure puts the safe handling of the model entirely on the actions of the operator. You don't have to understand anything except "keep the throttle off" to know you're doing it right. But as you point out, that leaves only one line of defense to be bypassed for a dangerous situation to occur.
The Tx last on, first off procedure requires that a user understand the intricacies of their specific radio equipment, know how to set a failsafe, and still exercise general safe Tx handling procedures. Obviously this offers multiple layers of safety compared to the traditional method, but it requires a greater application of knowledge to take advantage of each layer, and may not apply to every radio system in use.
I can see how, from a regulatory standpoint, being able to say "first on, last off" is beneficial in that it applies to all systems regardless of programming and makes them all equally safe/unsafe. It also gives the impression that one's safety is entirely in their own hands because they're relying entirely on their own handling of the transmitter instead of on the unseen software any given system may have.
Personally, I believe there are flaws with both methods which can only be overcome by a proper application of knowledge and caution.
I think it's ridiculous that anyone should be barred from flying for using either method, provided it applies to their specific equipment.
And, the use of a one-size-fits-all regulation undermines the potential safety provided by modern radio systems, so long as one knows how to use it correctly.
(I should be clear that all references to "you" that follow are general and not directed at anyone in particular. Also, this is intended as a comment only on the safe use of radio procedures in ground handling, and does not touch on the benefits related to in-air radio failures.)
The transmitter first-on, last off procedure puts the safe handling of the model entirely on the actions of the operator. You don't have to understand anything except "keep the throttle off" to know you're doing it right. But as you point out, that leaves only one line of defense to be bypassed for a dangerous situation to occur.
The Tx last on, first off procedure requires that a user understand the intricacies of their specific radio equipment, know how to set a failsafe, and still exercise general safe Tx handling procedures. Obviously this offers multiple layers of safety compared to the traditional method, but it requires a greater application of knowledge to take advantage of each layer, and may not apply to every radio system in use.
I can see how, from a regulatory standpoint, being able to say "first on, last off" is beneficial in that it applies to all systems regardless of programming and makes them all equally safe/unsafe. It also gives the impression that one's safety is entirely in their own hands because they're relying entirely on their own handling of the transmitter instead of on the unseen software any given system may have.
Personally, I believe there are flaws with both methods which can only be overcome by a proper application of knowledge and caution.
I think it's ridiculous that anyone should be barred from flying for using either method, provided it applies to their specific equipment.
And, the use of a one-size-fits-all regulation undermines the potential safety provided by modern radio systems, so long as one knows how to use it correctly.
Hai-Lee
Old and Bold RC PILOT
Your view is spot on and the regulations actually require the operator to use the safest methods, (that their radio equipment and abilities allow). As an instructor it is my duty to teach my students the currently safest possible methods. Unfortunately as stated previously the parochial and technologically illiterate old school elite are mandating rules that the regulatory body has already stated are not LAW!
Their positions are seen as being or power and great importance and without rules to enforce they loose power and control. The regulations are safe the rules being enforce are not and driven by a need to be seen as being important and in control NOT safety or the best interests of the membership!
Actually under the regulations it could be said that the national associations have no role to play in determining what is the safest possible operation as it has been clearly stated that club rules are not a legal defence. It is purely a case of Empire building!
Have fun!
Bricks
Master member
You are correct! Throttle calibration can be an issue but that is easily fixed when the radio is first installed. The issue is that just because your statements are correct and that such handling is safe, and declared as being safe by Spektrum themselves), does not mean that it is permitted! Sadly some Neanderthals do not either set Failsafe or know how to do it properly. It is because of those who cannot set failsafe properly that the rules require truly safe setup for safe model handling to be banned even though poorly set failsafe can cause a long range fly away!
What I am talking about is setting the end points as Some ESC`s even if the transmitter is powered up first and has been calibrated and I have my kill switch on it will start to spin up as soon as I turn my kill switch off. You will not notice this if you power the plane with the kill switch off.
Hai-Lee
Old and Bold RC PILOT
Your experience is unknown to me. I acceptance test every ESC I get and the first test is to power them up without the Rx, (the Rx has a properly set and tested Fail Safe of course). This is to ensure that the ESC boot sequence is not possible.
Next is turn on the Tx and then connect the Rx and calibrate the ESC.
After the ESC is calibrated I turn off the Tx and ensure that the failsafe settings shut down any motor activation
Next I power cycle the ESC and Rx and listen to the tones from the ESC to ensure that the ESC boots up properly and the motor remains dead.
Next I turn on the Tx and verify the throttle operation and the kill switch function.
Next I proceed to install the ESC or place into accepted stock.
In the last three years and for around 100 different builds ALL have performed as expected and as per the Smart Safe description in their manuals.
I do not say your experience is wrong and I am not calling for a mandated operation as ESC technology has changed over the years, (I refurbish older models as well), and so have their operating features. My beef is that newer and safer operating procedures should be allowed and not banned just because those in power fear or do not understand them!
Have fun!
Hondo76251
Legendary member
So this is a question, not to stir up anything, but from someone who had a bad experience in a club 25 years ago and has more or less flown by himself ever since... How often do people even go into failsafe?
I have a unique situation where I fly FPV a lot, at ranges most people never consider with all kinds of receivers. I've flown out of signal probably 300 times, maybe more, but thats at at least half a mile usually (or 30 pine trees deep, more or less, if I'm blasting through the trees for most DSMX) and I've never had a failsafe not work. I've flown about 20 miles years ago on super sketchy long range gear while I was still more or less a newbie and still never had a problem with failsafe.
I treat my gear a lot like I treat my guns, always loaded. As a civilian I've worn a pistol on my hip on a daily basis for more than 10 years, and I have 2 tours in combat before that. Being sure that the gear will protect you feels, to me, a bit like guys that just start out carrying a pistol but want to carry it without a round in the chamber. Partner, if you're not confident in your gear and how it operates, you might want to spend some more time at the range... My guns are always loaded, my props are always on, my failsafe was set and tested when my model was built and tested, and I have a spare magazine and a med kit with a tourniquet for when life doesn't work out like you planned...
I have a unique situation where I fly FPV a lot, at ranges most people never consider with all kinds of receivers. I've flown out of signal probably 300 times, maybe more, but thats at at least half a mile usually (or 30 pine trees deep, more or less, if I'm blasting through the trees for most DSMX) and I've never had a failsafe not work. I've flown about 20 miles years ago on super sketchy long range gear while I was still more or less a newbie and still never had a problem with failsafe.
I treat my gear a lot like I treat my guns, always loaded. As a civilian I've worn a pistol on my hip on a daily basis for more than 10 years, and I have 2 tours in combat before that. Being sure that the gear will protect you feels, to me, a bit like guys that just start out carrying a pistol but want to carry it without a round in the chamber. Partner, if you're not confident in your gear and how it operates, you might want to spend some more time at the range... My guns are always loaded, my props are always on, my failsafe was set and tested when my model was built and tested, and I have a spare magazine and a med kit with a tourniquet for when life doesn't work out like you planned...
Hai-Lee
Old and Bold RC PILOT
It is not a matter of how often Failsafe is used or required but unfortunately the possible result if it is required.
You carry not to intimidate others but to ensure that in the unlikely even you need to be armed you are prepared, (no use relying on others to always behave responsibly).
I test, test, and test again everything to ensure that it works as required. In the small local club I have observed 3 fly aways due to the club rules, poor setup, and a lack of checking the failsafe as part of the preflight. Sadly the range tests worked well on the ground but the signals were lost not long after take off. I do not include those aircraft that crashed out of control with a failsafe commanded full throttle setting but rather only those planes that were last seen leaving the flying field area and were never located or recovered.
Have fun!
Hondo76251
Legendary member
Tactics beat force, I support the 2nd, but I don't open carry. I'm not in uniform, having a sidearm where all can see is not a political statement, it it a tactical blunder. But back to the question at hand, and again, comparing to range safety (not a subject taken lightly) no one tests the effectiveness of the "drop safety" of the pistol you are about to shoot on the range by making you throw it on the ground and stomp on it (though I've seen it done in some classes to prove a point)
I see the biggest problems coming from so called "Smart" things... I'm much more cautious with anything that doesn't have a direct connection to the throttle. Even in real aircraft, (military, not civilian) I've had a flair bucket go off inches from my head because of a computer glitch, and that was with all procedures implemented correctly...
I see the biggest problems coming from so called "Smart" things... I'm much more cautious with anything that doesn't have a direct connection to the throttle. Even in real aircraft, (military, not civilian) I've had a flair bucket go off inches from my head because of a computer glitch, and that was with all procedures implemented correctly...
Hai-Lee
Old and Bold RC PILOT
This system is not subject to such glitches except for the programming of the failsafe itself and even then it is mostly applicable to a weird combination of OEM and non-OEM equipment that is the specific risk. Rather than pick on a specific mix of equipments and force others into a potentially dangerous or expensive situation I am just trying to be allowed to use something that is even safer.
The number are 2 separate dedicated and cascaded, (in function), processors that must both fail to cause a danger in the situation of setup I wish to use. The ESC alone, (if it fails), must generate the appropriate waveforms required to drive the motor properly to allow it to turn continuously. The processors have the usual check sums and the like in their inbuilt program as well as their own boot up sequence to successfully complete before motor activation can be achieved. Add a third if the Transmitter is included in the equation.
The sayings related to computer operated anything are, garbage in - garbage out, and Computers do not make mistakes - People do!
People fail more often than computers do and after working a life time in the electronics and communications industry I know how to feed them and care for them as well I am very well aware of the failure modes they have. Again I am not trying to mandate my methods be mandated for everyone but rather to be allowed to use what I know is safer.
As for glitches and assorted failures they will occur with or without the transmitter being turned on BUT personal failures are removed as a danger if the transmitter is switched off as long as the failsafe is correctly set!
Have fun!
It only takes once...
I used to fly FlySky for my copters. Then one day, I faceplanted an acro hexacopter into the ground at high speed when I botched a flip. The copter smacked hard enough to rip the antenna off the RX. FlySky RX failsafe is to just continue with the last command which in my case was to throttle up to gain altitude.
The copter tried to tunnel to China... at WOT...
The only reason my copter did not take off and fly away is that it stayed upside down after the crash.
I got lucky.
You know that cold chill that goes up your spine when you realize you dodged something life changing? Yeah...
Now I test failsafe and fly with failsafe programmed to fall out of the sky and disarm both on the RX AND the FC. I never fly over people, pets or property so fall out of the sky and disarm is the proper solution for me.
A lost model stinks and several people on this forum have had them at least once. A lost model that hits someone or hits a car with a family in it is too high a price to pay for cheap radio gear or lack of education, IMO.
I have seen planes go into failsafe after a mid-air collision. It's not just about range. It's a mindset most vets are familiar with (as is that chill).
It's about the unexpected.
Expect it!
Hondo76251
Legendary member
I wasn't in disagreement about the necessity of properly using failsafe, quite the opposite. I was agreeing with @Hai-Lee that it doesn't make sense for a club to have a mandated procedure like that given the large variety of gear we have these days. If you have a safe method for operating your own equipment that you are familiar with, the club mandating it be done their way doesn't make anyone safer.
It is sad to see so many clubs have people that the experience less enjoyable for everyone.
It is sad to see so many clubs have people that the experience less enjoyable for everyone.
My post was not meant as a rebuttal but as an answer.
@Hondo76251 you and I are absolutely in agreement, right down to your point on concealed carry.
I was brought up on Jeff Cooper.
When I post, my tag may carry some weight with newbies, so I was trying to articulate the concepts of personal responsibility and a mental state of action instead of passivity to anyone who reads today, tomorrow or 5 years from now due to a necropost.
My local club closed in 2016. Still I think your situation is very different than mine. I think you are very rural. It would take a fixed wing with a good amount of battery for you to have a fly away that can hit a car doing 50. If one gets away from me I can be over a busy 50 mph road or a church with a quad or hexacopter.
I think you asked a good question. I apologize if my answer sounds like a rebuttal or a sermon.
If you have any questions or would like me to alter my text, just PM me, @Hondo76251.
Last edited:
Hondo76251
Legendary member
@cranialrectosis Oh no, I'm with you on the comment, and completely agree on making a clear post for future readings. I do a lot of things that I dont think are appropriate for every situation. I just wanted to make sure I hadn't come across as disregarding safety because of my slightly libertarian view on "the rules"
Everything we do has a risk factor. We do what we can to mitigate the risks as best as possible and still be able to function effectively but the risk is never zero. Pretending we can make it zero is not looking at the situation honestly. This applies to every aspect of life, working, driving, fishing, shooting, flying... etc. In my case I not only live very rural, I live on almost 50 sections of private land. I dont have many planes with the battery capacity to get off my property if I tried. The neighboring ranches are almost as large. I'm not quite the middle of nowhere, but you can see it from here...
Freedom is paramount but the burden of freedom requires personal responsibility. If you're going to exercise your right to keep and bear arms, study the wisdom left by men like Jeff Cooper. Seek out quality training classes. Become knowledgeable and proficient, then practice, practice, practice. I feel the same way about learning to operate in our hobby. The more experienced and proficient you become the more things you can do with lower risk. That's why I dont agree with strict rules that limit everyone's activities because of the risks it might pose to those without the skillset required. That is why seeing clubs that might have an environment that could discourage newcomers bothers me. What better place to learn than in the company of those more experienced? I'm very thankful for this new wave of the hobby, guys like the Flitetest crew, people putting their wisdom and experience up on YouTube, and forums like this where we can discus topics and learn from others who have come before us while still being open and exploring the new and growing technology brought in by the young blood. I have high hopes for our future.
Everything we do has a risk factor. We do what we can to mitigate the risks as best as possible and still be able to function effectively but the risk is never zero. Pretending we can make it zero is not looking at the situation honestly. This applies to every aspect of life, working, driving, fishing, shooting, flying... etc. In my case I not only live very rural, I live on almost 50 sections of private land. I dont have many planes with the battery capacity to get off my property if I tried. The neighboring ranches are almost as large. I'm not quite the middle of nowhere, but you can see it from here...
Freedom is paramount but the burden of freedom requires personal responsibility. If you're going to exercise your right to keep and bear arms, study the wisdom left by men like Jeff Cooper. Seek out quality training classes. Become knowledgeable and proficient, then practice, practice, practice. I feel the same way about learning to operate in our hobby. The more experienced and proficient you become the more things you can do with lower risk. That's why I dont agree with strict rules that limit everyone's activities because of the risks it might pose to those without the skillset required. That is why seeing clubs that might have an environment that could discourage newcomers bothers me. What better place to learn than in the company of those more experienced? I'm very thankful for this new wave of the hobby, guys like the Flitetest crew, people putting their wisdom and experience up on YouTube, and forums like this where we can discus topics and learn from others who have come before us while still being open and exploring the new and growing technology brought in by the young blood. I have high hopes for our future.
So have we decided that @Hai-Lee is the Jeff Cooper of flight?
Clearly we are in agreement @Hondo76251.
I think dialog like the one Hai-Lee started is what separates us from the 'Neanderthals' and our ability to reason is the most libertarian aspect of humanity. Liberty and justice exist in balance or not at all.
Too bad you can't PM beer. I'd like to buy you one.
Clearly we are in agreement @Hondo76251.
I think dialog like the one Hai-Lee started is what separates us from the 'Neanderthals' and our ability to reason is the most libertarian aspect of humanity. Liberty and justice exist in balance or not at all.
Too bad you can't PM beer. I'd like to buy you one.
Last edited:
Unfortunately, I think most people find out about failsafe after a near incident or worse. The learning curve to our hobby is steep and it is easy to overlook important nuance due to the vast diversity of hardware and purpose.
You are not alone.
I flew for over a year before I truly understood it.
@Hai-Lee has done us a service with this thread, particularly now as we transition from build season into fly season and the Covid restrictions are being lifted.
Were you able to find the information you need and get set up?
messyhead
Well-known member
I'm glad in a way that I'm not the only one to have not heard to understood it, makes me feel slightly less of a noob
But it's something that should be highlighted more, so this thread has been really good for that.
I'm working on it today. I've set up a kill switch, and I've set a throttle failsafe. I'm looking into surface failsafe options at the moment.
I was thinking of starting a failsafe/kill switch for noobs thread and seeing if it could get made a sticky as it's quite an important safety aspect.
I'm glad in a way that I'm not the only one to have not heard to understood it, makes me feel slightly less of a noob
But it's something that should be highlighted more, so this thread has been really good for that.
I'm working on it today. I've set up a kill switch, and I've set a throttle failsafe. I'm looking into surface failsafe options at the moment.
I was thinking of starting a failsafe/kill switch for noobs thread and seeing if it could get made a sticky as it's quite an important safety aspect.
I think you have a good idea. Only one real issue with stickies. The tech changes FAST and the threads have to be constantly updated. It's a commitment. Don't be discouraged. Just be aware up front.
Please do post your thread and progress. The real education is in the journey not just the results. In three years, some 12 year old newbie will get to read all about it and we will all be better for it.
Edit: Looks like already are.
