Smart Trainer switch

[AcBates]

it needs 1.99 for sticky switches, and to look at "Ail" instead of the "IAil" for mix source to get the difference of the instructor. the graphic has "OpenTx v2" just under its title.

[MikeB]

Is the "sticky" switch set by the first input and cleared by the second one? Just asking regarding compatibility. I've recently been adding a "latch" option to er9x/ersky9x custom switches which probably does the same thing.

Mike.

[Kilrah]

The examples I've seen for your latch function suggest it works differently.

Sent via mobile

[MikeB]

I've added two options "latch" and "F-flop". Latch is a set-reset latch, F-flop is an 'edge' triggered data store.

Mike.

[AcBates]

Is the "sticky" switch set by the first input and cleared by the second one? Just asking regarding compatibility. I've recently been adding a "latch" option to er9x/ersky9x custom switches which probably does the same thing.

Mike.

ya, the sticky switch in this example is working this way. started by SH↓, and cleared by the logic switch. sounds like your latch would be able to it.

[ImRich]

...the issue with making it a checkbox on the trainer screen is that the exact functionality you want takes only four lines on the logic switch screen with no changes needed, including optionally watching the throttle

The reason for a checkbox? It's such a nice feature, that is helpful, why make it prone to errors in setting up the logic.

Keep in mind that when training the average student (at least in my area where we don't supply a club aircraft for training), you are using the student's equipment (aircraft and radio) as the master, and you use another radio as the 'slave'. The instructor uses the master radio and just takes a moment to setup the slave transmitter (it takes only a moment to match the reverse switches).

So the instructor is actually in control with the master radio (owned by the student).

If this was a checkbox, the setup to enable the trainer function for this is an easy checkbox that would be built into every OpenTX radio out there.

If an instructor has to enter the logic to implement this, it takes time, and is prone to mistakes (which could cause an aircraft to be damaged if the instructor though he had control when he didn't).

So I'd still like to see this implemented as a check box. But if not, thanks for the logic!

On another note, I think it's important to use both axis (mode 2, elevator and aileron) and perhaps 3 (Elevator, Aileron and Rudder) to switch out of slave mode and bring control back to the instructor. Because one never knows what control the instructor may need to use to recover an aircraft. For example if the student was headed quickly towards the ground, the instructor may only pull an emergency elevator to try to save the aircraft. He may never think to move the aileron!

Perhaps people would prefer not to have checkboxes for things like this, but I think it would make OpenTX easier to use (which would be a good thing) without removing or restricting any other features.

Either way, thanks for your help and suggestions, and please consider getting this built into the firmware, as we now know, more than one person has had this wonderful idea. (great minds think alike).

[Kilrah]

The problem with the checkbox is that it's on/off, while between all the discussions I've seen on this subject there have been several "variants" with some differences that some prefer and some not. So which of the 5 solutions do wo choose to give a checkbox to? Then it will probably please only 1/4th of those interested by the feature, the others want it differently and will still have to do the logic thing

If you can all agree on one precise solution you can submit it as an enhancement request on the issue tracker. Can't guarantee the core team will want to spend the time to implement it, but as usual the firmware is open source so if anybody is is interested in doing it and submitting a patch for integration, they're welcome!

[ImRich]

OK, I think we believe there is no reason to have the option to press the training switch to revert control to the master as any master stick movement will revert control back to the master. I tried to include most common ideas (Please let me know if I missed anything).

So let's see if we can agree!

Smart Trainer Switch option

Located on the Model Setup page under 'Trainer Mode' which can offer three options:

1. Master - The normal default master where the trainer switch works as it does now: Press and hold for slave to control, release and master has control
2. Master Smart Switch - This new Smart Trainer Switch Feature
3. Slave - This is a slave transmtter.
   
   or we can add an additional check-box under the 'Trainer Mode' menu as follows:
   
   1. [X] Smart Training Switch - check-box to enable/disable all of the following
      1. As soon as the training switch is pressed, the slave receives control, and the position of the master joysticks are captured.
      2. The slave remains control until movement of the master sticks (with some small amount of 'slack' to allow for vibrations, etc) are seen.
      3. AIL,ELE,RUD, THR/COL of the master will revert control from the slave to the master.
         This way no matter what joystick input the instructor uses, control comes back to him.
         
         1. [ ] Ignore Throttle/Collective detect - check-box to disable detection of master Throttle(collective) movement (Default: THR will be detected).
            Some instructors like to change the throttle depending on the flight mode being practiced (i.e.: Takeoffs vs Landings) or as the student is closer or further from the ground, so this allows the Throttle/Collective to be changed without control reverting back to the master. On the other hand, leaving it disabled might be useful to have in a helicopter situation (where the instructor needs to grab sudden collective) vs. a fixed wing student.

Notes:

The ability to choose to ignore throttle/collective stick movement should be included no matter which method is chosen to enable the Smart Training Switch option.

As mentioned above, I can see two methods to implement this:

One would be to have the Model Setup 'Trainer Mode' have the three options as listed above.
The other would be to add two layers of check-box options under the 'Trainer Mode' selection. Either is ok for me, but having the two check-boxes may be a bit clearer to some people. Either we can decide which is best for a user, or we can leave it up to the developers to decide which is easier to implement.

For those instructors that like to follow along on the joysticks with the student, don't enable the 'Smart Trainer Switch' option and everything will work as it always does.

[markran]

The add feature is great when my club does air shows. We take people up on buddy boxes to let them try flying. They think they fly the whole time, but especially for the younger ones I do a lot of the flying.
-Gohst

Yes, Trainer ADD mode is great for my young daughter. For now I'm trying to build her confidence with the plane more than teach her but, like most kids, she only stays interested if she thinks she's doing all the flying. OpenTX rocks!

[AcBates]

this is using 1.99

...can't say I've played with it in Companion at all, I just set stuff up in the radio.

[ImRich]

To those that have been part of this discussion, do you think I captured the toughts of the group in my previous post? If so we can try to submit this as a feature request.

[MikeB]

My question regarding this is does it need to be a built in feature?
If it is posible to configure it using custom functions and switches etc. then the feature already exists.
It is unlikely that a trainer type 'plane will need that much in the way of custom switches etc. so needing to use a few to make this work doesn't seem a problem.
One of the whole ideas of custom firmware is you can configure what you need.

Mike.

[ImRich]

Mike,

It seems it's possible to do this via custom functions, but I believe that I previously mentioned, when an instructor is helping a student, the instructor usually uses the student's transmitter, so it's not like he only has to program his one radio, but he has to do this one each student's transmitter.

Having to take the time to enter serveral (or more) lines of custom functions, which could be prone to errors, on a student's transmitter just adds to the workload for the instructor. It sure would be easier if it was one simple check box.

In my club, we have a training night, where a bunch of students show up and want training before it gets dark. Most of the instructors wouldn't be familliar enough with the required programming, and many students certainly barely know how to use their equipment. So most wouldn't have the time to do this.

So it's my suggestion that this should be a built in function. It makes it easy to use (more user friendly), and quicker to implement without errors.

If other's don't agree that this would be a good addition, then I can understand it. But it seems there has been some good interest in this already (at least two independent threads on the topic).

I do understand the power of having such an open platform, where you can do almost anything using the built in custom functions, but sometimes, for common features, it would be much more user friendly if things like this could be pre-configured and easy to use with one check-box.

I'll go quiet on this if no one else agrees.

[jhsa]

Mike, I remember that before we had to program differential using curves etc. First time I tried to do it, being new to er9x, I crashed my plane as I somehow inverted the ailerons (i still can't believe that I didn't see it on the pre flight check ).
Now we have a nice hard coded differential
I think that if this feature is good, and provide an easier way of doing something that otherwise would be quite complicated and prone to mistakes, then why not hard code it as long as there is plenty of flash?
Just my 2 c

Joao

Sent from my GT-I9195 using Tapatalk

[ImRich]

After reading this other thread a couple of times: viewtopic.php?f=45&t=5230

I seemed to me that Reinhard is trying to do something very similar to the ideas presented here in this 'Smart Trainer Switch' thread.

[splenkingforth]

This is a fantastic solution to my needs as a trainer!! Will this enable me to pass control of one axis at a time to the student. I find for primary lessons its best to give say only the roll to the student for first flight. Then on the next flight only give them yaw and let them build up to using controls in harmony. Is this going to be possible?

[ImRich]

Yes, The 'Smart Trainer Switch' will not affect which channels, nor the mode (add or replace) you have those channels set to.

This simply affects how and when control is passed back from the student to the instructor.

[Daedalus66]

This is a fantastic solution to my needs as a trainer!! Will this enable me to pass control of one axis at a time to the student. I find for primary lessons its best to give say only the roll to the student for first flight. Then on the next flight only give them yaw and let them build up to using controls in harmony. Is this going to be possible?

You already have this capability. The smart trainer switch is just about how the instructor transfers control.

[splenkingforth]

So..: tried to transfer the Bin file in this thread on to my OPENTX with companion. But it said invalid bin file. I suspect this is because it's running on a 9xr not frsky Trannis. Would this be the reason ? If so can I get this to work with my setup? Any help would really be appreciated as this is a marvelous idea.

[Kilrah]

Yes, the file that was posted there uses features that are only available on the Taranis version, and even so only in the not-yet released 2.0 version of OpenTX. If I remember well someone did post a more complicated way that would work with the standard 9X version in one of the many thready about the subject...

[AcBates]

The only v2 feature is the sticky switch... which I should have realised, the sticky switch feature is actually just a simplification on what was already possible. You can replace any sticky switch with a GVar, two functions, and a logic switch.

In the previous openTx...

the logic switch:
a~x GV1 10

custom funcs:
SH↓ Adjust GV1 10
CS1 Adjust GV1 0


...where "CS1" is the logic switch that is the one monitoring the instructors input. Then assign the Trainer function to work off the "a~x GV1 10" logic switch. Just tested, works equally as well as the previous posts on v2.


(actually the sticky switch does a smidge more than that, but for purposes of this thread (two separate events activate and deactivate), this is all it needs )

[ImRich]

Does everyone feel we have enough interest in this feature to request it to be built into the standard firmware?

[jhsa]

I did request something similar a while ago. not sure if it was for opentx or er9x.. But yes, I think it is a good idea to have an option. specially if the radio has more than enough resources for that.

João

[AcBates]

if it was a Lua script, that would be just about as easy to activate as a checkbox... could be a really nice middle ground, and OpenTx could find out if it's popular or not.

[seancull]

Here is my variation on this theme. In my case I wanted the instructor to use the buddy box and initiate the transfers from the buddy box. I didn't have much luck with the "differencing" approach and was happy to use a 25% off centre trigger for the sum of the 3 axis controls.

http://seancull.co.uk/2014/06/30/tarani ... opentx2-x/

Sean

[ImRich]

Wow that sounds a little, shall I say, dangerous? What happens if the student takes one too many steps away from the instructor and the training cable pops out (I've seen this happen!)? Is he left with control, or left without control?

Be careful!

I'd still like to get this smart trainer switch idea sent to the developers for inclusion into the main code.

[seancull]

I totally take your point but in my personal case he is at the point where he needs occasional help.

[jhsa]

still..