Hey folks,
I have a 9XR that i just started using to fly my APM deadcat quad with.
The problem is that the throttle stick is way too sensitive for me.
I used to fly the quad with a cheaper radio set and the throttle stick seemed great. I had too move the stick 'miles' to get it to change speed - which is what i like.
Now with the 9XR i only have to move the throttle stick a few mm and my quad is shooting up through the sky. Also, today when i was flying the quad it was a bit too high in the sky so i moved it down a few mm but that was zero throttle and it fell through the sky! I corrected it and all was fine - but i want to fix this.
I have calibrated the radio through mission planner. Just hoping someone with more experience could tell me how to make it less sensitive.
I was thinking, that at the moment the throttle channel mix on the 9XR is 100%. I guess this is the range it uses on that channel. What if i change it too 50%? Would that mean that the whole range of movement of the stick would only move through the lower 50% of the channel output. Effectively meaning i would be flying at MAX throttle at was previously 50% throttle?
Any suggestions would be much appreciated!
Thanks
Replies
I had the same issue and found this video
9XR Throttle Curve Using Expo
It made a world of a difference. I haven't had any issues, but I am not an aggressive flyer
I think i may have this sorted out.
I am experimenting with throttle curves, in particular the expo throttle curve on the 9XR which should hopefully give me a stable hover.
I am also putting a sonar module on the quad to help in altitude hold mode.
By moving the COG back the quad should be more stable also, as the deadcat wants to fly forward because of motor orientation.
Perfect! Thanks for your input. Much appreciated. I will change the p accel value, possibly make two throttle curves, and i am also getting a sonar. That should sort out the throttle issues. But the deadcat still wants to fly forward all the time so i am hoping that next chance i get to fly, having the COG further back will limit that.
I have heard that many people have problems with deadcat style of configuration. It has the front motors further apart - so the APM thinks the motor aren't where they are. Arducopter configuration doesn't have an option to specify the new location of the motors does it?