It  seems like fly-by wire is the current buzz term.

And the advantage of  the throttle-by wire is??????, in aircraft
applications.

Having been  the recipient of a possible throttle jamming incident in the
air, with a  linkage that did not give me good feedback of the actual
connection   of the throttle and the throttle body, unless there is a
really  good
reason,  other than "that it is available",  in aircraft  application, I
think I
would rather go with the push-pull  direct connection variety of control.

Someone please straighten me  out

Rich

--

Rich, This is not to "straighten you out" but  it's why I'm would like to
at least give it a go at doing  this.

Push/Pull direct connection is very nice, particularly when it's  to an
engine just up front of you, however sometimes the engine like in  my
case is behind you and the cable runs become quite long. I need have  to
have 2 throttle controls linked together, it's a Tandem Machine and  I
need enough space for people like me - 2 metres tall, 6'6" in the  old
measurements.

I really hate having connecting rods on the left  side of the seats like
some others have done and the machine is pretty  open. If I use a rod
system to join the throttle controls then it sits out  in the open, is
easily damaged or tripped over and makes it very hard to  get in/out the
left side of the machine, I would really like to able to get  in/out the
left side of the machine. So to avoid this issue and I really  want to
avoid it, I need use at least one push/pull cable to link the  two
throttle levers together so they operate together and then  another
cable from one of the throttle controls to the throttle body, now  I'm
certainly able to do that and if the electronic control does not  work
then I will be doing just that.

However, TK insists that he  really wants to test his throttle
controller design. He is also pretty  certain that it will be perfectly
reliable, so one must give a fair go  after all, I originally asked him
what he thought. He got interested in  doing this, it would not be very
fair not to give a fair go. If it works  and I have no reason to doubt
that it won't then why not? For others it  simply gives another option
for a throttle control system. I'm already  completely reliant on all
sorts of other electronics and electrical systems  for flying using
an RX-8 Engine, for instance Tracy's EC3, Tracy's EM3,  fuel pumps,
trim system etc.

Apart from anything else it is just  plain fun to see if it can or will
work without spending too much time or  money on it, we've only spent a
couple hours on it so far, I suspect that  it will go to a working
prototype with only a very few more hours which is  pretty good, it
would more than likely have taken me at least several hours  working out
how and where to run the push/pull cables as well as in  fabrication time
of a number or brackets and the like and to make sure that  it would not
get damaged or bind going to the engine keep water out of the  cables etc.

Regards David


Greetings David.

I am also of the rear engine persuasion (aero canard SX). The length of the
cable is somewhat immaterial. It's been used in boats (much longer run)
for  years, as well as virtually all twins, each of which has  longer and more
tortuous runs.

The tandem throttle arrangement does create some problems, but not
unsolvable with cables. Merely run one cable from the front lever to a fixture  at
the aft throttle control which connects this front cable to the  rear cable
(kind of like a union with a perpendicular bolt to engage the  aft throttle
lever. This fixture (union) can be as simple as the arrangement  used in the
locking mechanism of the canopy, or as sophisticated as you like.

With this arrangement, the forward throttle is directly connected to the
engine, albeit through the fixture.

The cables can be routed any way you please.

Good cables are lubricated, can be bent and give a sturdy attachment.

This gives tactile feedback with the throttle. Even the Airbus which is a
FBW craft syntheses feedback to the pilot.  Direct  connection, indeed,
tells you throttle plate position, binding and a myriad  of things which you
can't get with wire. Perhaps some feedback information  forewarning of some
possible impending malfunction (a bad place to have  one)

If You use TK's EC2 or 3, you have redundancy in spark, in go juice, but
absolutely no redundancy in throttle position nor feedback information, or
even  function.

Please don't get me wrong, I really want to use the fly-by wire but I need
more info before I trust my Glutei maximi to it

Rich