TRIM values as inputs..

[GoogleCodeExporter]

It will be nice to have trim values split from the related stick to use them as 
input for a channel. 
At least throttle trim that very often is not used, or is used only as throttle 
cut.
In this way there will be another semi proportional input available.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by romolo.m...@gmail.com on 30 Dec 2011 at 11:56

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Original comment by bson...@gmail.com on 31 Dec 2011 at 8:09

• Changed state: Accepted

[GoogleCodeExporter]

E'hem. (Reverted status to 'New') Mr. Project Leader should be the only one to 
accept issues. No? :-)

I do not understand this request, yet. Can we have more explanation of what it 
means, "values split from the related stick to use them as input for a 
channel", as well as an example of how and why this would be used in practice?

(And I use throttle trim all the time. It's very important with glow engine.)

Original comment by gru...@gmail.com on 2 Jan 2012 at 4:02

• Changed state: New

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Sorry ;)
I think that Romolo want to have these MIXERS:
CH1(THR): Source=THR, NO TRIMS
CH2(LIGHT): Source=THR TRIM

Original comment by bson...@gmail.com on 2 Jan 2012 at 9:05

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Yes, the idea is indeed to' have a mix like the one listed by bertrand. In 
gliders thr and the stick is used instead for butterfly thr trim then may be' 
used for airbrakes, normally on other radios i will do with lateral sliders but 
on 9x i do not have them
Will try to' explain better as soon as i will have a decent keyboard available

Sent from iPhone

Original comment by romolo.m...@gmail.com on 2 Jan 2012 at 10:15

[GoogleCodeExporter]

OK. I think I understand, sort of. Sorry for being 'slow'.

Is the intention to use the trim switches as push-button inputs, which is what 
I think you meant above ... or is it more like having virtual sticks/pots, with 
values from -100 to +100. (Or both?)

Some example of exactly how the trim switches are used, so we can all 
understand it better would be good, when you get time.

Original comment by gru...@gmail.com on 3 Jan 2012 at 4:55

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Romolo ... what is the status of this issue now, in your mind? Is it still 
valid? I think maybe the virtual pots, using rotary encoders might replace it? 
Yes/No?

Original comment by gru...@gmail.com on 3 Apr 2012 at 7:13

[GoogleCodeExporter]

If gruvin9x is intended as a v4 only firmware, then no, it's no longer
valid, but if instead is intended to run also on stock, then yes, it is
still valid as stock board has no rotary encoder at all..
About the feature itself you are right, it shares several points with
VPOTs, ie it's independent on flight phase...
So it's up to you to decide if THR TRIM is a VPOT for stock board or is an
independent feature.
In my opinion for stock board we may have only one VPOT controlled by THR
trim

Original comment by romolo.m...@gmail.com on 3 Apr 2012 at 8:09

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Good point about the stock board .. except that I kinda figured that if people 
want the extra features, they'd obviously want to upgrade. Perhaps not.

This certainly all makes sense to me, though I don't think I'd personally have 
a use for it. But that certainly doesn't mean it shouldn't be done.

Anyone else want to make any comments? Is this something others would like us 
to spend time coding for the stock board firmware version? Oh wait .. no one 
will see this, in here. I'll copy/paste to the discussion group, with link to 
here.

Original comment by gru...@gmail.com on 3 Apr 2012 at 9:23

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Yes, good idea. What about doing same for rudderless models ?

Original comment by th9...@gmail.com on 3 Apr 2012 at 10:24

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Would you need/want it then? You already have a spare stick, don't you?

I was also thinking that the existing 'extended trims' feature would probably 
adapt easily into this idea, not that I've looked at the actual code.

Original comment by gru...@gmail.com on 5 Apr 2012 at 10:43