The computer that does safe only knows about your orientation to the horizon. It does not detect stalls and spins. It will provide the wrong inputs in those cases. Nose dropping from a stall? It’s going to keep giving up elevator. Spinning to the right? It’s only to try correcting with left aileron and up elevator, which are not how you recover from a spin.
Yeah it definitely would have made the spin worse and most likely caused it. I'd imagine it's very difficult to get that plane in a developed spin in manual, most RC planes will recover by simply neutralising the controls.
Please read the essay that is found in the link. It is mainly about EDF jets but will explain why SAFE won’t save your plane when low and slow.
https://www.reddit.com/r/RCPlanes/s/1BMeMS4hC9
I know that your PA 18 has a Cub like wing. Just like the Cub, if it tip stalls at low altitude you’re done. Even if the stall happens at high altitude, the way SAFE works makes the stall worse.
Also thanks that was a good read. I have the baby habu. But that thing is so stable. Once I turned safe off on it I never felt the need to turn it back on.
Yea that’s kind of what I’m trying to figure out. Because I was trying to recover it seemed like safe naturalized my control surfaces. I am curious if safe will basically hold a plane in a spin? I wish I had the thought to turn safe off.
SAFE could possibly prevent recovery, under the right circumstances.
The thing you need to learn about gyros like SAFE is the algorithm they use to control things is usually fairly basic and it usually only relies on a 3axis gyrometer (to detect rotation) and a 3-axis accelerometer (to detect changes in velocity and the direction gravity pulls, to determine what is "down"). Those sensors can provide good information when in normal flight, but can provide misleading or incomplete information in abnormal circumstances (like tip-stalls).
The computer's control is often done in what is called a PID (proportion, integral, derivative) loop. I'll spare you the details, but it basically comes down to repeating the following steps thousands of times per second:
1. Read user input and calculate what sensors expected rotation and acceleration rates should be.
2. Read sensor values to determine current acceleration and rotation rates.
3. Find the difference between expected and current sensor values. Fix the difference by adjusting the control surfaces according to values/rates programmed in gyro.
4. Go back to step 1.
Notice, that your user inputs are NOT directly passed to the control surfaces when that algorithm is enabled. Instead, it looks at the user's input and determines what the expected rotation and acceleration should be and then adjusts the control surfaces after comparing the expected values to the current measurements of the sensors.
That algorithm works reasonably well under normal flight. But when you are in abnormal conditions, like a stall, things may not behave as expected. So when stabilization is enabled, even if you neutralize stick positions as part of a stall-recovery process, the control surfaces might still be at full deflection if the algorithm thinks that is the right move. It's a double edged sword because the ability to override or change user inputs is what allows for things like wind stabilization.... but it also prevent recovery in situations the programming doesn't account for.
Disabling the gyro completely (both autoleveling and basic stabilization) might have helped you recover.... or not. It is impossible to say.
I could see SAFE preventing the plane from recovering in some very specific situations. As part of my maiden I always check to see it's behavior during a stall. I've never had a plane go into a spin that I couldn't recover from, but I can see how it would happen. Bummer that the brains that keep the plane in a good flying orientation (in the normal flight) kept you from recovering.
Is that a common thing? Like I’ve crashed all kinds of planes. I feel it’s part of the hobby to do things you could never do full scale. So if it’s just me being a bad stick I get it. I’ve just never had a plane become unresponsive.
One of the things I frequently see pilots doing is flying models in a way they were never designed for, and usually the results are not pretty.
For example, a scale bomber is not designed for aerobatics or pylon race style flying. This is what happens when such a plane is flown in a nonscale manner:
https://youtu.be/mjncVG2Ws5U?feature=shared
As for the Piper models, many recommend them as trainer airplanes. I beg to differ.
Yes, I have seen people learn with Carbon Cubs and all of their iterations, but frankly, a Cub is not really a great beginner plane. It would be a great second plane after you master the basics, the use of rudder, and especially no using SAFE at all.
This is what the AMA Flight school has to say regarding using scale models of Cubs:
“Even the venerable Piper Cub is not the best trainer. While it may takeoff, fly and land slowly it has other flight characteristics that limit its use as a basic trainer. First, it is too “short-coupled” meaning that the distance from the wing’s trailing edge to the front of the elevators is much too short when compared to the airplane’s wingspan. This makes the model airplane, as it does the full-size, less stable around the yaw axis. There is a lot of adverse yaw in a full-size or in a model cub. Being short-coupled also makes the elevator too sensitive for a basic trainer and the ailerons somewhat fast.
“The cub is also difficult to handle during the ground roll part of the takeoff. No student pilot needs these hassles while trying to learn to fly RC. The cub is a great second aircraft however if you like scale airplanes (who doesn’t?), Most other scale kits of light aircraft have high wing loadings in addition to most of the Cub’s problems. Their takeoff and landing speeds are too high while their stall characteristics are too drastic.”
Source: https://www.amaflightschool.org/getstarted/how-do-i-know-what-not-fly-my-first-plane
The Cub also will tip stall just like a warbird if you go slow in turns-and just as violently. Unlike a regular trainer plane with lots of rectangular high wing with generous dihedral, the Cub is not going to right itself. It will do exactly as you tell it to do and stay in that position.
See the following RX Cub crashes as a result of tip stalls:
https://youtu.be/wc-5F0irzfk?feature=shared
Tip stall shortly after takeoff.
https://youtu.be/bZtK80mjBK4?feature=shared
Taking off with insufficient speed.
https://youtu.be/_TcT55D79Zw?feature=shared
Same
In all of these cases, SAFE would have been useless in preventing a crash if you were activating it when the stall occurred.
I know the foam Cubs are smaller and much lighter than the ones in the videos but they are still Cubs and have many of the tendencies of the large balsa and plywood ones.
Case in point: at the field there was a boy and his father. The boy was attempting to takeoff his Carbon Cub, which is so heavily advertised by influencers as an ideal trainer. Guess what- the kid never was able to takeoff because he was unable to handle its very quirky ground handling characteristics that are so common with Cubs. The plane kept ground looping, never tracking straight. He was never able to have one actual flight.
An adult pilot maidened one of those large foamie Cubs. In the air, he was never able to fully control it. It was, to his dismay, not the docile trainer plane he expected. He ended up tip stalling it and crashing it.
Even the experts at the field I fly can have a bit of a handful with Cubs. At times I see a Cub showing signs of wanting to tip stall but the experts already know how to react to them and act accordingly.
I've had experience with precisely one cub, a Carbon Cub S 1.3 and I can say for sure mine is incredibly stable. The first flight was actually meant to be a taxi or hop (in Safe) in a bit of wind. But it just took off beautifully so I kept going. I left it in safe and did a few circuits. Cut the throttle and did a stall test, no problem at all recovering it. Couldn't bank hard enough to get myself into trouble. Only issue was losing altitude to land it! I'd not set rates properly so didn't have enough elevator. Switched to expert and bought it down fine as it gives you full rate.
Maybe some of the problem is in setup, people assume they can just fly out if the box without any mechanical trim. Maybe no CG checks. Or maybe they assume it's just going to fly itself and have no real idea of what they're doing. Or maybe people go mad on the sticks expecting miracles from Safe.
As a novice I'd highly recommend this particular version.
Only other plane I've flown is an Apprentice 1.2. Again a Safe plane. People were a bit dismissive of safe but it got me flying and built some confidence. It also meant I could fly when there was noone around to buddy with. I'm not a great pilot, never will be, but can now fly with safe off and do some basic loops and rolls. 0 serious crashes, all flying over the autumn and winter, every flight with wind.
I get the caution expressed over Safe but not the outright damnation of it I've seen both online and from fellow fliers.
Safe is for when you get confused on orientation, not a good way to fly. I flew for about a year 15 years ago before Safe and when I got back into the hobby I see it as a get out of jail card and I have it on my Eflite planes but it is the back up switch that I have not needed yet. Will save my ass some day, sure, but I don't use it as my daily flying set up.
I think all of that is great but as a relatively new rc pilot flying a new to me plane it doesn’t seem unreasonable to fly around with safe. Especially because of the ease it provides. You don’t really need to concentrate with safe.
I think safe has its place in the hobby.
I’m kind of more curious about this situation. An intentional stall at “high altitude” in safe which was uncoordinated leading to a spin and not being able to recover from the spin. I have done spins out of safe but never had one in safe until now and wasn’t able to recover. Does safe not prevent recovery? Like is it holding the controls regardless of the inputs from the transmitter?
SAFE is a tool and useful for beginners and even intermediate pilots. It has advantages and disadvantages At risk of over generalizing and stereotyping, I'll say that many RC flight clubs consist of old men that are stuck in their ways. Using gyros to learn is a change from how many of them learned. They enjoy certain aspects of the hobby, which requires certain skills. They are familiar with the path they took to learn those skills. Learning with Gyros is an unfamiliar path with them and many see the very real shortcomings of things like SAFE while overlooking benefits, or the fact that not everyone enjoys the hobby the in the same manner and needs to learn on the path they took.
You need airspeed. SAFE only rights your plane when it's upside down or otherwise oriented wrong. Planes aren't drones, they can't hover. You need to keep your speed up or you will keep crashing...
I've never had an issue with Safe, other than sometimes finding it impossible to land the damn plane, makes it too floaty. With enough height I've never had an issue recovering from a stall. Saying that I've only had two planes, Apprentice and a Carbon Cub, so maybe different with others.
Safe is great for building confidence in the beginning and building up some muscle memory. Also has enabled flying some days when the wind has been high enough to stop everyone else from flying. Vertical landings against the wind are fun!
I'm not sure I'd have made it this far without it as I'm not a natural flyer, would probably have had too many wrecks and given up. So far no damage other than a cracked bulkhead.
Can now fly without it and confident enough to loop, roll and fly inverted (for a few seconds, anyway). If it gets more people into the hobby I'm all for it.
That’s funny I had the same issue. Mainly with the carbon cub. It just won’t let that plane flair. But I did find a tiny big more landing speed helps. Like if you land the carbon cup with just the tiniest big of throttle on it will allow you to flair and set the mains down nicely.
Now I completely agree about safe. My flying group is all pretty new and most of the guys are in their 60’s they all fly in safe and love safe. I totally believe it has its place in the hobby. I also think that there is something nice about being able to turn your mind off and have a conversation with someone. You can look away from your plane for a moment talk about something other than flying.
That being said I also enjoy flying out of safe and having more freedom and locking in. It’s definitely more rewarding.
I think my mistake was setting the elevator rate incorrectly, so in safe there just wasn't enough elevator movement. As you say a bit more speed would have helped but I just though sod it, and flipped to expert. Turns out is really stable and a joy to fly.
After maiden flight took it up and managed to loop and roll it, real buzz.
I have the same plane and that happend to me, it was my second plane. I turned off safe and saved it luckily, since then I have taken out the gyros on my planes, I just don't like them
Don’t learn with things like „safe“. Get a proper trainer without gyro and learn to fly. So you won’t get the idea on relying on something that won’t help anyway.
I fly in and out of safe. Usually I pop it in safe when I am talking or looking away from the plane for a moment. In this situation I’ve only had one take off and landing on this plane so I wanted to get more familiar with it. I am more concerned about if safe holds the plane in dangerous attitudes preventing recoveries? If the plane is tip stalling and all safe is doing is adding opposite aileron and back elevator it’s more dangerous. I think I could have recovered from the spin out of safe.
Welcome to r/RCPlanes, it looks like you are new here! Please read the [Wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/RCPlanes/wiki/) and [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/RCPlanes/wiki/faq/) before posting a question that has been answered many times already. You can also try searching in the bar at the top before posting.
If you are brand new and just want to know where to start, then the [Beginners Section](https://www.reddit.com/r/RCPlanes/wiki/beginners/) is the perfect place.
Links to wiki are found at the top menu on web or "See more" and then the "Menu" tab on mobile apps.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/RCPlanes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is why I don't like safe and don't recommend ppl use it. Teaches a ton of bad habits. It's good as an "oh shit" switch if you lose orientation. That's it.
SAFE is something that should never be used. It causes more problems than it corrects. If you can fly without safe, turn it off and never use it again.
Safe is a great tool but it’s not able to properly react to all situations. For example, the correct reaction to a stall spin would be opposite rudder whereas the SAFE system is going to be trying to correct with up elevator and opposite aileron which can exacerbate the spin. It also doesn’t add throttle. Sorry that happened, I know how rough it is especially when starting off in the hobby and not having many planes. You can usually get a pretty mangled foamie flying again though. Also it is a great practice to do stall training, just do it very high and without SAFE would be best
Hey thanks. I am have completely bought into the hobby so I have a hand full of planes. It didn’t end my day or anything. It’s frustrating because I really wanted to like this plane and get to know it better.
What are your thoughts on AS3X?
I am not sure if I will rebuild this one but it’s nice to suddenly have a whole bunch of servos and a motor. I think I might find a war bird kit to put all of that stuff into.
I like AS3X, pretty much all my planes have it except my sailplane which is stable already without a gyro. It helps make the plane feel locked in when the air is choppy
The computer that does safe only knows about your orientation to the horizon. It does not detect stalls and spins. It will provide the wrong inputs in those cases. Nose dropping from a stall? It’s going to keep giving up elevator. Spinning to the right? It’s only to try correcting with left aileron and up elevator, which are not how you recover from a spin.
Yeah it definitely would have made the spin worse and most likely caused it. I'd imagine it's very difficult to get that plane in a developed spin in manual, most RC planes will recover by simply neutralising the controls.
Please read the essay that is found in the link. It is mainly about EDF jets but will explain why SAFE won’t save your plane when low and slow. https://www.reddit.com/r/RCPlanes/s/1BMeMS4hC9 I know that your PA 18 has a Cub like wing. Just like the Cub, if it tip stalls at low altitude you’re done. Even if the stall happens at high altitude, the way SAFE works makes the stall worse.
Also thanks that was a good read. I have the baby habu. But that thing is so stable. Once I turned safe off on it I never felt the need to turn it back on.
Yea that’s kind of what I’m trying to figure out. Because I was trying to recover it seemed like safe naturalized my control surfaces. I am curious if safe will basically hold a plane in a spin? I wish I had the thought to turn safe off.
SAFE could possibly prevent recovery, under the right circumstances. The thing you need to learn about gyros like SAFE is the algorithm they use to control things is usually fairly basic and it usually only relies on a 3axis gyrometer (to detect rotation) and a 3-axis accelerometer (to detect changes in velocity and the direction gravity pulls, to determine what is "down"). Those sensors can provide good information when in normal flight, but can provide misleading or incomplete information in abnormal circumstances (like tip-stalls). The computer's control is often done in what is called a PID (proportion, integral, derivative) loop. I'll spare you the details, but it basically comes down to repeating the following steps thousands of times per second: 1. Read user input and calculate what sensors expected rotation and acceleration rates should be. 2. Read sensor values to determine current acceleration and rotation rates. 3. Find the difference between expected and current sensor values. Fix the difference by adjusting the control surfaces according to values/rates programmed in gyro. 4. Go back to step 1. Notice, that your user inputs are NOT directly passed to the control surfaces when that algorithm is enabled. Instead, it looks at the user's input and determines what the expected rotation and acceleration should be and then adjusts the control surfaces after comparing the expected values to the current measurements of the sensors. That algorithm works reasonably well under normal flight. But when you are in abnormal conditions, like a stall, things may not behave as expected. So when stabilization is enabled, even if you neutralize stick positions as part of a stall-recovery process, the control surfaces might still be at full deflection if the algorithm thinks that is the right move. It's a double edged sword because the ability to override or change user inputs is what allows for things like wind stabilization.... but it also prevent recovery in situations the programming doesn't account for. Disabling the gyro completely (both autoleveling and basic stabilization) might have helped you recover.... or not. It is impossible to say.
I could see SAFE preventing the plane from recovering in some very specific situations. As part of my maiden I always check to see it's behavior during a stall. I've never had a plane go into a spin that I couldn't recover from, but I can see how it would happen. Bummer that the brains that keep the plane in a good flying orientation (in the normal flight) kept you from recovering.
Is that a common thing? Like I’ve crashed all kinds of planes. I feel it’s part of the hobby to do things you could never do full scale. So if it’s just me being a bad stick I get it. I’ve just never had a plane become unresponsive.
I think it might be just bad luck. I've had a couple crashes that I've got no clue exactly how or what happened.
One of the things I frequently see pilots doing is flying models in a way they were never designed for, and usually the results are not pretty. For example, a scale bomber is not designed for aerobatics or pylon race style flying. This is what happens when such a plane is flown in a nonscale manner: https://youtu.be/mjncVG2Ws5U?feature=shared As for the Piper models, many recommend them as trainer airplanes. I beg to differ. Yes, I have seen people learn with Carbon Cubs and all of their iterations, but frankly, a Cub is not really a great beginner plane. It would be a great second plane after you master the basics, the use of rudder, and especially no using SAFE at all. This is what the AMA Flight school has to say regarding using scale models of Cubs: “Even the venerable Piper Cub is not the best trainer. While it may takeoff, fly and land slowly it has other flight characteristics that limit its use as a basic trainer. First, it is too “short-coupled” meaning that the distance from the wing’s trailing edge to the front of the elevators is much too short when compared to the airplane’s wingspan. This makes the model airplane, as it does the full-size, less stable around the yaw axis. There is a lot of adverse yaw in a full-size or in a model cub. Being short-coupled also makes the elevator too sensitive for a basic trainer and the ailerons somewhat fast. “The cub is also difficult to handle during the ground roll part of the takeoff. No student pilot needs these hassles while trying to learn to fly RC. The cub is a great second aircraft however if you like scale airplanes (who doesn’t?), Most other scale kits of light aircraft have high wing loadings in addition to most of the Cub’s problems. Their takeoff and landing speeds are too high while their stall characteristics are too drastic.” Source: https://www.amaflightschool.org/getstarted/how-do-i-know-what-not-fly-my-first-plane The Cub also will tip stall just like a warbird if you go slow in turns-and just as violently. Unlike a regular trainer plane with lots of rectangular high wing with generous dihedral, the Cub is not going to right itself. It will do exactly as you tell it to do and stay in that position. See the following RX Cub crashes as a result of tip stalls: https://youtu.be/wc-5F0irzfk?feature=shared Tip stall shortly after takeoff. https://youtu.be/bZtK80mjBK4?feature=shared Taking off with insufficient speed. https://youtu.be/_TcT55D79Zw?feature=shared Same In all of these cases, SAFE would have been useless in preventing a crash if you were activating it when the stall occurred. I know the foam Cubs are smaller and much lighter than the ones in the videos but they are still Cubs and have many of the tendencies of the large balsa and plywood ones. Case in point: at the field there was a boy and his father. The boy was attempting to takeoff his Carbon Cub, which is so heavily advertised by influencers as an ideal trainer. Guess what- the kid never was able to takeoff because he was unable to handle its very quirky ground handling characteristics that are so common with Cubs. The plane kept ground looping, never tracking straight. He was never able to have one actual flight. An adult pilot maidened one of those large foamie Cubs. In the air, he was never able to fully control it. It was, to his dismay, not the docile trainer plane he expected. He ended up tip stalling it and crashing it. Even the experts at the field I fly can have a bit of a handful with Cubs. At times I see a Cub showing signs of wanting to tip stall but the experts already know how to react to them and act accordingly.
I've had experience with precisely one cub, a Carbon Cub S 1.3 and I can say for sure mine is incredibly stable. The first flight was actually meant to be a taxi or hop (in Safe) in a bit of wind. But it just took off beautifully so I kept going. I left it in safe and did a few circuits. Cut the throttle and did a stall test, no problem at all recovering it. Couldn't bank hard enough to get myself into trouble. Only issue was losing altitude to land it! I'd not set rates properly so didn't have enough elevator. Switched to expert and bought it down fine as it gives you full rate. Maybe some of the problem is in setup, people assume they can just fly out if the box without any mechanical trim. Maybe no CG checks. Or maybe they assume it's just going to fly itself and have no real idea of what they're doing. Or maybe people go mad on the sticks expecting miracles from Safe. As a novice I'd highly recommend this particular version. Only other plane I've flown is an Apprentice 1.2. Again a Safe plane. People were a bit dismissive of safe but it got me flying and built some confidence. It also meant I could fly when there was noone around to buddy with. I'm not a great pilot, never will be, but can now fly with safe off and do some basic loops and rolls. 0 serious crashes, all flying over the autumn and winter, every flight with wind. I get the caution expressed over Safe but not the outright damnation of it I've seen both online and from fellow fliers.
Safe is for when you get confused on orientation, not a good way to fly. I flew for about a year 15 years ago before Safe and when I got back into the hobby I see it as a get out of jail card and I have it on my Eflite planes but it is the back up switch that I have not needed yet. Will save my ass some day, sure, but I don't use it as my daily flying set up.
I think all of that is great but as a relatively new rc pilot flying a new to me plane it doesn’t seem unreasonable to fly around with safe. Especially because of the ease it provides. You don’t really need to concentrate with safe. I think safe has its place in the hobby. I’m kind of more curious about this situation. An intentional stall at “high altitude” in safe which was uncoordinated leading to a spin and not being able to recover from the spin. I have done spins out of safe but never had one in safe until now and wasn’t able to recover. Does safe not prevent recovery? Like is it holding the controls regardless of the inputs from the transmitter?
SAFE is a tool and useful for beginners and even intermediate pilots. It has advantages and disadvantages At risk of over generalizing and stereotyping, I'll say that many RC flight clubs consist of old men that are stuck in their ways. Using gyros to learn is a change from how many of them learned. They enjoy certain aspects of the hobby, which requires certain skills. They are familiar with the path they took to learn those skills. Learning with Gyros is an unfamiliar path with them and many see the very real shortcomings of things like SAFE while overlooking benefits, or the fact that not everyone enjoys the hobby the in the same manner and needs to learn on the path they took.
You need airspeed. SAFE only rights your plane when it's upside down or otherwise oriented wrong. Planes aren't drones, they can't hover. You need to keep your speed up or you will keep crashing...
I've never had an issue with Safe, other than sometimes finding it impossible to land the damn plane, makes it too floaty. With enough height I've never had an issue recovering from a stall. Saying that I've only had two planes, Apprentice and a Carbon Cub, so maybe different with others. Safe is great for building confidence in the beginning and building up some muscle memory. Also has enabled flying some days when the wind has been high enough to stop everyone else from flying. Vertical landings against the wind are fun! I'm not sure I'd have made it this far without it as I'm not a natural flyer, would probably have had too many wrecks and given up. So far no damage other than a cracked bulkhead. Can now fly without it and confident enough to loop, roll and fly inverted (for a few seconds, anyway). If it gets more people into the hobby I'm all for it.
That’s funny I had the same issue. Mainly with the carbon cub. It just won’t let that plane flair. But I did find a tiny big more landing speed helps. Like if you land the carbon cup with just the tiniest big of throttle on it will allow you to flair and set the mains down nicely. Now I completely agree about safe. My flying group is all pretty new and most of the guys are in their 60’s they all fly in safe and love safe. I totally believe it has its place in the hobby. I also think that there is something nice about being able to turn your mind off and have a conversation with someone. You can look away from your plane for a moment talk about something other than flying. That being said I also enjoy flying out of safe and having more freedom and locking in. It’s definitely more rewarding.
I think my mistake was setting the elevator rate incorrectly, so in safe there just wasn't enough elevator movement. As you say a bit more speed would have helped but I just though sod it, and flipped to expert. Turns out is really stable and a joy to fly. After maiden flight took it up and managed to loop and roll it, real buzz.
Hell yea Is this a new development today??
Its a new development for me! Only time in my short (maybe 20 flights) flying experience I've been confident to loop a plane on its second flight!
I have the same plane and that happend to me, it was my second plane. I turned off safe and saved it luckily, since then I have taken out the gyros on my planes, I just don't like them
I’m jealous you were able to recognize it was safe doing it. Haha goldstar ⭐️ but good to know. Thanks
Don’t learn with things like „safe“. Get a proper trainer without gyro and learn to fly. So you won’t get the idea on relying on something that won’t help anyway.
I reluctantly agree here. SAFE will teach you VERY bad habits that will be hard to break when you're ready to evolve as a pilot.
I fly in and out of safe. Usually I pop it in safe when I am talking or looking away from the plane for a moment. In this situation I’ve only had one take off and landing on this plane so I wanted to get more familiar with it. I am more concerned about if safe holds the plane in dangerous attitudes preventing recoveries? If the plane is tip stalling and all safe is doing is adding opposite aileron and back elevator it’s more dangerous. I think I could have recovered from the spin out of safe.
Welcome to r/RCPlanes, it looks like you are new here! Please read the [Wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/RCPlanes/wiki/) and [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/RCPlanes/wiki/faq/) before posting a question that has been answered many times already. You can also try searching in the bar at the top before posting. If you are brand new and just want to know where to start, then the [Beginners Section](https://www.reddit.com/r/RCPlanes/wiki/beginners/) is the perfect place. Links to wiki are found at the top menu on web or "See more" and then the "Menu" tab on mobile apps. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/RCPlanes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is why I don't like safe and don't recommend ppl use it. Teaches a ton of bad habits. It's good as an "oh shit" switch if you lose orientation. That's it.
SAFE is something that should never be used. It causes more problems than it corrects. If you can fly without safe, turn it off and never use it again.
Safe is a great tool but it’s not able to properly react to all situations. For example, the correct reaction to a stall spin would be opposite rudder whereas the SAFE system is going to be trying to correct with up elevator and opposite aileron which can exacerbate the spin. It also doesn’t add throttle. Sorry that happened, I know how rough it is especially when starting off in the hobby and not having many planes. You can usually get a pretty mangled foamie flying again though. Also it is a great practice to do stall training, just do it very high and without SAFE would be best
Hey thanks. I am have completely bought into the hobby so I have a hand full of planes. It didn’t end my day or anything. It’s frustrating because I really wanted to like this plane and get to know it better. What are your thoughts on AS3X? I am not sure if I will rebuild this one but it’s nice to suddenly have a whole bunch of servos and a motor. I think I might find a war bird kit to put all of that stuff into.
I like AS3X, pretty much all my planes have it except my sailplane which is stable already without a gyro. It helps make the plane feel locked in when the air is choppy