Does it matter exactly what it's called? It could be called Swiss cheese for all I care. More important is the matter of how to make use of it in David's project. The PWM/PPM argument is just muddying the waters.
As long as he's aware that pulse-length measurement is needed to measure the pulses, then either filtered PWM output or serial to a DAC, followed by an op-amp for level conversion, nothing else really matters.
Yes I fully agree.
Let's agree that the outputs from the radio control receiver have pulse widths varying between 1ms and 2ms that convey the information.
As I see things there are at least three options:
1) Filter the signals that would have gone to each servo. As the frame rate is only roughly 50Hz, any filter design may slow the response time too much (as mentioned in the original post). The frame rate is unlikely to be constant and this will affect a filtered signal but only very slightly.
2) Get an Arduino to measure the pulse widths of both servo outputs from the receiver. Then either use two digital-to-analogue converters (DACs) or two PWM outputs from the Arduino. If using DACs, the delay involved should be insignificant. If using PWM outputs, they will need to be filtered, but as the frequency is about 490Hz even a simple resistor-capacitor network may well be adequate. My understanding is that the pulses from the receiver's servo outputs do not occur at the same time so pulseIn() could be used.
3) Design electronics to convert the pulse widths to a control voltage, possibly utilising available servo motor control integrated circuits or utilising PCBs extracted from servos.
While also recognising that there will be a need for an amplifier, is that a reasonable summary?