I would be honored if you could take a look at my Kickstarter project:
It uses two Rimfire motors GPMG4700 (about 2HP each), two Castle Creations Phoenix edge 100 ESCs, and either the UDB4 or UDB5. The origin of the source is Matrixpilot 4.0, adapted to the hybrid differential thrust (pitch) and thrust vectoring (roll) 4-DOF control system.
Your comments and advise will be greatly appreciated!
Best regards,
Gert Lundgren
Comments
Test flight successful. It appears TPAC could take on a little more load, and if switching to the stronger 18.5V motors, a six-pac might be possible.
See the TPAC project on Kickstarter.
Now this is progress! Don't forget the helmet when you do the drop!
Will this do? Four 12 OZ beverage containers weighing a total of 3.5 LBS (1.6 KG). Release mechanism being developed.
Flight test planned for today.
BEER!
Mark, What payload would best illustrate the lift capability of my tpac?
Thank you very much for the advise. I have several changes.
First off I'd like to mirror RC Tech's comments, very cool and original design... From a Kickstarter perspective, here would be my issues:
#1, Definitely too many rewards, think paradox of choice. I think RC Tech's suggestion is spot on - the only change I would make would be to add a ARF (same as RTF, but minus the TX/RX for people who have one).
#2, The page is way too long, and way too much information not directly relevant to the project. There are pictures of planes, other types of UAV's, etc... I think that would be better presented on your website, for people wanting to know more about the evolution and what you've done - on the Kickstarter page, keep it lean and mean.
#3, The price (from my perspective) is high vs other options - $1100+ for just an airframe is way beyond what I would typically spend, especially considering that I'm probably going to be replacing parts periodically as I crash it. It also works against you that your parts don't look exotic, so it makes it harder to justify the expense - I'm not saying carbon fiber and machined aluminum would be better for your purposes, just that it has more perceived value.
#4, While your video does show it flying and doing it's thing, it would be good to take the time to go over the key elements that make the vehicle unique - if you can't catch people with your video, they probably won't read the page. Since heavy lift is a feature of the aircraft, seeing it actually lifting something would be nice also - plus address any obvious questions, like how stable it is, especially in a cross wind.
#5, if heavy lift is one of the key advantages of the design, it should be emphasized - when I first saw the design, I wasn't sure what the advantages were beyond the obvious (less motors, robust airframe, etc).
Anyway, I wish you luck on the project - what you've done is really impressive, and I love the diversity of designs (especially the FRAS).
Hej Gert,
It is always refreshing to see a new a design and i really like the sturdy frame/landing skid. I think it have potential in heavy lifting scenarios.
I think how ever that you need to reevaluate your kickstarter levels. You have probably put hundreds of hours designing the best tube joiners, but i think it will be hard to sell them for 128 dollar.
Stefan Olofsson (RC Tech)
www.rctech.se
3D Robotics | Team Black Sheep | Hobby UAV