Posted by Colby sts on September 22, 2009 at 7:44pm
I am interested in using an Electric Sailplane as a platform for autonomous aerial photography for long flights of an hour or more, hopefully two. I know that people have used the Aero Master as a UAV platform but what about large electric sailplanes like Maxi Sport T-Tail. Any thoughts, experiences or advice would be greatly appreciated.
You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!
FYI, we have created Pteryx UAV www.pteryx.eu
based on the following goals:
-protect/enclose the payload
-survive landings, wear gracefully, maintain geometry, well defined cracking points for the wings
-maintain glider-layout efficiency, but higher sinkrate in glide mode (more precise landing)
-eliminate electrical connections during pre-flight assembly, max 10mins
-possible groundstation-less operation
-minimise number of flight control surfaces/servos
-increase useful photo count by introducing roll-stabilized head
-resistant to an occasional, slight rain (all painted and fiberglass+gelcoat)
-remain hand-launched with optional full-auto catapult operation
-protect the propeller
-no realtime mission adjustment
-no groundstation necessary
-parachute is optional
-onboard wireless camera mounts, optional
-operation at the edge of visual contact, if not - aided by wireless camera (assisted FPV mode)
This is what we figured out to be important for pro users
for aerial photography.
IMO aerial video prefers faster, heavier plane and 3D stabilized mount - so a different mission.
I hope this requirement list is well balanced.We are not offering a solution for every important scenario,
but one can imagine easily lifting large amount of scientific equipment in the camera nose.
does any one know of an air frame similar to the NPS-X? Could be a cool way to work around the space problem with sailplanes if the dimensions were right.
Does any one know of an ARF that is similar to the Dynaflite Butterfly, http://www.dynaflite.com/airplanes/dyfa1010.html? It seems like the perfect combo for flight endurance and space in the fuselage.
Foster
As Condor says its getting everything in thats the problem.
Thats why we have gone for large EPP based airframes with wide cabins and close to sailplane aerofoils and wing ratios. Also my fat fingers get in that fuselage easier.
We can easily achieve one hour, I have a friend who has a flying wing based design upto 3 hours endurance now. Electric to boot.
As a person that uses an electric sail plane as a UAV your biggest problem is getting everything into the airframe. Once you start piling in the electronics there is not that much room for batteries let alone a camera and transmitter. If you are going for stills you are going to have to sling it under a wing. The next problem is that gliders tend to be on the fragile side. This means one bad landing on rough terrain can end in a broken bird.
Replies
www.pteryx.eu
based on the following goals:
-protect/enclose the payload
-survive landings, wear gracefully, maintain geometry, well defined cracking points for the wings
-maintain glider-layout efficiency, but higher sinkrate in glide mode (more precise landing)
-eliminate electrical connections during pre-flight assembly, max 10mins
-possible groundstation-less operation
-minimise number of flight control surfaces/servos
-increase useful photo count by introducing roll-stabilized head
-resistant to an occasional, slight rain (all painted and fiberglass+gelcoat)
-remain hand-launched with optional full-auto catapult operation
-protect the propeller
-no realtime mission adjustment
-no groundstation necessary
-parachute is optional
-onboard wireless camera mounts, optional
-operation at the edge of visual contact, if not - aided by wireless camera (assisted FPV mode)
This is what we figured out to be important for pro users
for aerial photography.
IMO aerial video prefers faster, heavier plane and 3D stabilized mount - so a different mission.
I hope this requirement list is well balanced.We are not offering a solution for every important scenario,
but one can imagine easily lifting large amount of scientific equipment in the camera nose.
Foster
Any thoughts?
http://hobbyking.com/hobbycity/store/uh_viewItem.asp?idProduct=8283...(102in)_ARF
It seems to have plenty of room under the canopy, and the finish is fantastic.
Any thought on converting this one into a UAV?
Thats why we have gone for large EPP based airframes with wide cabins and close to sailplane aerofoils and wing ratios. Also my fat fingers get in that fuselage easier.
We can easily achieve one hour, I have a friend who has a flying wing based design upto 3 hours endurance now. Electric to boot.
He's studied aerodynamics and it shows!
It always comes down to what you want to lift.
Foster
Good luck.