Posted by MAerialPhoto on September 21, 2013 at 8:39pm
Hallo,I've start Aerial mapping using multicopter, it has very good result with the flexible landing spot, flying still, etc.But the problem is, what if i have bigger Area to cover?I'm interesting in fixed wings UAV.After some reading, I have a question.What is the benefit of each plane ( Glider oder Flying Wings ?)Glider like http://aeromao.com or Flying wings like http://www.questuav.com1. Payload ?2. Flexibility of Landing and Takeoff spot?3. Easily control?4. Better with Arduplane?My payload will be- APM- Sony NEX-7 with stabilizationThanks
You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!
For newcomer its important to learn flying first before putting any expensive payload on aircraft. Get hand of flying and you can decide which configuration can suit your requirements. Although APM can fly full autonomous mission for you, sometime you may need to take manual control. So its better to learn flying first. With help of APM you can learn it very easily without much trouble.
My 5c. As some on the thread have mentioned - the benefits to wings are the reduced number of control surfaces you have to manage - only 2 servos. I would not call them(wings) more stable than the traditional glider in the sense that the length(shortness) of the airframe is so short that rotation happens at a much higher rate than the alternative BUT for the mapping application this rotation can be managed by most reduction packages(Photomodeler ect.)
Now, a lesson from the guys who have the tom to do the difficult research and get the answers to your questions - let us look at Trimble. They have a second generation wing as a mapping product. First generation was called the X100(if memory serves). 80% of the guys out there offering a product like this uses the wing as an airframe. Now, we can argue that they are reducing the risk in reducing the number of moving parts or that it is indeed a better - more stable - solution than a glider.
You might have a chat with a chap called NamibPilot(I think). He builds a mapping drone using a conventional airframe - motor in front. Maybe he can enlighten you to his reasons and findings. He just released rev 2...or was it MkII, of his drone.
The difference in payload would depend on the carrying capacity of the wing design(product of wing area) - can not say one is better than the other. The same goes for the landing and takeoff. A glider is more forgiving to launch, but at the same weight and wing area it would be difficult to all. Control should not be an issue. If youre flying APM it is 6 of the one and half a dozen of the other. I've used APM on wings and conventional frames. It even brought home a tail heavy glider without issues(I could not get it right so I activated the auto pilot). As I mentioned above - APM is brilliant for both airframes.
Im not even sure you will see a difference in the efficiency if comparing same wing areas, propulsion and battery.
I fly a 2m composite(carbon) glider(ish - home brew skywalker copy) configuration, but must admit that I'm finding myself 'oogeling' the X8 as a next project.....maybe.
Good luck, mate - the fun is in the journey. Let us know what you decide.
Greetings everyone. Everything is a trade off. Add more lift, and drag will follow as it is a byproduct of lift (induced drag). Wings have tons of lift, but all that surface area is going to add lots of drag, especially when flown at higher speeds. I recently lost my FX61 wing(mechanical at 3,000 AGL) with a full eagle tree system installed (ouch!,) It was my first FPV that I lost, sad day indeed! I was hand launching at a weight of 3600 grams! Empty weight I believe is 1400, so it will effectively carry more than double its dry weight. I love the FX-61, the bird took a MASSIVE beating while I dialed in batteries, trim, weights, CG etc. Now that I know what im doing, I am looking forward to flying another wing very soon.
Currently, I am setting up my 1600mm C-47 and testing the pros and cons of both platforms. The landing gear on the C47 will allow me to mount a nice belly camera for 90 degree look down, which will be nice for surveillance.
Without being disrespectful to you in any way how do you have the Gaul to decide who is an armchair aerodynamist ?
In MY flying career of 40yrs I hold a pilots licence, glider licence and multi engine licence. I have built and designed over 60 r/c and soaring aircraft. I am also a practising electrical and mechanical engineer. I have probably forgotten more than you have ever learned about aerodynamics.
What is your skill level? From your posts you just want to make bad comments about what you read. Maybe you should back off a little.
Thanks for the discussion,
I can understand now, why a lot of Aerial mapping company develops a flying wings as the UAS.
I saw on www.aeromao.com , the developed two platform such as glider and flying wings.
But others like gatewings,questuav and other company are using a flying wings.
Thanks for all your advice. I receive a lot of Information from you guys. And I think the flying wing will be the best choice for my job.
I can place the camera easily for landscape format, and also looks easy to lauch.
The traditional plane is also good. But I must put a modification box to input all electronic component and camera ( for glider ) like http://hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__39528__Cyclone_E_All_Moulded...
I think it comes down to personal preference and portability. I think that ultimately the aerodynamic performance isn't so important unless you want to take part of competitions with the same plane.
I would say that regular airplanes and flying wings are equal in regard to the criteria you'v set.
flying wings are inherently unstable and flying fly can be troublesome sue to less internal space but mostly due to wing waggle as flying wings cannot fly as high speed as the equivalent size traditional plane
Take a look at RV jet . Payload is the best i've seen on a wing . Its a new company , so be patient . Don't go with a glider . I've yet to see a glider that has any decent payload . The glider require a fair amount of wind and is not as agile . I've yet to see any professional use a glider for photo / agriculture . Yes , landing can be tricky at times ( But this is also true with RC plane as dirt road , grass can be hard on a plane and its landing ) . A Agriculture ariel company told me that they land their flying wing in the corn or soybean field . Wing has long flight time . Handle the wind . RV jet has the ability to fly up to 10 miles ( maybe further , still being tested as to its limits ) . Climbs really well .
Replies
For newcomer its important to learn flying first before putting any expensive payload on aircraft. Get hand of flying and you can decide which configuration can suit your requirements. Although APM can fly full autonomous mission for you, sometime you may need to take manual control. So its better to learn flying first. With help of APM you can learn it very easily without much trouble.
Hi MAerialPhoto,
My 5c. As some on the thread have mentioned - the benefits to wings are the reduced number of control surfaces you have to manage - only 2 servos. I would not call them(wings) more stable than the traditional glider in the sense that the length(shortness) of the airframe is so short that rotation happens at a much higher rate than the alternative BUT for the mapping application this rotation can be managed by most reduction packages(Photomodeler ect.)
Now, a lesson from the guys who have the tom to do the difficult research and get the answers to your questions - let us look at Trimble. They have a second generation wing as a mapping product. First generation was called the X100(if memory serves). 80% of the guys out there offering a product like this uses the wing as an airframe. Now, we can argue that they are reducing the risk in reducing the number of moving parts or that it is indeed a better - more stable - solution than a glider.
You might have a chat with a chap called NamibPilot(I think). He builds a mapping drone using a conventional airframe - motor in front. Maybe he can enlighten you to his reasons and findings. He just released rev 2...or was it MkII, of his drone.
The difference in payload would depend on the carrying capacity of the wing design(product of wing area) - can not say one is better than the other. The same goes for the landing and takeoff. A glider is more forgiving to launch, but at the same weight and wing area it would be difficult to all. Control should not be an issue. If youre flying APM it is 6 of the one and half a dozen of the other. I've used APM on wings and conventional frames. It even brought home a tail heavy glider without issues(I could not get it right so I activated the auto pilot). As I mentioned above - APM is brilliant for both airframes.
Im not even sure you will see a difference in the efficiency if comparing same wing areas, propulsion and battery.
I fly a 2m composite(carbon) glider(ish - home brew skywalker copy) configuration, but must admit that I'm finding myself 'oogeling' the X8 as a next project.....maybe.
Good luck, mate - the fun is in the journey. Let us know what you decide.
Greetings everyone. Everything is a trade off. Add more lift, and drag will follow as it is a byproduct of lift (induced drag). Wings have tons of lift, but all that surface area is going to add lots of drag, especially when flown at higher speeds. I recently lost my FX61 wing(mechanical at 3,000 AGL) with a full eagle tree system installed (ouch!,) It was my first FPV that I lost, sad day indeed! I was hand launching at a weight of 3600 grams! Empty weight I believe is 1400, so it will effectively carry more than double its dry weight. I love the FX-61, the bird took a MASSIVE beating while I dialed in batteries, trim, weights, CG etc. Now that I know what im doing, I am looking forward to flying another wing very soon.
Currently, I am setting up my 1600mm C-47 and testing the pros and cons of both platforms. The landing gear on the C47 will allow me to mount a nice belly camera for 90 degree look down, which will be nice for surveillance.
I hope the arudpilot works well with the C-47!
In MY flying career of 40yrs I hold a pilots licence, glider licence and multi engine licence. I have built and designed over 60 r/c and soaring aircraft. I am also a practising electrical and mechanical engineer. I have probably forgotten more than you have ever learned about aerodynamics.
What is your skill level? From your posts you just want to make bad comments about what you read. Maybe you should back off a little.
I can understand now, why a lot of Aerial mapping company develops a flying wings as the UAS.
I saw on www.aeromao.com , the developed two platform such as glider and flying wings.
But others like gatewings,questuav and other company are using a flying wings.
Thanks for all your advice. I receive a lot of Information from you guys. And I think the flying wing will be the best choice for my job.
I can place the camera easily for landscape format, and also looks easy to lauch.
The traditional plane is also good. But I must put a modification box to input all electronic component and camera ( for glider ) like http://hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__39528__Cyclone_E_All_Moulded...
Thanks all for your information
MAerialPhoto
I think it comes down to personal preference and portability. I think that ultimately the aerodynamic performance isn't so important unless you want to take part of competitions with the same plane.
I would say that regular airplanes and flying wings are equal in regard to the criteria you'v set.
Did you think to Paragliders for this purpose?
Payload 1.5 -2 kg
Parafoil with this or you can DIY.
flying wings are inherently unstable and flying fly can be troublesome sue to less internal space but mostly due to wing waggle as flying wings cannot fly as high speed as the equivalent size traditional plane
Take a look at RV jet . Payload is the best i've seen on a wing . Its a new company , so be patient . Don't go with a glider . I've yet to see a glider that has any decent payload . The glider require a fair amount of wind and is not as agile . I've yet to see any professional use a glider for photo / agriculture . Yes , landing can be tricky at times ( But this is also true with RC plane as dirt road , grass can be hard on a plane and its landing ) . A Agriculture ariel company told me that they land their flying wing in the corn or soybean field . Wing has long flight time . Handle the wind . RV jet has the ability to fly up to 10 miles ( maybe further , still being tested as to its limits ) . Climbs really well .
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next