Introducing the Albatross UAV project!

Hello all,

Where to start... Well, My name is Justin, and aviation is my life. I grew up in a family with aviation in our heart and blood. Everyone in my family has been in some sort of aviation, whether it is Full scale helis, prop jobs, jets/airliners, hang gliders, or even home built aircraft. I solo'd at 18 yrs old with only 9 instructor hours, and continue to enjoy every aspect of aviation. I am currently serving in the USAF as an aircraft electrician, in order to finish my Aerospace engineering degree. (Which is not far from being complete!)

Onto the project! 

The albatross UAV project came to me one night while laying in bed (so original isn't it?!). My goal was to provide a high grade, inexpensive UAV platform with unrivaled performance.

My goals?

A standard 4-6kg+ MTOW

Plenty of room for sensors, batteries, and equipment

Easy 1 hour flight times, and up to 4 hours (which is the goal... of course we can't be sure to initial flight tests)

Breakdown, and transportation ease!

Wide flight envelope

Sexy and appealing looks

Last but certainly not least, EFFICIENCY!

Airframe introduction.

The wing: The wing will have a wingspan of 3000mm, and wing area of 68.38dm^2 (in other words, 118" span, and 1060in^2). It consist of an optimized foil, and a forward swept planform. The foil is designed to ensure low stall speed, while maintaining a high max efficiency, and large cruise window. The wing planform Utilizes this foil nicely. It is a relatively high aspect wing with a ratio of 13.2. I have found that this moderate aspect ratio is preferred at RC Reynolds numbers for numerous reasons. an Aspect ratio of 12-15 allows for easier, and stronger wing structure, it allows for slightly higher Reynolds numbers, allowing airfoil's to work properly, over a wider speed range, and allows for easier built in retract, and or component bays. Obviously, we want to achieve all of the above, with minimal impact on performance. Of course a Higher AR wing would be more efficient, but at a significant cost (both in actual price, and giving up benefits.) The wing will be built with built in component bays, allowing for RC rx install in one wing, and Vtx install in the other. Not only does this allow for more room in the aircraft, but it allows for proper separation between Vtx and RC rx. The wing is forward swept, which helps minimize the chance of tip stalling while on approach with your UAV, which may as we all know, be overloaded. (there is nothing as horrible as losing your beloved UAV platform and equipment!). A Forward swept wing also helps with making proper CG easy to achieve. The downturned style tips aren't just for sex appeal, they actually reduce drag and tip vorticites, as well as decrease stall, while improving stability!

The Fuselage: The fuselage is designed around the user. It is designed to have plenty of usable storage space. Whats this mean? Well why would you have a tall narrow fuse? This not only makes is a huge PITA to work in, yet it limits how YOU want to lay out your components! The fuselage is approximately 740mm long, 150mm deep and 200mm wide. To avoid excessive fuselage/wing intersection drag and interference the fuselage is built in a slight trapezoidal shape, only to an extent that wouldn't hinder storage capacity to much. This translates into a fuselage with more usable space than the popular SkyHunter. I haven't mentioned efficiency yet. Lets not forget about that! The fuselage is actually a very efficient shape, minimizing the drag left behind. (even though it will only get chewed up by a prop...). It is also efficient in cooling. It will be designed with a NACA duct in the nose, which is a high pressure region. It will consist of an exhaust right above the motor, which is the lowest pressure region. think suck and blow. While creating a pressure differential it actually pulls air through the airframe keeping necessary components nice and cool.

Tail/s: The tail is an Inverted V design. Why? Simple really, an Inverted V improves efficiency while decreasing drag. It is also naturally more stable in a banked, and coordinated turn. The Inverted V allows for twin tail boom design, allowing for a large diameter prop. It also raises the ground clearance of the tail on landing and takeoff.

Breakdown and transportation: The number 1 reason for keeping airframes small is due to transportation and storage. The Albatross is designed to fit into a box no larger than .35m X .5m X 1m. In reality the case could be much smaller. How does it do this? The fuselage is 740mm X 200mm X 150mm, needless to say, it was designed within the required specifications. The wing is 3m long! However, it simply breaks into 3 1m long sections. The twin carbon-fiber tailbooms are 700mm each. The tail will be hinged at the center, and consist of two 440mm halves, allowing it to fold into one 440mm piece. Not only does this make it easy for the end user, but it reduce's shipping costs to your door. No more paying as much as 50% of your aircraft on shipping alone!


My Short Term goal is to finish analysis and development. I am planning on starting a kickstarter to fund the initial molds and production costs. The current Design consists of a fiberglass fuselage, twin carbon fiber booms, and either a foam core/obeche covered wing, or an all built up wood wing. It will come with optional fuselage formers/inserts. These will be laser cut, allowing the builder the option of using them or not. These peices will consist of a retract mount (offset similar to an A-10c aircraft nose wheel, to allow for minimal effect on usable space) as well as numerous mounts and shalves for components and or batteries. Of course, as mentioned this will be up to the customer whether or not he/she will choose to install them. It also allows for some open source design in case anyone wants to improved upon, or create their own after market laser cut parts. This airframe would be available at a goal price of around $500 usd. This may or may not be achieved, but it is my GOAL. I consider this a reasonable goal considering similar aircraft such as Hobbykings UAV-3000 are capable of being produced around $300. I hope that my few added features are not enough to out-reach my goal.


Wingspan; 3000mm
Wing Area; 68.38 dm^2
Root Chord; 300mm
Tip Chord; 160mm
Fuse Length; 740mm
Fuse (max) Width; 190mm

My Long Term Goal is a Albatross Pro version. The Albatross Pro will have a slightly enlarged fuselage,  more wing area, higher MTOW, change in airfoil, fully molded wings and tail, and more precise construction. These changes would increase MTOW, and cruise speed/efficiency to a more specified range. It would also consist of a few ease of operation features such as built in Cannon-plug style connections for easy quick-disconnect assembly. This means that when you take off the wing, there is no servo connection to fumble with. It would also consist of some ease of assembly mods such as quick disconnect wings, booms, and tail, requiring no tools to use. (Think, Crutch/cane style push button. This would be located under the flaps.)


Albatross Pro:
Wingspan; 3000mm
Wing Area; 75.216 dm^2
Root Chord; 330mm
Tip Chord; 185mm
Fuse Length; 890mm
Fuse (max) Width; 230mm

Here is a more in-depth design log on my RCG account. The wing planform, and laminar foil research was originally from a previous project, before I realized its potential in FPV/UAV. Although the introduction of my UAV/FPV platform is fairly new, a lot (many years worth) of prior personally research has been incorporated.


I am currently in communication with a few different OEM manufacturers for an initial Hobby version, and a long term Pro Version. If you know of, or you are another OEM manufacturer feel free to contact me! It would be much appreciated!

Please, feel free to comment, discuss, and provide constructive criticism! After all, this is my first post on DIY Drones, so please be nice! Also, Feel free to comment on what YOU would like to see in this aircraft, as well as what you think would be a reasonable price. Of course the higher the price, the nicer the construction and quality.

Without Further Adieu, here are some pics! These are renderings of the Hobby version. The Pro version has preliminary renderings on the RCG discussion posted above. 





You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!

Join diydrones

Email me when people reply –


  • looks like the guys at readymaderc just unveiled a similar plane to yours. 2 meter span only, but wingtips and tail are similar. fixed gear, foam.  looks good. i'm sure the performance is not as good as yours could be, but it will be out there in a couple of months.  you could benefit from what they have done by getting one, and using it to collect data, and refine your design?  then it would not stink so bad that someone is producing a similar aircraft.   your's still looks sexier..

  • How's it going Justin?  you might remember me from the conversation we had about my gemini.

    i was just wondering if you had got a prototype flying yet?  and how's it going with the project?  will be following it!  best wishes spike

This reply was deleted.


Liam left a comment on Agricultural UAVs
I'm Liam from T-MOTOR. I would like to reach out to see if there is any possibility for us to work together.
We are a propulsion system manufacturer who offers motors, propellers and ESCs for all kinds of drone applications which vary from secur…"
DIY Robocars via Twitter
RT @SmallpixelCar: Smart move. The car used the shadow to guide it through the bridge. This was never in the training samples. But it learn…
DIY Robocars via Twitter
RT @SmallpixelCar: Getting closer to the target. Single camera. Untrained road.
Richard Cox left a comment on Australia
"Anyone in the DIYDRONES Australian subgroup based in Alice Springs, NT?
I am experimenting with Ardupilot (standard Arduplane), Pixhawk 4 FC in a 4-ch
RC "AXN Floater Jet" foamy plane..."
Omar Sykes left a comment on Australia
"Hi everyone, I am looking for someone who is good at drone building, repair and software in Adelaide. Please give me a call on 0477 319 219."
DIY Robocars via Twitter
RT @RoboticMasters: #donkeycar
DIY Robocars via Twitter
DIY Robocars via Twitter
RT @RoboticMasters: Donkey car, car car car car car car; Donkey car, car car car car car car; Donkey Car. Anyone like our tiny tiny donkey…
DIY Robocars via Twitter
RT @SmallpixelCar: After improving DBSCAN speed, I can get 11 frame per second on @NVIDIAEmbedded Jerson Xavier MAXN mode and the autonomou…
Jun 26
DIY Robocars via Twitter
RT @Heavy02011: Join us at next Virtual Race League: ⁦@diyrobocars⁩ Race #4 - Parking Lot Nerds, August 1st
Jun 25
DIY Robocars via Twitter
RT @SmallpixelCar: #CUDA implementation should be easy, because most of the time is on distance calculations berween two points and if the…
Jun 25
DIY Robocars via Twitter
RT @SmallpixelCar: This is the view from the car. Even my lanenet inference is fast on @NVIDIAEmbedded Jerson Xavier, DBSCAN clustering tak…
Jun 25
DIY Robocars via Twitter
RT @SmallpixelCar: Ran my car in the park, with single camera and @sparkfun IMU. #TensorRT on @NVIDIAEmbedded Jetson Xavier. Lanenet one fr…
Jun 24
DIY Robocars via Twitter
RT @SmallpixelCar: Making progress on drive the car autonomously in my neighborhood. This run used single camera only. No other sensors. ht…
Jun 24
DIY Robocars via Twitter
RT @chr1sa: The @DIYRobocars/@donkey_car AI racers are getting *fast* in the simulator, in part because it's so well optimized for reinforc…
Jun 21
DIY Robocars via Twitter
RT @DAVGtech: Yesterday we had a ten year old in Canada racing a sixteen year old in France. This is a truly unique community and opportuni…
Jun 21