Has anyone ever re-attempted this record?


I am interested in doing this and attempting this. Probably most likely with a GO Pro HD camera attached to record everything. Is there a good autopilot that would be able control the gas engine that one could recommend, perhaps with collision avoidance. I think I saw something about sonar detection and collision avoidance for the APM 1.0. 2560 board on the udrones.com store website.


I would be using a 4 channel rc gas engine plane, the gas engine would be modified to have an alternator to charge the batteries.




Views: 1420

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I'd suggest Paparazzi as the autopilot.  The APM is cool, but it's nowhere near as sophisticated and mature as Paparazzi.

I use the APM mainly because it has nicer GCS software, uses MAVlink, and runs in windows.  But if I were doing some high end stuff like you propose I'd use Paparazzi.  The Umarin board in particular is very tiny and light.

Yeah, the board is a bit flaky today.

Censorship! Censorship! Censorship!

LOL, JK.  I did have a crappy connection and hit add reply twice since the first one didn't seem to work.

I'm not dissing the APM, but I think the paparazzi code is a lot more sophisticated and mature.  It was actually too complicated for a lot of what I was doing and I grew tired of mucking about in Linux without very good docs.  When my APM2 came I pretty much shelved my Paparazzi gear because the APM was so much easier to get going.

I do think the adaptive control loops and the much more powerful hardware Paparazzi runs on makes it more suitable for high end, scientific, and pro-level users.  If autopilots were my full time job I'd defiantly be using Paparazzi.  The APM is easier to use and a lot less frustrating.

If you like the idea of hundreds of files with defines and settings and variables with the makefile running willy nilly through the whole thing, then Paparazzi is for you.  Same thing if you like recompiling your air firmware all the time for every little tweak.

For almost everything I can think of Paparazzi takes the high (hard) road and APM takes the easy road.  Processor, operating system, GPS, etc..

Have you considered Carb heat for icing en route 2 stroke?or four stroke ?You could bleed some exhaust gas around the  venturi to keep it warm . How may hours do you expect to take ? are you doing it in one shot a series of steps You could run the engine the recommended number of hours to see the fuel burn then calculate your weight + 30% for head wind if you can get up in the jet stream you can get a 200+ knot push and maby just idle across at altitude you will need a means of leaaning the mixture  A transponder or a modified epirb locator beacon and tell the authority what you are doing  modify a sat phone with Gps and it will show you where it is and you can control it from home . I think Iridium makes one with data link With a transponder air traffic control would keep track of it maby a series of RCplanes go up en route for in flight fueling 

the ideas are limit less Very worthwhile project! Good Luck!

The TAM-5 took... 38 hours 53 minutes @ 42mph cruise speed

1883 miles / 39 hours = 48.3 mph.  So it seems that they maybe only got an average of around 6 mph tailwind.

If you're going to attempt the record you might as well try to do it a little quicker so you get a record out of it.


It should be much easier to accomplish with todays technology, but perhaps much harder to get permission?

I don't think motor technology has really made any progress since 2003.  AFAIK there's been no real efficiency gains or power-to-weight gains in a LONG time.

Reply to Discussion


© 2019   Created by Chris Anderson.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service