Skywalker X8 wing endurance VS the c-astral wing


C-astral wings (website) are identical to the wing X8 Skywalker (or the opposite!), but the perfomance are very different. What could double performance of the c-astral? The outer covering (composite or carbon)? The motor / prop combination? My goal is to create a similar astral-c wing, long flight endurance, tilt&pan camera or a lightweight sony alpha like a5100, parachute for landing and a Pixhawk (their mission planning software looks suspiciously like Mission planner anyway!)

Thanks everyone


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

Join diydrones

Email me when people reply –


      • Hi Alex. 

        There is nothing stopping you installing a larger battery if you desire, just keep in mind it will effect your payload capabilities as this airframe was not designed for heavy lift applications. 

        What are you looking to carry for your missions? 

        I'll send you an email with some pricing. 

  • Identical....

    ... really... ;)

    Looking at the C-astral wings, they are composite, whereas the Skywalker X8 is EPO foam.

    Differences that I can see just from looking at comparative photo's, the wing aerofoils (airfoil for those of you located the wrong side of the Atlantic ;) are total different, the X8 will weigh more, nett result the X8 requires more thrust to stay aloft = less endurance than the C-astral. 

    The C4-EYE claims to have 3hr endurance, in optimum conditions with a light payload this is not unbelievable.

    An hour for the X8 is probably the most cost effective flight time as it does not make a good glider, hence will have to be under power more often than not. Using an optimised prop/motor and LiPo combination should see 1hr flights easy enough, but the weight of batteries needed to achieve a 3hr flight combined with the APM and ancillary gear could not be carried by the X8!

    If you specifically want endurance, consider a Techpod or similar.

    With the X8, you certainly get a 'lot' of plane for your £/$, but IMHO ultimately it is a compromised design - and it certainly can't hope to compete with bespoke composite platforms like the C4-EYE.


    • Hi Kev and thanks for the relpy,

      You're right, there are not the same, but pretty similar.

      I know the "C4-eye" is really impressive, but it is between $ 50k and $ 100k and I do not need all the accessories.
       Knowing that the market is actually at the beginning and that the applications are still nebulous, invest $ 75k would be quite risky.

      You say apm is not optimized for long flights, why? Yet C-Astral mission planner looks (very similar;)) like Mission planner / apm planner!

      Do you think that building a composite mold for an existing model (X8, FX79) would be a good option (not knowing how much costs a mold!)

      Thank you again
      I will continue to search the forums.

      Alex from Montréal

This reply was deleted.