Another APM Powered Quad from Aerosky

I recently came across a very interesting Quad Copter from Aerosky call the X350. The don't mention the APM but in the manual it states that it is compatible with DroidPlanner and Mission Planner. The price is great if it flies as the advertise

For the RTF price of 399.00 I am considering getting one to test. It does not state anywhere that an APM/or compatible is in it. I thought that under the Open Source rules they had to mention the Group of Developers etc... 

Specs as listed:

Easy to Fly
Altitude Hold
GPS Position Hold
Point of Interest
Return to Location/Home
Failsafe Return Home
Headless Mode
Follow Me (Telemetry Module Required)
Set Waypoints and Create Flight Plan (Telemetry Module Required)

Motor:4pcs x 2312 KV1000 motor
ESC :4pcs x 20A Brushless ESC
Battery :11.1V 2800mAh 20C Li-Po
Transmitter Battery:4 AA Batteries (Not Included)
Radio System:7CH Radio,7CH Receiver ,2.4GHZ
Propeller:4pcs x 8045 Propeller
Power Input:11.1V(3S Li Po) 
Maximum Tilt Angel:35°
Maximum Yaw Angular Velocity:200°/s
Hovering Accuracy:Vertical: 0.5m Horizontal: 2m
GPS and Flight Controller (Included)           

Rotor Distance:350MM
Flight Time: Approx 20 minutes
Flight Weight:< 1000g
Operating Environment Temperature:            -10℃-50℃ 
Power Consumption:  3.12W
Weight (Battery & Propellers Included):        <1000g
Payload: 350g (Recommend), 500g (Max)
Hover Accuracy (Ready To Fly Version):      Vertical: 0.5m Horizontal: 2m
Max Yaw Angular Velocity:  200°/s
Max Tiltable Angle:    35°
Max Ascent / Descent Speed: 3m/s
Max Flight Speed:      10m/s
Diagonal Motor-Motor Distance:       350mm
GPS inside      

Battery Type:  3S LiPo,2800mAh,20c
Battery Cells:  3S
Battery Capacity:        2800mAh 
Battery Discharge Rate:          20C

Views: 6018

Comment by Gary McCray on April 17, 2015 at 12:12pm

Hi UAS Pilot,

I just looked at their manual here:

It shows compatibility with Droid Planner using the optional "link" module but doesn't say anything about Mission Planner.

From the information I was able to glean I couldn't find any substantial information to suggest that they are using an APM.

Possibly they are, but they certainly don't seem to be supporting it in Mission Planner setup and control use.

And it is from what I can see certainly not guaranteed to be in any way compatible.

It looks like a nice quadcopter for the price, probably similar to the Cheerson CX20, but APM compatibility does not seem to be mentioned or likely.

Best regards,


Comment by UAS_Pilot on April 17, 2015 at 12:16pm

If not an APM, Then what other flight controllers are compatible with DroidPlanner which are not APM, PixHawk, etc...

Also, If it is compatible with DroidPlanner, would it not work with MissionPlanner?

I could be wrong.

Comment by AA on April 17, 2015 at 12:17pm

Very interesting. Looking forward to your review.  I have been looking at RTF Aerosky UAV planes over at  They seem to deliver a lot at low prices.

Comment by Tobias Witting on April 17, 2015 at 12:24pm

it is probably similar to the Quanum Nova or the Walkera quad. You never know what exactly you get. If you don't mind a bit of DIY, I can recommend getting a phantom body shell (cheap but a good airframe. Compact enough to stuff into a backback) and fitting it out yourself. Pixhawk+GPS, your own TX/RX (e.g. Taranis + X8R) and either the E300 set from DJI or the new Air Gear 350 set from Tiger Motor. I tried both and really prefer the T-Motor set. These motors produce 1kg max thrust on 4S! This thing is an absolute rocket ship, but also efficient. Hover at 12A. I get really safe 18min of flying with a 4Ah Lipo.

Comment by Gary McCray on April 17, 2015 at 12:32pm

UAS Pilot,

You are probably right, but the fact that they have provided sufficient compatibility to run DroidPlanner is not a guarantee that there is sufficient for it to work with Mission Planner or that they have even provided the interface to do so.

The fact that they have made no mention of APM, Ardupilot, Mission Planner or the Open licensing is also cause to at least strongly suspect that they have felt free to make whatever changes they wanted without mentioning them.

Possibly there is additional information on this elsewhere, but it is not in the manual.

And having limited compatibility with DroidPlanner is no guarantee of anything beyond that.

Comment by UAS_Pilot on April 17, 2015 at 1:10pm

That makes sense. This is why I built my own using a PixHawk. 

Comment by Nathaniel Caner on April 17, 2015 at 3:19pm

Interestingly under the "Parts and Accesories" category you see a listing for an "APM Power Module with XT60" The product description The APM Power Module is a simple way of providing your APM with clean power from a LiPo battery through a 6-pos cable. seems to support the suggestion that the X350 might be powered by an APM/clone of some sort. The description by the way uses very similar wording to those used for the PM in the 3DR store.


Nathaniel ~KD2DEY

Comment by AA on April 17, 2015 at 3:31pm

This seems to feel very similar to this...  which has been covered extensive here and on rcgroup

Comment by Gary McCray on April 17, 2015 at 4:09pm

Hi Nathaniel,

You are absolutely right, looks like they are using a APM clone at some level at least.

If that is true, they are legally obligated to provide open access to their design and their firmware.

However, like at least some other Shenzhen / Guangdong manufacturers, they do not appear to have done so, at least not yet.

And one thing you really have to watch out for are minor differences that have the net effect of not making it APM compatible for either Mission Planner, current APM firmware or even re-programmable at all.

And UAS_Pilot,

Really nice use of a Phantom frame, very clean looking build.

I have a similar APM build featured on my Quadcopters Are Fun site.

Best Regards,


Comment by Craig Elder on April 18, 2015 at 6:40am

>>> thought that under the Open Source rules they had to mention the Group of Developers etc... 

Our license basically comes down to 2 things:  The manufacturer has to tell people their customer that they are using ArduPilot and if they make changes to the code then the have to publish them.  We like it when they link to  And yes, they are in violation of the license.  I would definitely like to speak with them.


You need to be a member of DIY Drones to add comments!

Join DIY Drones

© 2019   Created by Chris Anderson.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service