AWuAV 3015E the Revolutionary Open Source drone

AWuAV 3015E the Revolutionary Open Source drone soon in a simulator game !


Pixracer Autopilot

Ardupilot Arducopter 3.5



WL Weight (without Lipo) 900g

MTOW Maximum take-off weight 3900g

MWOL Maximum Payload+Lipo 2900g

Max Thrust 5600g


30cm of diameter 25cm higth


50km/h Horizontal Flight

100 km/h Vertical Flight


40mn (no payload)

25 mn (1 kg payload)


1 km Wifi or Hf or ILLIMITED LTE 4G


400 ft (122m) per FAA regulation


Secure Wi-Fi network or LTE 3/4


2.4 Ghz And 5.8 Ghz


Lipo 6S3P 10.5AH 900g


~1.5 hours

Site :

E-mail me when people leave their comments –

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

Join diydrones


  • Hi The Sun,
    I can certainly see that you could make a monocopter with 3 vanes work, the ones I have seen use four because their actuation parallels that of a quadcopter.
    Three independent vanes requires at least a somewhat uncommon control scheme and flying methodology.
    I actually have some information on both single and Coax copters on my drones are fun website.

    While it is a bit dated, I have to say that from my experience they all suffer from considerable difficulty dealing with wind and gusts, because of their relatively large side profile and the fact that their control surfaces simply slightly redirect the downward air blast, the ones I have seen tend to get blown around like leaves in the wind.

    Indoors or in no wind they maneuver adequately but slowly and it seems somewhat difficult to attain a forward angle of attack that permits relatively rapid forward travel.

    Although their hovering performance in a windless area can be better than average, their maneuvering performance in comparison to either a multicopter or helicopter seems pretty dismal and not easily correctable.

    Basically these have been reinvented and abandoned many times by now and I have seen no compelling reason that they have anything to offer that is better than the other solutions - including the one presented here.

    Nice looking if not particularly realistic simulation though.

    Best Regards,


  • I do not understand how torque will be compensated
    but why move the engine, if you can move the nozzle(casing) of the turbine?

    not the gyroscope effect, less stress on the servo

  • Actually Gary you only need three independently actuated vanes to control monocopters, of which I have built quite a few.

    They work decently, in fact quite well, if you are moderately capable and can design properly in hardware and implement basic nonlinear controls. Not saying that these people nescissarily qualify...

  • In order to get a monocopter to work at all you have to have 4 servo controlled vanes on the bottom (2 for a dual copter (counter rotating) in order to have any directional control and they still work like crap in any kind of windy or gusty situation, been there and gone 4 years ago.

    Simply, what you are showing might work in a simulator but it will absolutely not work in any useful or satisfactory method as real hardware.

    Cute simulation though, if only the real world actually worked like that - it doesn't.

    Best Regards,

    (I actually do know what I am talking about.)


  • Just FYI aerodynamic torque compensation has been around for a very long time (google "stator vanes").It is worth noting further that any static system can only compensate for torque at a single mass airflow rate, and that at all other points the system will produce yaw moments. (unless you are using a free wing system, though at that point you might as well have a more traditional monocopter control method)

  • By aerodynamic Torque Compensation thanks to a particular profile of the structure of the drone which is explained in the current patent.

  • Assuming that you want to make it into a physical platform how do you compensate the torque from the single propeller?

This reply was deleted.