By 

With the number of multi-rotor drone concepts competing for a narrow market share, you really need a unique selling point if you want to get your project off the ground. In the case of the developers of the Cargo Unmanned Air System (UAS), their point of difference is to claim a massive 60 kg (132 lb) lift capacity for their proof of concept, with the promise of an eventual production unmanned aerial vehicle that can carry payloads of up to 400 kg (880 lb) with automated "sense and avoid" capability.

The UAS team envisage that items such as mail and parcels, food and water, or even medical supplies and emergency equipment could all be delivered more quickly and securely than is possible with ground transport. As such, they argue that the increasing overcrowding on highways could be avoided using such a system but, more importantly, they believe that in emergency situations such as floods where existing road infrastructure has been damaged or is otherwise impassable, their UAS could be deployed to deliver medical supplies or food to stranded people.

Full article here: Cargo UAS

Views: 2572

Comment by Euan Ramsay on July 26, 2014 at 2:41am

As someone who's designing a package to lift 15kg (I'll be testing a 5kg version next month), I do wonder how they plan to build a MR that can lift 60-400kg but still fit into "cluttered" airspace such as streets.

And it'll be *really* expensive, given it will exceed the upper weight limits of SUAV's in most countries, requiring full certification and pilot licences.

Comment by Euan Ramsay on July 26, 2014 at 2:49am

LOL - I like the ideal of scaling...yeah, lets just "select and drag" within CAD! yeah, we can carry 400kg now! 

God, I really hate some the implausible crap that comes out of kickstarter.


Admin
Comment by Thomas J Coyle III on July 26, 2014 at 7:34am

@Euan,

Your comments are the main reason that I posted this blog.

I believe that this project is really a "pie in the sky" effort and I will be really surprised if it is ever completed at a price point that even commercial ventures would be willing to pay.

Regards,

TCIII ArduRover2 Developer

Comment by Jakey Boy on July 28, 2014 at 5:05am

Unfortunately the guy in question is neither credible nor reliable. Myself and a colleague invested some money into a company which he was a part of a few months ago. He ripped us off and is now using the prototype that we funded to look for further investment through KickStarter. He's been reported.

Comment by Euan Ramsay on July 28, 2014 at 5:06am

Actually, X8 is not that inefficient, if you compensate with a bigger disc area. You still lose efficiency through the coaxial setup, but you benefit from the larger useable disc area of a quad (assuming overall size is constant).

But agree on everything else.

Comment by Euan Ramsay on July 28, 2014 at 5:08am

Oh dear Jakey. Hope you didn't lose too much. This is one of the reasons I avoid kickstarter.

Comment by Hans H. on July 28, 2014 at 5:19am

Design Objectives: Deliver heavy loads long distances.

Design Decisions:

1. Propellers with three blades to get worse efficiency.
2. Selecting 8X frame to get worse efficiency.
3. Covering 20% of the rotor surface to get worse efficiency.
4. Propellers are high up and the payload far down. Hint: a multicopter is not a boat and dont need a keel.
5. The little "wings"? By tilting the craft forward, the wings angled downward?
6. The engines can not tilt. The propeller will hit the wing.
7. Let the CAD-model have cool carbon fiber look!

Perfect it looks great!

Results: Small payload, short flight time and stability like a drunken sailor.

Comment by Euan Ramsay on July 28, 2014 at 5:32am

8. Use the smallest battery compartment possible, to ensure both low capacity, and poor inaccessibility.

Comment by Rob_Lefebvre on July 28, 2014 at 7:46am

CAD is getting so good, it's getting really hard to distinguish from an actual photo of a prototype, or a photorendering pasted onto a background.

I've seen another case where somebody is trying to sell an aerial platform that, as far as I know, has never actually been built.

Comment by Hans H. on July 28, 2014 at 9:31am

Maximization of "buzz words" and a drawing in CAD. Now looking for investors.
(ok they have a prototype without any of them special features that are promised. Like payload.)

The engine technology will apparently be petrol / disel generator and batteries... if they succeed, it is a world first for RC ... and generator will also be doubled up for fail-safe. yes... about that ...

It will also handle "multi engine failure". How? For each engine that fails they lose 25% lift (the one that is broken and the one that is counter rotating, diagonally opposite).

Coaxial engines have minimum 20% in losses in the RC context. Sure, the Russians have a turbo-prop planes with higher efficiency but it is not in RC context. Perhaps it is one more "worlds first".

Comment

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

Join DIY Drones

Groups

Season Two of the Trust Time Trial (T3) Contest 
A list of all T3 contests is here. The current round, the Vertical Horizontal one, is here

© 2018   Created by Chris Anderson.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service