DIY Drone joint venture platform

Hi there.

This being my first post and all please bear with me.

Having read through an number of posts on airframes for armature UAV's i'm left a bit baffled.
I do understand that some people are more into electronics and software than building airframes but i find it quite odd that a modified Easystar seems to be the "donor" plane of choice.

I know that the mods are endless and there's even a guy that writes about building and selling Easystar carbon fuselages here but from what i can tell the fuselage and the fact that ailerons are not standard
is the Achilles heel of the Easystar.

Obviously threes no reason to reinvent the wheel so i was thinking along the lines of combining the wings of something like a "BMI Arrow", "AXN Floater jet" or "Dynam Hawksky" (they are all Easystar type planes

but with ailerons) with the fuselage of something like "Penguin-B UAV" or "Team Javelin" which should basically result in a platform as stable as the Easystar but with a lot more room and freedom for payload placement.

Anyways... My point being (although a bit obscured). How about a joint venture. There's loads of brilliant people with tons of experience in here. Why not define a "standard" DIY Drone platform that will suit the majority of projects?

Please let me know you thoughts.

Lets get a list of requirements together and see what happens.

Kindest Regards


E-mail me when people leave their comments –

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

Join diydrones


  • Developer
    @Hooks, Thanks very much.
  • Moderator
    The building thread are deleted, but the smaller Hugin platform thread are here.

  • Developer
    Hooks, look super. I remember you having a long discussion thread about your design months ago. can you provide a link back to your project ?
  • Moderator


  • Moderator
    Well the reality of a universal bigger airframe would be that it would probably have to be made traditionally as not everyone has access to foam cutters or CNC machines. Probably the best simple flying wing that has come by here is Jarons one.

    To make a twin boom we would need to find a plan for a biggish aileron trainer wing and add a box to it at the correct measurements.

    Deciding on what size that box is to be would cause the greatest argument!!
  • Admin
    Hi Stig,

    I was going to say "here we go again", but I figured that someone else would point that out. It seems that most of the threads that start out discussing a "do all" design never get into the air so to speak. There was a very promising thread on RC Groups started by Gemma Jane, but it died earlier this year and Gemma appears to have lost interest.

    I have flown numerous EZ*s with and without ailerons and enlarged rudders. I also have two modified Twinstar IIs one which has landing gear attached to it. However the model that comes closest to your vision of a universal drone is the Maja. Ya, I know it cost about $330 USD, but it has tremendous heavy lift capability and Borjet has brought out landing gear for the Maja making it easier to get into the air. I have both the Maja and the landing gear kits and plan to put them together over Christmas break. The Maja is not for a beginner and requires extensive effort and rework to ge it into the air. However I believe that it is the best way to go for a heavy lift model other than the Twinstar II.

    Just a thought.

  • okay I'm going to be in the very (Very, very ) small minority here but I think designing a new airframe for uavs is a good idea.

    I just feel you should go farther then what’s been said here.

    UAV design is based more on what manned aircraft look like then what really works beast and that bugs me. Why not go with a box wing design instead of the norm mid wing and tail design.

    1) It gives you more wing area for a size of the crafts foot print, allowing it to be a smaller aircraft all around.
    2) Having forward and aft wings smoothes out the pitching caused turbulent winds making a much more balanced craft.
    3) The design gives you larger control surfaces.
    4) It has naturally stronger wing structure.

    I know I’m not anywere close to the norm on this site but it just makes more sense to use what works best instead of what people are used to.
  • No idea how much you've delved into the RC flying community (sans drone/autopilots), but IMHO this community is sorta like an organic extension of that.

    There are lots of airframes and styles, and there will always be many. The best systems and accesssories (TX/RX, servos, ESC's, motors, Autopilots...) are those that can adapt to different models/setups/flying styles.

    As you say theres a lot of vets here with a lot of experience, but do you think its fair to ask them all to go out and buy a standard airframe? (esp if its not what they're used to flying or what they want to fly)

    And afterwards, say that we (as a community) shows there is a much higher demand for one specific model of RC plane. I think its reasonable to say we'll see a pretty good price hike as resellers catch on.

    What do you mean by 'joint venture'? It sounds like instead of you going through and choosing an airframe and motors/etc, you get the vets here to do that and have them buy the same setup.

    PS that pic looks a lot like Michigan's AUVSI carbon fiber beast.
  • Stig: that would be my very generic advice for all these types of projects. Make sure you don't over design on the front end. It's all too easy to over design the project and try to include the requirements and whims of every poster on the internet .... and thus could never be built in a human life time (or might even be impossible to build.) Pick realistic goals. I've always felt that a successful project will find a good balance between thoughtful design and forward progress. Not enough of either element, and the project will wither away.
This reply was deleted.