Does this look familiar?
Go Discover FPV Plane, and in Australia store!! $150 bucks
.jpg)
The Go Discover was designed from the start to be a great FPV platform with a massive center bay, straight forward layout and superb, predictable, yet sporty, flight characteristics.
What makes the Go Discover stand out is the integrated pan and tilt system in the nose, giving an un-obstructed bird’s eye view of the world below. The pan and tilt system uses 2 gear driven engagements for a smooth solid camera platform. The pan and tilt system was designed to perfectly house a GoPro 1, 2, 3 or 3+ as well as any other board or cube FPV camera with an easy swappable back mounting plate, all housed behind a clear acrylic dome. The front dome provides a great view, while protecting your FPV gear.
Comments
A few issues with the GoDiscover. basically its a really good platform very let down by the supplied hardware. Number 1 is the prop adapter. PLASTIC mine let a blade go and it ripped out the motor. For just a few more bucks HK should be supplying metal.
The servos are really cheap and nasty I ripped the wing ones out and replaced those, but the ones in the very well designed Pan/Tilt are another matter. even with a lightweight card camera mine stripped its gears on a slightly firm landing. The clever overload protection disign was stronger that the plastic gears in the servo. Now the problem is the none standard splines. I have none that fit so have had to replace the whole pan/tilt unit. The ESC is supposed to be 40amp as 4S Max load at WOT on mine was 27 amps but it still overheated and I only just scraped home. I've written to HK about this but get no real response. don't waste your money on the ARF version get the kit and use your own electrics. Especially NEVER fly with the plastic prop hub otherwise a very good model
Hi guys! I'm part of the RVJET design team and we try to help anyone if they have questions or comments about the model. I don't know who the designers of HKGD is but would be very interesting to discuss with them since the design requirements seem to have been extremely similar.
Anyway, here's a comparison video of the different domes that Vova did. I don't have any flight comparison data yet:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5Rinayhyw4
The last few years i have been helping to educate model pilots and model instructors and we have noticed a definite change in the general level of understanding of modellers when it comes to how a aircraft actually works. My general comment is that a mini is similar to a volvo still stands, they both have wheels so it stands to reason that they must be the same, of course i get shot down! Take the fullsize world and glider towing or crop dusting. How many of those aircraft look similar? Most of them have a similar layout because they had the same design objectives, so it stands to reason that the final designs will be somewhat similar to look at from a distance and it is the trained eye up closer that picks the difference. For the majority to understand more about how their aircraft work would make things much safer in many areas! Alot of model instructors in australia 5 or so years ago wouldn't have been able to answer the question of what is the CAUSE of a wing to stall? Ok so how many said speed? I am guessing more than a few, answer is it does NOT depend on speed! If you exceed the critical angle of attack your wing will stall no matter how fast or slow you go!
The last 5 or so years there has been a big change in the way we educate instructors, most now at least have access to the right information. All of my students get a basic understanding of aerodynamics during their initial training period weather they like it or not. Funnily enough the next few years they keep coming back to ask questions and further their knowledge which i could not ask for more. I guess it must just be me seeing something wrong!!! Or maybe i need to go see my optometrist for better glasses so all my models can look the same!!!!
Personally i would go for the RVJET, for me it has a lot to offer, however for some cheaper "fun" the go discover certainly would be high on the list of candidates!
Again i didn't mean any disrespect to anyone! But it is an interesting debate for sure! So for gramma and spelling, doing this on the phone aint so easy!
Hmm, having flown as a passenger SFO-FRA-SFO many times in 747s and now twice in A380s I think I'd be hard pressed to find among the crowds on board someone who has flown in both who can cite a substantive difference between the two. Except for the few people who know something about airplanes, to whom they are totally different. Steve is right, to the untrained eye things appear the same when they are not - just as our "drones" are equated by the press and "public" to deadly gunships careening through the skies, peering into bedroom windows when they're not launching Hellfire missiles at nursery schools and hospitals. Which makes as much sense as equating a Ford Focus to an Abrams tank, or for that matter not seeing the obvious substantial differences between the RVJET and the HK wing (neither of which is a patentable, let alone groundbreakingly innovative, design). Oh and by the way, Ground Hog Day and Valentines day are really the same thing because they're both in February. Let's debate that.
Disclaimer: I too buy some things from HK and make no bones about it and I think there may be an undercurrent of HK-bashing in this thread (beginning with its title). For some of us who have been playing around with electric aircraft for more than a half-dozen years or so, Hobby King earned their name when they made the hobby affordable by blowing up the LiPo market. We were paying upwards of $75 for a 3S 2200 mah LiPo when HK more than quartered that price.They've done the same to some other components, and there are lots of people in the business who don't like that at all. Tsk tsk. (And please don't anyone belabor us with more horror stories about shipping and support, those can be told about every single large retailer from Amazon on down.)
@Steve: Great rant but a bit too harsh about non-builders categorically not understanding aerodynamics etc. That's one way to gain the knowledge, sure, but there are many others, including spending all available time flying, not building. See world-class hyper-aware musicians, racecar drivers, ship captains, pilots, ski jumpers, etc. etc. for examples. Among such you will find people who know at least as much and often more about the whys and wherefores of the behavior of their instruments, vehicles, tools etc. than any builder.
@swift @Artem It flies pretty nice but I haven't put any equipment in yet. One of the first things I did probably inspired by the HK promo was to barrel roll it a few times on an assent. I think I might have even gotten it tighter than in the video. Definitely and fun wing to fly. Has pretty nice stall characteristics imho. Feels a little more solid in the air that the Phantom FX61 which I also fly a lot.
P.S. it is not always about how thing look.
@ Artem, no not at all. By my logic it is immediately recognizable as a "copy" of the RVJET - that's why we're having this debate. The A380 does have two wings and two levels, but beyond that and four engines it shares even fewer features with the 747 than all the other passenger airliners out there. You could make more of a case for the 777 and the A330, but so much design water has flown under the bridge before they were both designed, it's a debatable case even now.
Suggesting that the RVJET shares similarities with the X8 beyond being a flying wing design suggests you have some malfunction with your aesthetic judgement or your spectacle prescription.
@ Andrew
not slightly, the idea - definitely a copy, but implementation is their own, with your logic rvjet is an improved copy of x8. and a380 is a copy of b747-400 you see 2 stories, 2 wings...
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 5 Next