What do you think could be in this Trex450-style copter that could make it worth $50,000?
From Robots.net:
This small helicopter is called Inceptor and it is the latest product of Insitu, the innovative company behind ScanEagle that is now owned by Boeing. Inceptor weighs only 3.5lbs and fits into a police car trunk. It has an electric motor with swappable lithium polymer batteries. It can fly for around 24min, take-off and land autonomously, navigate and hover via waypoints and also controlled semi-autonomously through a touchscreen. The integrated flight control system is aFCS20 provided by Adaptive Flight Inc.
One can learn to operate it in a few hours and it provides electro-optic or IR imaging immediately even during adverse weather conditions and wind gusts. Video imagery is transmitted to the handheld ground control station and distributed to decision makers for real-time viewing. It flies below 500ft and within line of sight (as dictated by the FAA-issued certificate of authorization).
Inceptor will enter a developing but still very niche market sector that is mostly dominated by quadcopters. Prototypes are already flying and initially it will be available only for US public agencies at a cost of around $50.000. Selected law-enforcement customers will test it soon.
Comments
There was a lot of hoopla years ago about $500 hammers and that sort of thing. It all seemed to flare up and go away. Then, my son just told me about a requistion that passed through his hands for a $2,000 toilet seat (for an airplane, not the Space Shuttle). I don't know if that $2,000 seat has the commode attached, but any way you slice it, something seems out of whack. I guess we're all too busy keeping our jobs to fight the good fight and try to get some control on government spending.
Hey, this is Boeing, I bet they really wanted $80,000 !
The processors (DSP too) are way more advanced than AT1280, but the comm link is about the same, I hope it is robust. The weak link is the freshly trained operators.
Who will get to try these? I would like to watch the first missions, Could be interesting!
In my experience helicopters handle wind much better then multicopters. You also get more efficient lift, resulting in longer flight times and more payload. The main problems with helicopters are vibrations and lots of failure points because of the complicated mechanics. And from a DIY standpoint there is also the cost of parts.
And I have to agree with Toby. There is no way you can compare the cost of a DIY hobbyist project with a commercial one where every man hour has to be payed for. Especially when we are talking about a niche product meant for use in the government sector where safety and documentation requirements are insane.
My guess is expect to pay more than $50,000 for a useful system. Note the "contact us for configurations" wording on the brochure.
Why a heli instead of a multicopter? Collective pitch = better control. A multicopter could certainly work, but if you started designing this a few years ago, a heli is what you would pick.
It's really cool that the small heli resembles the big helis UAVs. However, I can't think of any reason to use a heli instead of a multicopter for this size/application. Any insights?
Planning for QE5
Those numbers versus that solution is WAY out!
Look at it! It's little more than an APM, CCD camera and Ardu in a 450 heli frame!
If thats the result of twelve man years then that's depressing.
Every $20k solution ive seen is hypet matre, truly inventive or somehow worthwhile. Dont get me wrong, I dont think $20k is a lot in 2011, but thats an APM in a fancy case and a 500% markup....
Wow ... how they can fly 40minutes with a conventional HELI ?
i have some class450, 2 class 600 and one class90 and never fly more than 20minutes ever in hover .
can any one Xplain ?
its easy, add up all the hours that have gone into developing the APM platform and times it by maybe $200 an hour. Then add up all the hours building and tuning it to work on a specific platform and times them by $200.
Then add up all the hours spent filing and negotiating the certificate of authorization and times that by $200 as well. $200 is a common internal charge out rate for specialists in corporates.
Then add up the cost of providing support and training for however long you get for free as part of the price.
Then take that total amount and divide it by the number of units you think you can sell.
Then work out the cost of building each unit and add that on.
Then add all that up and add in a margin.
If it took a team of 12 people a year then thats 25,000 man hours to design, build and get certification for.
12 might seem a lot, but you have managers, specialists, lawyers and a sales team etc, it soon adds up.
On those numbers that would cost Boeing $5million dollars in labour and resources to build it.
Lets say they think they can sell 150 of them then thats $33,000 per unit it dev cost.
At a $50,000 price tag then they have to sell 100 of them just to break even.
I'm not defending the price, but I am saying that its impossible to compare a model where we provide our labour for free against a corportate model where ever second of work costs real money.
Now, if they could sell 30,000 of then the dev cost is only $166 so it becomes a consumable item.
Its all basic economics 101, supply and demand.
The reality is, that on a global economic scale, the demand for these things is not massive, its not a consumer device, so the price is going to reflect that.
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next