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

Join diydrones


  • OK,that makes sense for a simple platform with no camera stabilization.





  • T3

    The key is to have high wing loading anyway in order to minimize turbulence effect in real photomapping job.

    The ideal photomapping tool is not really RC plane and you cannot get away from bungee or catapult.

    Even if you can takeoff from hand with say 3kg MTOW, you might want to have roll stabilisation and more endurance for agriculture and forestry (given the number of legs, 45min endurance is a few, typically you need 60-120min PLUS large safety margins for everything including endurance or else you fly 1x1km missions max).

    With RC model, the difference between a map in very good weather (2m/s, sunny and no thermals) and average result in average weather (thermals or 6m/s wind) is that you cannot stitch the second case because teh photos are left and right and the overlap is random. Hence the wing loading, endurance for extra leg overlap, preferably some sort of stabilization.

    There is expensive software that doesn't cares, but this is not an option for agriculture and forestry, but rather for cons site documentation, DSM and urban planning.

  • Looks pretty cool.

    It looks like it has a pretty high wing loading (high stall peed), judging by the way it lands.

    This makes it hard to get above stall speed when hand-launching and when you power the motor bellow the stall-speed, the motor torque tends to take over and make it go into spin. I experienced this recently.


    This brings me to another point. They obviously designed it to be a compact system but doesn't having to have its own launch system defeated the purpose of making it compact? They could just make the plane slightly bigger, conventional, and not have to mess with the launch stand? 

  • Nice presentation but defiantly not something that going to last a considerable time in the field.  I could see large use of this for oilfield applications (similar to my line of work) but some sort of landing net might be a better idea.  I do understand their problems tho, front facing and downward facing cameras are always a little more risky especially since the lens seems to double as the landing skid on this one!  None the less a beautiful design and excellent software support (for the image side anyways).
  • Looks like the Ricoh has a GH-2 hood and a UV filter over the lens.  Still should have something to protect it from the belly skid landings
  • T3
    Yes. This was intentionally put coloured. Antenna is a synonymous of something unmanned, wireless and hitech.
  • Did anyone notice that the first thing he did after popping the case open was cross thread the antenna?
  • T3

    190.pdf on their webpage

    published in

    page 76

    18 november 2010


    Rendabel in 2012

    blah blah

    600.000 euro kapitall bij besinessangels, blah blah


    Interesting point is their rentability in 2012 is quite well thought.

    Setting it for 2013 would open eyes as there is End of World scheduled for end 2012, Muslim uprising dec 24th 2011 and Chinese flu v2 in February 2012.


  • Hi, is there a reference for their venture capital somewhere? I know some companies in the business that "burned" money in a similar way. There seem to be people still believing in the nice presentations those startups show when asking for the cash ... Of course much is government/official money...

    Regarding the export problems. By choosingn micropilot they get the trouble doubled... First they have to get it from Canada to Belgium (where the company seems to be). Then they have to take care of export regulations for UAV systems when they sell it both regarding belgian rules for the system and canadian for the AP. Sounds like a burocratic nightmare..  And as Mauro said, 50k without the processing software...

    It´s just not the "killer application" yet...  Let´s find that and you could make money :-)

  • T3

    @Rory, What worries me is that we have addressed all the technical issues the startups are experiencing and rich countries spend kilotons on rich noobs in their countries.

    This is centrally governed economy, the landmark of fallen communist economy.

    To be honest, US is worse since I cannot even go there without a visa so I assume they don't even allow liberty of movement similar to USSR. I know what I am talking about, maybe my country has some uneducated politicians and citizens, but we can detect sinking political systems from 100.000 miles.

    Those guys had some 600KEUR venture capital!

    And even then, instead of 4WD pickup they took a black van ;-)


    Considering the price, REMEMBER the processing tools ARE costly. There are a few good PhD for years behind all those tools. So at the end 50-100KUSD system is not a bad thing (but there are 2-3 times less expensive alternatives).

    The key question is:

    how cheap do you think should it be to make an innovative business in a difficult yet profitable market?

    less than your house to make a global leader position?

    less than your car to make countrywide services?

    less than your refrigerator to startup a local business after studies?


    Gatweing partial partlist:

    RICOH GR digital with GH-2 lenses

    Ultramat 14-Plus

    Trimble YUMA portable


    The weakest point is autopilot: they need export license to some extent, they only way to stock autopilot if you are not the maker is to buy a lot for local research, if quick order comes, you integrate 'research' ones and buy more on the name of the client. You ship same day when the batch for the client arrives, but the 'research' autopilot is already integrated so you dispatch it immediately. This is why they need large capital, stock, stockholders, then a lot of media mess and price is a result.


    Note that catapult is not necessarily and indication of invert-malicious autopilot (but I know you know Micropilot). It looks better and we have it on Pteryx for repeatibility. Also we tend to fly heavier with 1.5kg batteries onboard, sometimes.


    Processing time is a few days, but the question is if the shaky platform can guarantee that.

    The approach is, you get a fiels 2x2km. Then you need overlap in both directions shoudl the wind come. You need extre 50% endurance for the wind. A parachute will help landing in the plantation or small football field. Stab camera woudl help to guarantee overlap. Catapult guarantees strong push even if you are tired adn sweating. The approach is to have 200% more everything (current,amps, endurance, range, visibility) and then you can operate day by day with occasional mishap - at this point the platform must have mechanical failsafes in order to reduce repair time. The Gatewing approach is what? Replace air platform? Meticulous electronics checklist after platform integration is not feasible in the field! It is not a rocket science to do, exept when bugs are hiding in your T-shirt.

This reply was deleted.