Hello all,
Where to start... Well, My name is Justin, and aviation is my life. I grew up in a family with aviation in our heart and blood. Everyone in my family has been in some sort of aviation, whether it is Full scale helis, prop jobs, jets/airliners, hang gliders, or even home built aircraft. I solo'd at 18 yrs old with only 9 instructor hours, and continue to enjoy every aspect of aviation. I am currently serving in the USAF as an aircraft electrician, in order to finish my Aerospace engineering degree. (Which is not far from being complete!)
Onto the project!
The albatross UAV project came to me one night while laying in bed (so original isn't it?!). My goal was to provide a high grade, inexpensive UAV platform with unrivaled performance.
My goals?
A standard 4-6kg+ MTOW
Plenty of room for sensors, batteries, and equipment
Easy 1 hour flight times, and up to 4 hours (which is the goal... of course we can't be sure to initial flight tests)
Breakdown, and transportation ease!
Wide flight envelope
Sexy and appealing looks
Last but certainly not least, EFFICIENCY!
Airframe introduction.
The wing: The wing will have a wingspan of 3000mm, and wing area of 68.38dm^2 (in other words, 118" span, and 1060in^2). It consist of an optimized foil, and a forward swept planform. The foil is designed to ensure low stall speed, while maintaining a high max efficiency, and large cruise window. The wing planform Utilizes this foil nicely. It is a relatively high aspect wing with a ratio of 13.2. I have found that this moderate aspect ratio is preferred at RC Reynolds numbers for numerous reasons. an Aspect ratio of 12-15 allows for easier, and stronger wing structure, it allows for slightly higher Reynolds numbers, allowing airfoil's to work properly, over a wider speed range, and allows for easier built in retract, and or component bays. Obviously, we want to achieve all of the above, with minimal impact on performance. Of course a Higher AR wing would be more efficient, but at a significant cost (both in actual price, and giving up benefits.) The wing will be built with built in component bays, allowing for RC rx install in one wing, and Vtx install in the other. Not only does this allow for more room in the aircraft, but it allows for proper separation between Vtx and RC rx. The wing is forward swept, which helps minimize the chance of tip stalling while on approach with your UAV, which may as we all know, be overloaded. (there is nothing as horrible as losing your beloved UAV platform and equipment!). The downturned style tips aren't just for sex appeal, they actually reduce drag and tip vorticites, as well as decrease stall, while improving stability!
The Fuselage: The fuselage is designed around the user. It is designed to have plenty of usable storage space. Whats this mean? Well why would you have a tall narrow fuse? This not only makes is a huge PITA to work in, yet it limits how YOU want to lay out your components! The fuselage is approximately 740mm long, 150mm deep and 200mm wide. To avoid excessive fuselage/wing intersection drag and interference the fuselage is built in a slight trapezoidal shape, only to an extent that wouldn't hinder storage capacity to much. This translates into a fuselage with more usable space than the popular SkyHunter. I haven't mentioned efficiency yet. Lets not forget about that! The fuselage is actually a very efficient shape, minimizing the drag left behind. (even though it will only get chewed up by a prop...). It is also efficient in cooling. It will be designed with a NACA duct in the nose, which is a high pressure region. It will consist of an exhaust right above the motor, which is the lowest pressure region. think suck and blow. While creating a pressure differential it actually pulls air through the airframe keeping necessary components nice and cool.
Tail/s: The tail is an Inverted V design. Why? Simple really, an Inverted V improves efficiency while decreasing drag. It is also naturally more stable in a banked, and coordinated turn. The Inverted V allows for twin tail boom design, allowing for a large diameter prop. It also raises the ground clearance of the tail on landing and takeoff.
Breakdown and transportation: The number 1 reason for keeping airframes small is due to transportation and storage. The Albatross is designed to fit into a box no larger than .35m X .5m X 1m. In reality the case could be much smaller. How does it do this? The fuselage is 740mm X 200mm X 150mm, needless to say, it was designed within the required specifications. The wing is 3m long! However, it simply breaks into 3 1m long sections. The twin carbon-fiber tailbooms are 700mm each. The tail will be hinged at the center, and consist of two 440mm halves, allowing it to fold into one 440mm piece. Not only does this make it easy for the end user, but it reduce's shipping costs to your door. No more paying as much as 50% of your aircraft on shipping alone!
Goals:
My Short Term goal is to finish analysis and development. I am planning on starting a kickstarter to fund the initial molds and production costs. The current Design consists of a fiberglass fuselage, twin carbon fiber booms, and either a foam core/obeche covered wing, or an all built up wood wing. It will come with optional fuselage formers/inserts. These will be laser cut, allowing the builder the option of using them or not. These peices will consist of a retract mount (offset similar to an A-10c aircraft nose wheel, to allow for minimal effect on usable space) as well as numerous mounts and shalves for components and or batteries. Of course, as mentioned this will be up to the customer whether or not he/she will choose to install them. It also allows for some open source design in case anyone wants to improved upon, or create their own after market laser cut parts. This airframe would be available at a goal price of around $500 usd. This may or may not be achieved, but it is my GOAL. I consider this a reasonable goal considering similar aircraft such as Hobbykings UAV-3000 are capable of being produced around $300. I hope that my few added features are not enough to out-reach my goal.
Specs:
Albatross:
Wingspan; 3000mm
Wing Area; 68.38 dm^2
Root Chord; 300mm
Tip Chord; 160mm
Fuse Length; 740mm
Fuse (max) Width; 190mm
My Long Term Goal is a Albatross Pro version. The Albatross Pro will have a slightly enlarged fuselage, more wing area, higher MTOW, change in airfoil, fully molded wings and tail, and more precise construction. These changes would increase MTOW, and cruise speed/efficiency to a more specified range. It would also consist of a few ease of operation features such as built in Cannon-plug style connections for easy quick-disconnect assembly. This means that when you take off the wing, there is no servo connection to fumble with. It would also consist of some ease of assembly mods such as quick disconnect wings, booms, and tail, requiring no tools to use. (Think, Crutch/cane style push button. This would be located under the flaps.)
Specs:
Albatross Pro:
Wingspan; 3000mm
Wing Area; 75.216 dm^2
Root Chord; 330mm
Tip Chord; 185mm
Fuse Length; 890mm
Fuse (max) Width; 230mm
Here is a more in-depth design log on my RCG account. The wing planform, and laminar foil research was originally from a previous project, before I realized its potential in FPV/UAV. Although the introduction of my UAV/FPV platform is fairly new, a lot (many years worth) of prior personally research has been incorporated.
I am currently in communication with a few different OEM manufacturers for an initial Hobby version, and a long term Pro Version. If you know of, or you are another OEM manufacturer feel free to contact me! It would be much appreciated!
Please, feel free to comment, discuss, and provide constructive criticism! After all, this is my first post on DIY Drones, so please be nice!
Comments
I'm not going to put spam on your page
In the comments to your article there is a lot of links to other models and it is not considered as spam
Please accept my apologies and I wish you the best. Sorry about it
Alex
In the mean time, I want to remain transparent with everything going on with this project. Some of you may wonder why I have selected to "approve" all comments. I selected this option, not to screen negative comments, but to keep discussion on topic. Before this time, I have approved every comment. I am sorry to say I blocked my first two. They were bot spam attacks from Alex. His page is: http://diydrones.com/profile/Alex541
In response to Alex, I have supported Esprit in many of my hobby needs. I have spent thousands on sailplanes and pylon planes. Whether it be airframes, parts, etc Esprit was always in my top 3. The other being SUSA, and Skip Miller. Needless to say I am very disappointed toee you spamming a development thread for a product which isn't even on the market yet. I am sure your aircraft will be awesome, but this is not the time or place to spam away. Your two comments have been deleted, and I have remained transparent.
If anyone is interested in his product please visit his page or PM him for info. This is not the place.
Thanks guys!
I try to summarize the competition for your project. Not to discourage you, but to help your project succeed. The list is sorted by price:
Additions to this list are welcome.
Not considered competititors are:
Concerning landing gear: I agree it is good to have the option. Our experience is that for this size aircraft it does not help. It adds weight, complexity and deteriorates aerodynamics. Starting and landing on a large greenfield is easier than on a runway, as you need less precision and can better adjust to the wind. Greenfields are better available than runways. If you don't want to throw the aircraft, bungee works just fine and proved to be the most reliable launch method.
Note that the Windex is not a retrofitted sailplane, but designed as a motorglider. It has been used by a team for the UAV Outback Challenge.
My conclusion is that there might be a market niche for your project. You are competing with a hand full of other airframes. You must provide and point out clear advantages to enter the market.
When will the Albatross hobby version be for sale? I would very much like to order one :)
Wayne, I would definitely be interested in at least talking! I have a passion for aircraft design, and when I am not flying rc, full scale, or racing karts and motos, I am usually designing (including suspension for mountainbikes and dirt-moto's). I would love your insight and knowledge as you have already made a very successful product, which admittedly is a bit of inspiration via your Kickstarter success and all. This being said I would love to at least have a few conversations, and see where it goes!
Dustin, These specific renderings are XFLR5. I was using a few other programs until my student licenses ran out. On the bright side XFLR5 is accurate (enough) for the most part. It does struggle with some situations and scenarios, as well as fuselage/wing intersections. It is really best for designing foils and wing planforms. On the bright side, even with minimal processing and fuselage analysis, you can get results that are close, at least close enough to consider a project promising. XFLR5 is currently used to design many of the top Competition sailplanes, including 2m, 3m, DLG's and even Dynamic soaring gliders.
Very nice. I wish you the best of luck. What program are you using to design analyze the wing and fuselage? I have experimented with Xflr5 but it's better suited for sailplanes. I'm looking for more powered flight data.
BTW for the record, the cyclops is a direct unauthorized copy of the original techpod design.
Yes, this is where we're at with this - both a glider and a quadcopter because a minimum of 30 minutes is needed. The difficulty, and why I'm imagining carrying the glider up, is launch and retrieval from a small zodiac.. seems landing and takeoff might be difficult, I have no idea how difficult this is. I'm not so concerned about inefficiency with quad, it would basically go straight up, drop the glider, and come back down to change batteries and get ready to venture out again. And then of course there's landing.. the quad used to catch the glider in a net? Seems like I need to know more about gliders. Thanks for the insight, lets keep in touch. I too have a Kickstarter project and I'm using 3D printed fuselages, open sourcing the design, there's probably some synergy here.
Andrew, having grown up in Monterey California, and doing a lot of diving in my adult life, I feel that UAV's are a perfect idea for wildlife tracking.
Rather than a quad dropping a glider, as this is both inefficient and heavy, It may be a good idea to have a high performance UAV that can loiter for 2 hours or more. The Fixed wing UAV can track, locate, and loiter above your target (being whales), and then you can proceed to send in a multi to get close, and more stable footage.
-
10
-
11
-
12
-
13
-
14
of 14 Next