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

Join diydrones


  • i was wrong, i read the entire thread (very long) about the 128 minutes reached by a guy with 120cm diagonal carbon fiber essential drone. i apologize for my previous message.

  • There are mistakes in my posts, a few above this one.  Where I said 2s and 3s packs, I meant to say 2p and 3p packs.  So, they offered a 12.2AH 6s3p pack.  That's 36.6AH.  Who knows, for that record indoor hover with no payload, they may have added an additional battery.   

  • it seems to me really too much 88 minutes of hovering. I can not understand how could they reach 88 minutes when the size (diameter) is the same of the DJI S1000 while the S1000 has 15 minutes of flight time (without payload).

    the flight time depends on the efficiency of each component:

    -the battery must be a lipo and the technical evolution of this battery is known and common between drones (you can go down to a 10-15C maximum to increase efficiency of battery, but nothing more).

    -the motors can be more efficient, ok, but with my Tmotors i can not achieve more than 30 minutes hovering, and they are really efficient.

    -the frame should be light, and the S1000 is carbon fiber, and it is really well studied, even if the junctions increases the weight but, HERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 5 TIMES THE AUTONOMY OF S1000 and 3 TIMES THE AUTONOMY OF MY HEXACOPTER WITH SELECTED COMPONENTS.


    I think they are not honest, or there is something technical that i'm missing.

    the fact that it's a quadcopter or a octocopter should not change the autonomy of a multicopter. do you agree with me? i think that it should be the same, if it is well dimensioned, even if i read that someone thinks that with octocopter you can achieve longer flight time than quaqdcopter.

    anyway i want to fly 88 minutes. where is the trick in this drone?

  • Here's one example:

    One would infer up to 88 minutes with a 2s battery pack, however the 88 minute flight was achieved with a 3s pack (indoors and with no payload).  In the real world you're going to see 30 - 35 minutes with an Nex-7 hung underneath.

    In my experience, Stefan's observation is spot on.  I would add that "Pilot error" is a standard response whenever anything goes wrong.

  • MD is a German company, specialized on government sales. German authorities, such as police, usually don't negotiate. They just buy what they need and if they need spare parts, they buy them.

    Once you (as a supplier) are in, prices and service don't matter, so usually, German companies which are specialized on government sales have fantasy-prices and no customer-service mentality whatsoever.

    Usually, their motto is "eat or die" - "if you don't like our way, go somewhere else".

  • Don, what exactly do you mean by "loose with their claims"?

  • I have a bit of experience with the MD4-1000.  It doesn't use either of those motors, rather custom Plettenberg's.  In 2011, motors were 795 Euros (each!) from microdrones.  The batteries are 6s.  Back then, they offered a 2s 12.2 AH and a 3s 18.3 AH.  The 2s was 1,460 Euros, can't remember the price of the 3s.  Spare blades were 229 Euros each.  It is very expensive to crash one!  MD is very loose with their claims.

  • I have something already which can hover in a room with no payload for... well more than 24 hours anyway...  it's called a balloon.

    I don't really understand why there's this desire to make these machines which can simply hover for a long time while ignoring every other flight performance measure.

  • What about this 3 blade propellers?

    Teorically 2 blade props have more efficiency wright?

    Why they use them?

  • 140g difference on 8 motors...starts to be quite a nice piece of battery actually!

This reply was deleted.