Slightly evolved airframe form factor

Views: 2386

Comment by Mark Omo on April 18, 2016 at 11:03pm

Love the Nerf dart on the pitot tube at 1:10

Comment by Maxime C on April 19, 2016 at 3:05am

Even Google folks are leaning toward double motor set for VTOL designs. I cannot understand why tilting motor are not preferred.

Comment by Paul Meier on April 19, 2016 at 4:11am

I understand double motors to be much more efficient, because you can optimise engines and props for vertical lift (short term) and forward flight (long term)


Moderator
Comment by Gary Mortimer on April 19, 2016 at 5:03am

That's a very old video Alex, the N numbers on the wings might have outed who makes them for Google.

http://www.suasnews.com/2016/04/updated-project-wing-video-google/

I wonder if its Pixhawk inside, looks like radios we know outside.

Comment by Rob_Lefebvre on April 19, 2016 at 6:51am

Interesting article Gary.

For note, gasoline is not more efficient than electric.  It's the increased energy density that matters.  About 5-10 times that of a LiPo battery.  There is no plausible battery technology on the market, or even in the lab, that will close that gap.  Battery energy density has been virtually stalled for many years.

Cost is also a huge factor.  The gasoline motor in my 800 heli costs $300.  It uses $2 in fuel per hour.  You just keep pouring it in, and pulling the cord.  Getting this heli to fly 1 hour was trivial.  Bolt on a couple extra fuel tanks at $10/each.

By contrast, I have an electric 800 heli.  The motors and ESC's are about $3-400.  So that doesn't change much.  However, each set of batteries cost $1000.  And it's a challenge to get to 1 hour of flight (But can do it, with a 1kg payload).

Comment by Maxime C on April 19, 2016 at 7:13am

@Paul
Yes the main pros are there. But Tilt rotor and thrust vectoring allows perching smoothly, will see applications in disaster recovery I believe.

@Rob
Talking about power density, fuel cells have a better power density in weight and a larger power density in volume (compared to gasoline). This is not before a few years for DIY drones, but 4-hours flight time has been demonstrated in early April : http://en.mmcuav.com/news_view.aspx?TypeId=4&Id=457&Fid=t2:4:2


Moderator
Comment by Gary Mortimer on April 19, 2016 at 10:14am

@Rob, yes I did'nt put that very well. Was just in a rush to get out the news of who made them really. No doubt tomorrow it will be discovered in all sorts of other places, but you heard it first ;-) We really have been trying to find out about that company, 444 N registered airframes is not to be sniffed at. So cool that Tridge, CanberraUAV and the Ardupilot.org devs have made it possible for mere mortals like me to play in this game as well.

Comment

You need to be a member of DIY Drones to add comments!

Join DIY Drones

© 2019   Created by Chris Anderson.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service