This multirotor has the ability to go full 3D flight at an amazing speed. It is going to revolutionize the multirotor world.


  • Unique Fully Aerobatic Quad
  • Higher performance 3D flight capable
  • Stable and smooth beginner flight
  • Includes TG-Multi flight control
  • Durable and simple VP design
  • Pre-painted clamshell body set



Specifications: Span: 490mm (diagonal rotor to rotor) Blades: 110mm Frameset: 85% carbon and metal design Drive System: Single Motor

  • Frameset (metal, carbon, plastic)
  • TG-Multi flight control (upgradable, used in VP Quads, Helicopters)
  • Blades (4 sets)
  • Pre-Painted Body Set

Needed to Complete:

  • 4S 2200 - 3000mAh 30C+ Battery
  • 6 Channel Transmitter & Receiver
  • (4) Servos - High Performance Digital Servos (0.8 sec/60° @ 6V minimum)
  • 45A ESC w/5A BEC
  • 3000kV / 390W Motor



Views: 6733

Comment by Jason Wise on December 9, 2013 at 5:27am

Curtis has been developing this MR over the last 12mths so it isnt 'new news'

Comment by Christiaan van Vollenstee on December 9, 2013 at 5:30am

Well its pretty new to me, and I like it.

Comment by Euan Ramsay on December 9, 2013 at 6:03am

Interestings, but for video rigs, I suspect pilots will want the pitch control automated, and focused towards the supposed improvements in stability during windy conditions.

Would be good if pixhawk (or even APM) was able to optimise pitch control on a second by second basis to give new modes such as "stabilise - economy" and "stabilise - performance".

ie a bit like a car engine ECU, which tries to run the fuel mixture as lean as possible to increase fuel economy. The APM/Pixhawk would try to vary pitch and rotor speed in near realtime to minimise Amp draw.

Comment by Christiaan van Vollenstee on December 9, 2013 at 6:15am

That would be great, I do not think the APM will be able to handle this maybe more the pixhawk, I could be wrong I am just thinking of the speed the code is executed and the size of the module where the code is running on.

Comment by Euan Ramsay on December 9, 2013 at 6:30am

Yeah - a collective pitch flight model will be a whole new model, and APM simple won't cut it. Even if it did have the stack space, the processor is struggling as well, if the stories about Octo CPU overloads are true.

No, I think pixhawk would be the place if this ever got taken on. Us old duffers can stick with our "antique" fixed pitch quads and APM's :-)

Comment by Dan Neault on December 9, 2013 at 6:43am

No sound at work...... can it auto rotate?

Maybe something there for us if it can ?



Comment by Crashpilot1000 on December 9, 2013 at 9:36am

That C64 "Spacetaxi" is a major revolution for handling. If scaled up it maybe a platform for an combustion engine.

Any 8Bit FC should be able to handle that with the proper code (look at Bradwii - it has a cycletime 2ms on 8 bit). I see no need for 32Bit it's basically steering Servos instead of ESC. Perhaps a throttlecurve is needed for the main (single) motor. Maybe arducopter is the wrong codebase - size wise - but you are free to port any other (8bit) project to the apm2.x hardware since it's not restricted to the Arducoptercode.

Of course 32Bit is always nice to have (and normally STM cpus are cheaper than Arduinos that's why the 32BitFC are more expensive.........)

Comment by Vince Hogg on December 9, 2013 at 11:21am

I suspect the APM in its current form could be 'fooled' into using variable pitch. the 4 outputs would drive servos instead of ESCs and the motor could be on a governed ESC on a separate channel. It may only work for +ve pitches and normal upright flight.

Comment by Josh Potter on December 9, 2013 at 11:50am

The APM will be able to drive this;  we just need someone to write the code.  Being the heli guy I might pick one up if the price isn't too high.

Comment by Dan Neault on December 9, 2013 at 12:21pm

Sorry, I'm with the others on this, APM is stuffed. I recently did a sensor flight feed back project with APM, and it was easier to add another Arduino, hijacking the PPM signal, then add the needed code into APM 3.1 :(


Could have likely done it with Pix Hawk alone, but I was on the clock, and I knew the second Arduino was cheaper in man hours. I just don't know the PIX well enough yet.



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

Join DIY Drones


Season Two of the Trust Time Trial (T3) Contest 
A list of all T3 contests is here. The current round, the Vertical Horizontal one, is here

© 2019   Created by Chris Anderson.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service