/diy/ - Do It Yourself

>>1345325
When you're rich and get your helicopter license.

>>1345325
I sincerely doubt legislation will ever allow flying cars/bikes. They are already trying to ban drivers in cars and make them all self driving.

Self driving flying cars/bikes are probably easier to do but the whole concept is scary as fuck. If you let a machine do everything people will become complacent. And I don't even wanna get into the concept of requiring parachuting license. I can just imagine the land whales screeching now.

>>1345325
Just use a helicopter, retard. Battery power and those designs will never be good enough to fly any worth while amount of time. EVER.

Airplane = Glide ratio
Quad Craft = Rock
Do the math

weird no matter how much i look into this i carnt figure out how there powering it whether its a small engine motor or powered by powerful lithium-ion batts

>>1345325
>Flight time - 20 minutes
>Total weight - 104 kg/ 229 lbs
>no videos, with uncut scenes, longer than a few scant seconds, some even slowed down

As always.

>>1345436
obviously some kind of fleshlight for plasma based alien life forms.

>>1345325
Yup. They should.

I could build my own amd turn a 1.5 hour work commute into a 30 minute nap but i aint got the balls

>>1345325
>fast, agile, reliable, affordable, easy to maneuver and looks amazing
>pick two

>>1345504
well thats easy.
>affordable
>agile

>>1345325
That is drone tech.

1200cc motorcycle isn't sufficient. You want like two stroke with an electric supercharger. The energy is there in kerosene/gas but it's almost impossible to get out in a cost effective form factor.

Also, people are terrible drivers and worse pilots. I thank god that flying cars were never invented or cheap enough for everybody.

The law will change as soon as they become popular, are you retarded?

The transportation/commute problems are being solved very very quickly by self driving cars. They will destroy your market.
1/10 would not invest

>>1345506

Nigga, you stupid. Reliability is the #1 important aspect of any aircraft. You finna die or summat?

>>1345501
>30min run time carrying a person

Not going to happen unless you build a regular helicopter.

>>1345325
I too want to be the Green Goblin.

>>1345325
>Tony Stark
stopped reading there
nigger

https://youtu.be/EQK9m_OBVgY

Here is flying tub. Same principle as OP but much more dangerous and cool!

>>1345519
el goblino verde...

Why the fuck would you even make a quadcopter transport vehicle? The only advantages of quads are agility and a small LZ, and the former is 100% useless for personal transport. Meanwhile, they have the worst range out of anything that flies barring a paper airplane. Make a VTOL, or a roadable aircraft that can drive to the airport and take off as a regular airplane - though they've been done already, just not with an acceptable price tag or reliability.

>>1345401
>They are already trying to ban drivers in cars and make them all self driving.
There's actually two forces here that are at odds
1. Insurance companies know for a fact that self-driving cars are better than real drivers
2. Insurance companies know for a fact that machine learning models are a black box and can't be relied upon in court to determine fault and payout
The field is a subset of AI, called interpretability.

You cannot have self driving cars if a technical lawyer cannot explain in court the car's decision making process at the time of a collision. This is for both legal and liability reasons.

>>1345604
Also, interpretability in machine learning is a new and almost nonexistent field. You want to interpret and identify actionable insights to improve a machine learning model? Suffice to say you will become the next multi-millionaire if you could do that.

>>1345325
I have comprehensive designs for one but little money, if you want to fund me be my guest.
>>1345422
>"Rockets will never be good enough to fly to the moon!"

>>1345449
I too think it's bullshit, I made an equation to calculate the max possible flight time of any drone and for one that heavy, with current battery densities you can't beat 15 minutes.

>>1345325
$150k should get you a small, but airworthy STOL plane. Those come closest to the ideal commuters aircraft...

>>1345636
this
drone technology and hoverbikes will happen pretty much immediately once mass produced affordable graphene supercapacitors or some shit becomes a reality instead of the diddly little lithium shit batteries we have now

>>1345597
>more dangerous

Actually, it is 2000% safer than that leg cutter the OP has in the image. The weight distribution is also much better since it is lower in respect to the props. Anything where the thrust is lower than the center of weight will work harder to correct balancing issues and require more energy. This one also looks like it lasts a shit load longer for flight time, probably the max you can squeeze out of today's tech and not be called a normal helicopter. This being a, "hexacopter". Of course it isn't a drone anymore since there's an on-board pilot.

>>1345631
>"Rockets will never be good enough to fly to the moon!"

You don't know shit about flight dynamics, battery technology, or power density of energy storage. The day we have hoverboards and hoverbikes that actually work for anything longer than a few scant minutes is the day we've cracked some real wizard magic power source and all our technology will be like fucking sci-fi. Ironically, that will probably be the day we don't need rockets to reach Earth orbit.

>>1345636
>>1345670
The best they can do is to drop weight, which isn't the point of any of this. Electric motors are almost as efficient as they can possibly be. The last few % of efficiency won't help lift much more weight or extend flight time by very much. It is all now down to power density, in regard to these extremely poorly designed flying machines.

Graphene super caps would be nice, but even those are not all that great and not dense enough for what is really needed.

>>1345656
You can also get a Mosquito helicopter for under $20k. Their XEL model doesn't require a pilot's license.

>>1345670
I think 15 minutes is marketable for leisure.
Hoverbike around your yard.

>>1345683
I could show you my aerodynamics work to shut you up but I'd like to file some patents. I hate this "sit back and wait for future magic technology" instead of get off your fucking asses and work out a way with what you have.
>Electric motors are almost as efficient as they can possibly be
True but most of the power is lost in the propeller, there are lots of little things you can do to reduce this loss.
>The last few % of efficiency won't help lift much more weight
Actually the weight you can lift is proportional to the square of the efficiency. How about you actually do some math before acting like an expert?

>>1345670
>once mass produced affordable graphene supercapacitors or some shit becomes a reality instead of the diddly little lithium shit batteries we have now
solid state glass batteries are already on their way. double the capacity of litihum iirc.

>>1345694
>I could show you my aerodynamics work to shut you up but...

Your math is wrong and you are a fool. You can't make props efficient enough with current or even double power density of modern tech. Use a normal helicopter if you want VTOL and useful efficiency.

>>1345696
It's bullshit
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass_battery#Skepticism

>>1345325
That guy who made the Zapata Flyboard got basically taken over by the U.S. Department of Defense. The FAA doesn't want to license this shit to normies and Homeland Security doesn't want jihadis to fly suicide bombers into the White House.

>>1345707
Okay anon see you at the bank.

>>1345325
>crash
>blades sever both legs

>>1345715
looool No, no you won't.

>>1345712
That's retarded since anyone can make this shit and fly it legally due to FAA rules and regs. Also, suicide bombers are an equally retarded reason since they already use off the shelf drones for bombings sans the suicide part.

>>1345325
>how come nobody has done anything?
Because electricity is for faggots. pure electricity based non-toy transportation is inherently shit.

Extended range electric is a shit idea for airborne transport, and exposed blades is a also shit, so the best choice is jets.

>Considering how good drone tech has become over the past few years
It hasn't, it's exactly where it was 10 years ago. The difference is that companies realized that plebs would pay out the nose for marginally better products. Basically, drones 'got better' because demand increased so it became profitable to produce slightly less memey memes.

>When will I fly to work on something fast, agile, reliable, affordable, easy to maneuver and looks amazing?
It's called a helicopter you niggerfaggot.

>>1345711
Oh wow, some mild skepticism with zero evidence to back anything theyre saying to the contrary. That totally disproves everything. /s

>>1345325
>there are helicopters, and planes that are cheaper and fly better than this

>>1345325
Can i take off from my driveway and miss traffic?
If not its useless.

>>1345933
>violates the first law of thermodynamics
>mild skepticism

>>1345504
That's easy.
>fast
>looks amazing

>>1345656
The XEL also doesn't have traditional skids, but floats instead.

Also, ultralights aren't allowed to be flown after dark, over cities or towns with a population density of more than 150 people per square mile, can't go faster than 55 knots level at max power. It also has to launch from and land at the same spot, since landing elsewhere except in an emergency requires a flight plan.

Love me some ultralights, but they're not good except for tooling around. The XE3 and XET models would make great commuter aircraft, but require a license.

Elon musk once sold flamethrowers..

im building one myself,

i've already got the plans, still tweaking them..

much more effective and safer than this meat grinder.

>>1345325
>exposed blades
what could possibly go wrong

>>1347719
Tell us more...
>>1347751
Idk why nobody ducts thier propellers anymore.

>>1345325
What if a jet was added to the drone? Would it go fast?

>>1348071
Yes but jets are expensive.

>>1345325

Bruv we've been on the market since the 1980's

You can find our ad in back-issues of Popular Science

>>1345753
Wasn't the consensus that this video was staged?
Basically the drone couldn't carry enough explosives to do that damage so they loaded their own vehicle down with explosives and made a video of a drone blowing it up acting like it their enemies.