[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

2017/01/28: An issue regarding the front page of /jp/ has been fixed. Also, thanks to all who contacted us about sponsorship.

/diy/ - Do-It-Yourself

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 78 KB, 1280x654, vortex-285-Drone.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
1113047 No.1113047 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]


>> No.1113058

Shitty Quad

>> No.1114470

I am currently working on a dynam t-28, but its not really diy, i am more of a rc plane than quadcopter guy, but if anyone has any questions i can try to answer them

>> No.1114472

The trend has passed anon.

>> No.1114604

Winter time. Too cold to do rc things

>> No.1114748

With micro fpv indoor race drones?

We all need to step up our games.

>> No.1114773

building a foamboard plane right now. Waiting on parts for an S500 quad. Maybe getting a C1 Chaser kit (flying wing) if they come back in stock soon.

or this >>1114748

>> No.1115190
File: 460 KB, 1209x907, IMG_20170114_143517 (1).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Rubbish, I went & flew in the snow yesterday :p

>> No.1115516
File: 423 KB, 1920x1080, WIN_20170115_20_09_19_Pro.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

In florida it's never to cold to fly. Flew 3 packs through my Voodoo 250 earlier, I think i've finally got this thing flying in a not-on-fire state.

>> No.1115518


>> No.1115520

Shitty? Debatable, they do fly. Overpriced, weak, and outdated? Definitely.
How are you liking Dynam? I've heard mixed opinions about the brand, some say they fly good but some say that they are trash.
well let's fix that
TinyWhoopLife my man.
>foamboard plane
gotta be more specific, man. Flitetest design? or something else?
Tricopter, man it's been yeas since I've seen one of those. I had a wooden one 5 years ago running a kk1 with RCTimer motors, flew like crap but was considered good at the time.

>> No.1115524

to be honest, that whole fiasco wasn't as bad as we feared it would be. I've not heard of any realistic enforcement of it, and it's not too difficult to comply with it anyways.

>> No.1115750
File: 35 KB, 1115x1723, hauler paint schemes.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

more like Experimental Airlines' Donkey, but as a taildragger. However, I make fuselages in the FliteTest style. Wing is almost done, fuse will be done tonight. I'll post some pictures once there's something to show.


>> No.1116069
File: 101 KB, 720x540, simple planes.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Nice! I just got back from helping a buddy build a little foambard biplane, based off of fltetest stuff but intended to be a simple build yet easy to fly.
The plane on the left we built a few months ago and it's been flying great as a 3ch rudder-elevator-throttle plane. The one on the right we built today and it flies pretty decent as well. It's 4ch. Both very slow and forgiving.
The build style is simple: Box for the power pod. Then, two identical fuselage side sheets. Add a couple dowel rods for wing mounting. The wings are single-sheet undercambered, very simple to make. Adding the polyhedral is done by tracing the correct outline using the wing itself, glueing, then using a bent piece of foam as a brace.

>> No.1116072
File: 35 KB, 960x720, biplane flying.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.1116306

Do you really need a HAM license to run a vtx? I just want to fpv a whoop in my garage. Going to get the 199.00 package and it says license needed to transmit vid.

>> No.1116309

Good news you can use a 25 mW vtx without a ham licence

>> No.1116313
File: 35 KB, 300x300, BLH8500-2T.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Well I know where my fun money is going this month.

>> No.1116344
File: 141 KB, 590x657, 1482980502223.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

i actually like it, the build was pretty easy, and it flew alright, what more can I ask for, all I have to say is never get a dynam for a first plane, they are a bit much for beginners

>> No.1116455

Fixed wing people, can you recommend anything for somebody who is interested in getting into fixed wing but who doesn't have any particularly large open spaces nearby? I have a few spots that I'm comfortable flying multirotors at, but I'm just worried that fixed wing is going to need a lot more space. Bonus if there is something cheap & which can eventually carry a small AIO fpv cam/vtx module.

>flew like crap but was considered good at the time.

Mine is definitely the most finickity of all my multirotors, but I just love how it looks so I'm happy to put up with its quirks :3

>> No.1116472
File: 65 KB, 968x478, PKZ3900.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

you want a micro, high-wing trainer. Google Micro Cub and you'll find a bunch.

>> No.1116483

Thanks, I think the Cub name sounds familiar from Flite Test videos.

>> No.1116484

Drop the trip faggot. Entirely unnecessary.

>> No.1116495

Your hostility is what's unnecessary.

>> No.1116516

Depends on where you live, but i've never heard of it being eforced at least in the U.S. I've run 250mw 5.8 systems and some old 1.3 stuff without any issues with no license.
That is true
You'll have fun with that. I personally recommend getting a set of goggles and a real RC transmitter from the start, but if you never intend on getting any bigger quads/planes then that stuff will work ok.
I guess it depends on the plane, and the dedication of the builder. I know a guy who bought the 64mm Meteor, he hated the build and only flew it twice before selling it. Said the hardware was terrible.
I'd say something like the UMX Sport Cub S is a good choice, but planes like that one can't take ANY wind and I'm not a fan of the brushed motor. The UMX Champ S might be a good one, it's a little bit bigger but has a brushless motor.
Or yuou can build a slowflyer type plane out of foamboard, see >>1116069. Planes like those ones are super easy to build and fly very slow, you'll need a slightly bigger space than you would for the UMX style planes, but I think you'll have a better expirience learning to build and fly your own design. Teaches a lot more about how the planes fly in the first place, and better understanding leads to better flight skill.

Tricopters are odd, but fun in their own way. Was considering building a mini tri once I get my Voodoo tamed... Could probably get one to fly halfway decent on some peppy 2204 motors and a naze32/similar flight control. We've come a long way since KK1 8-bit...
Those cubs are decent if you can still find one, same goes for the original micro champ. They are quite old though, there's better stuff out there.

>> No.1116540

Yes, but then I would just be sitting in a room alone staring at vr goggles instead of sitting in a room critiqueING domefans work, praying for Bunkerbro updates, and wondering if tunnlefag gave into autism and quit or is buried in his rapecave.

>> No.1116541

I heard they were working on separate drone laws so we didn't have to be basement dwellers hoping to skip on a South Korean channel.

Also, to lazy for pics but I built an rc mower and then it got rained on without the cover.

Fucking shoot me

>> No.1116564

>Separate drone laws
Haven't heard anything about that, Would be interesting to see what they come up with.
>Mower got rained on
I'd look into troubleshooting the individual parts, you'd be surprised what is still salvageable. If it wasn't powered on during the rain then the whole thing might still be useable.

>> No.1116611

Prebuilt quality drones are way too expensive and the majority of people dont want to learn how to build one.

>> No.1117031
File: 61 KB, 1000x800, 1478651366208.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I started with the sport cub s, great plane to learn on, as for the t-28, the build quality was a bit poor, but nothing substancially bad, maybe I got lucky

>> No.1118088
File: 217 KB, 1366x768, aquadrone.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Like my... aquadrone, /diy/?

>> No.1118117
File: 63 KB, 600x450, powerpool.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Well, that's an... interesting method. What control system are you using, looks pretty old. Also, might not go too far with that cord attached... You're gonna have to use the old power-strip-on-a-sandal solution methinks

>> No.1118363

It's an atmega328 and a NRF24L01. 50n06 mosfet for the brushed motor and a cheap "tower pro" servo for the rudder. Everything works.

I have a 2x3.7v lithium battery pack that I made out of flashlight batteries, I'm not sure if it will be enough to make the motor run but it's enough to power the servo, so at least it can sail.

>> No.1118400
File: 378 KB, 809x689, h8d.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Convince me why do I need a drone?
I'm not a quad guy myself, but a classmate of mine is, and wants me to buy his old quad plus spare parts and extra batteries for like 70€.
Only problem is I don't see a need or use for this devices/toys?
And is it a good offer?
What are cool things to do with them as a grown up man-child?


>> No.1118408

>Convince me why do I need a drone?
You don't. They're an entertaining hobby.

>> No.1118411

Take out one of the motors and build an autogyro instead

>> No.1118419

oh wow, REAL /diy/ electronics, most of use here just use storebought RC packages
I'd also be looking to make sure it sits in the water fine, looks like it might be a bit heavy to the rear.
You don't need that quad. Especially not for that price. I guess it would make a decent training quad, but it is closer to toy-grade than hobby-grade.
As far as actual use? well, the one you linked is definitely just a toy/fun hobby thing. But once you get into bigger more expensive quads, like say a higher-end DJI Phantom, you can actually make a business out of taking aerial video and photos. Real Estate firms, video crews, weddings, they all like the aerial footage.

>> No.1118470
File: 49 KB, 592x567, battery pack.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

It sits in the water just fine without the battery pack. I'm starting to doubt it, since it's quite heavy, but what else could go wrong besides the water shorting the 3 cells at the same time and the entire rig catching fire?

>> No.1118471

>doubt it will not sink with the batteries


>> No.1118501

It might work

>> No.1118547

Turns out it does float, but it's front heavy so I'll have to make another hull out of solid styrofoam and move the control box further rearward. Also, I killed one of the battery cells somehow.

>> No.1118550

>join local rc plane club
>have fun
>buy a plane
>realise I just enjoyed the company and flying was boring
>quit and sell the kit

ahh yes

>> No.1118584
File: 347 KB, 413x606, airboat.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


Problem solved! Now I can put pretty much as much weight as I want on the boat and it will stay afloat. Now I only need a sunny day to actually test this piece of garbage.

>> No.1118630

Started looking into how cheap fpv is now. Operating a vehichle from a cockpit pov is a game changer.
Makes me want to build a small "avatar-bot" for small scale adventures.

>> No.1118880

Cool idea!
Stay active

>> No.1118881

diy at home alone next time
hope you learned something
stay away from humans

>> No.1118913

b-but that's the literal exact opposite of what they said in their post...

>> No.1118956
File: 463 KB, 1200x800, DSC09096.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Had enough spare electronics for an entire new build, but no frame, so I figured I'd visit the hardware store... Going to see if it flies tomorrow :)

>> No.1118994

What kind of controller is that thing in the middle?

>> No.1119038

Naze32 rev5.

>> No.1119058

That looks really nice. It has a STM32F103CBT6 and a MPU6050, both of which I'm familiar with. Also a CP2102 usb-to-serial IC. Is the firmware open-source? I think I'll get some of those. What is the board underneath it?

>> No.1119060

Also, what kind of radio interface does it use? It doesn't seem like there is one built in the controller.

>> No.1119100


Anything in this form factor running a stm32 f1 is considered obsolete now, I only used it in this build because I was using up spare parts. If you're in the market for something similar today, you're going to be looking at stm32 f3 options.

Obviously the older f1 boards still work just fine, but the newer f3 boards aren't really any more expensive & provide more UARTs & can handle much faster PID loop times.

The board underneath is just a power distro board. XT60 input, bunch of output pads for the ESCs, plus 5v & 12v regulators.

>> No.1119153

Why would it be obsolete? It's a pretty decent chip for the price. Is there any f3 based board that can be bought on aliexpress?

>> No.1119460
File: 297 KB, 1200x800, DSC09000.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

The f1 chip itself isn't obsolete, but a miniquad flight controller based around it is. The hobby has moved on & people now expect faster PID loops (f1 struggles to achieve 1KHz loop with 1KHz gyro sample, people now want to run 4-8KHz+) & only having 2x UARTs is very limiting - if you have USB on one & your RC receiver on the other, you have none left for telemetry, OSD, etc. & have to resort to softserial.

Banggood is my usual source for RC stuff from China & there are plenty of f3 boards. I've used these for my last two builds, but there are cheaper options available without built in power distro.


>> No.1120164
File: 92 KB, 540x960, FB_IMG_1485150362564.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

My shit got rained on.

>rip Lawny....

>> No.1120167

Hope so. I am building a boat i think. Depends on what all is fucked. Was sitting at my dads 4 miles away. Never rained her. Fml

>> No.1120169

Easy as fuck to fly anon.

Cannot fly 5 copters i got

Get shitty drone, see you fuckers latter.

Get better drone. So easy it can litteraly fly itself and land.

Useful or fun stuff? Meh, dicking off /10.

>> No.1120171

You accidently split an atom and essentially nuke your pond. I think u need radiactive shit for it to even be possible tho

>> No.1120175

yeah the high performance stuff has all moved on to f3/f4 stuff. I'm still running a Naze32rev6 in my 210, but that's because i'm too lazy/cheap to buy something different when it flies good enough.
sleep tight Lawny
Boats are interesting... a fanboat isn't too hard, but an actual prop boat can be difficult.

>> No.1120184
File: 174 KB, 1366x768, quadEcalc.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

rait me

>> No.1120205

Can anyone help me? I got a Cheerson CX20/Quanum Nova and I bought a video camera and transmitter for it. However now I also want OSD in between the video cable so I can read the flight controller on my screen. Can anyone help me with what fucking thing I need? It's an APM flightcontroller but i'm unsure what I exactly need.

I dont like spending alot of money so I was hoping the Minimosd would work but i dont know I suck at this


>> No.1120235
File: 1.37 MB, 1920x1080, 2017-01-23 14.53.37.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Thanks for recommending the UAVfutures video for getting into minuquads(on gee). It's been the most fun I've had in a very long time. I'm ordering parts for my first scratch build now.

>> No.1120324
File: 218 KB, 1221x916, IMG_20170122_234214.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>I'm still running a Naze32rev6 in my 210, but that's because i'm too lazy/cheap to buy something different when it flies good enough.

Yeah, I have two rev6 quads flying atm & now one rev5 after the wooden one took it's maiden flight on Sunday. Not going to buy any more f1 FCs, but I'm also not rushing out to replace the ones that are flying fine.

So glad it worked out for you, welcome to the hobby! :D

>> No.1120337

I'm sorry, I don't speak hitler
What kind of info do you want on the screen? Base your OSD choice on that information. Then we can direct you what to do based on what OSD you want.
miniquads are insane, in the best way.
nice collection
I've got my one 210 (voodoo), an "original" tiny whoop (custom from stock inductrix, using the MMW motors and va1100) from back before the big brands started jumping on the bandwagon, and also a NanoQXv2 FPV because my parents mean well but don't consult me on these things before they buy. It flies fine, but... Tinywhoop is faster and better for indoor stuff.
And a crapton of airplanes. But none of them are currently fpv, I need to build a new Spear or Arrow wing. (want to get my LAST Arrow wing out of the woods first, get my Cam/VTX/Antenna/Inrunner motor back lmao)

>> No.1120347

>an "original" tiny whoop
I got 22k views on my YouTube video showing how to bind those things to an Orange module :3 Honestly I much prefer the E010 now - frame doesn't break as easily & it binds flawlessly with the Banggood multiprotocol module (the Orange module would have to be power cycled on occasion). Just put a Kingkong Q25 on one of them, but the stock motors aren't quite powerful enough - might try the motors from my old Inductrix before I by new ones though! And at the other end of the spectrum (no pun intended), I'm building a 650 now...

>> No.1120351

I'm a DX8 guy so whatever I fly, it's got to be spek compatible.
If I were to build one now i'd probably go E010 frame, not sure which motors I'd use. would definitely use a different camera/transmitter, the va1100 is crap.

>> No.1120587

Apparently the Racerstar 615 are a solid choice. For cameras I much prefer the form factor of the Q25 - no big CPL antenna to get banged up in crashes.

>> No.1120590

>What kind of info do you want on the screen? Base your OSD choice on that information. Then we can direct you what to do based on what OSD you want.

well I kinda like the MinimOSD with features such as

- Height
- Number of connected satalites
- Signal strength
- Speed
- Home direction

so yeah the MinimOSD looks nice but im unsure which one to order so it fits on my cx20

thanks alot for helping me out really appreciate the help

>> No.1120673

Then the minim is a good choice for you, it's meant to be APM compatible.
http://ardupilot.org/copter/docs/common-minim-osd-quick-installation-guide.html is a good starting point for installation, what FC board are you running? APM 1, 2, pixhawk, etc... Which one? That determines the exact wiring setup.

>> No.1120675

How do I design a quad with optimal characteristics using minimal trial and error?

>> No.1120691

Calculate and simulate the fuck out of it

>> No.1120697

not really diy but I want to buy a drone anyway, should I just fucking do it?


>> No.1120703

>http://ardupilot.org/copter/docs/common-minim-osd-quick-installation-guide.html is a good starting point for installation, what FC board are you running? APM 1, 2, pixhawk, etc... Which one? That determines the exact wiring setup.

i dont know, its from the cx20

would this fit? http://www.banggood.com/MinimOSD-MAVLink-OSD-APM-APM2-Flight-Control-Board-p-73436.html?rmmds=cart

>> No.1120704

Is there a tool or aid to help me with parts picking?

>> No.1120717
File: 703 KB, 1431x768, minimOSD-cx20.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Hokay, so.
I was able to find this little tutorial. This tutorial is intended for adding a telemetry transmitter to the cx20, but it uses the same pins as your minimosd will so it's still very useful. http://diydrones.com/profiles/blog/show?id=705844%3ABlogPost%3A1691503&commentId=705844%3AComment%3A1912817&xg_source=activity
You're basically gonna end up doing what I show in image attached. Note that the APM doesnt specifically note that the Vcc is 5v out, so you'll need to check that it really is 5v with a multimeter before hooking that up. You might need a regulator. But I doubt it, it's probably running the APM off a 5v uBEC somewhere anyways.

>> No.1120720

>falling for the phantom 4 meme
literally, why? If you're willing to drop $1000 on this thing, then you could get a Mavic, which is so much more practical for people who want a drone for simple beginner aerial video.
Probably he only downside to the mavic is that it looks kinda fragile IMO. And that's not a problem, because you should seriously be learning to fly on a $25 quad from gearbest or some shit before ever touching a DJI.

>> No.1120729

thanks! that tutorial seems to be what I need

however mine doesnt have solder points but a plug for what seems to be a 4 wide plug thingy

any idea?

>> No.1120730
File: 128 KB, 721x540, cx20osd.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


Would this cable fix it it? Pic related is the flightcontroller osd plug thingy on my cx20

might be 4 or 5 cables idk

>> No.1120732
File: 69 KB, 933x859, osd_shit.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

i wanna order this, is it good? the red chip is to program the Minimosd where you can select what to show on the screen. And I ordered 2 different cables to be sure I can connect it to my flightcontroller.

Would this work? I got an Aechine video camera/transmitter with a yellow wire and also red and black ones. So I hope this would work?

>> No.1120739

Just got a 5xsw with 5 extra 1200 mah batteries for a trainer.
This weekend im going to range mod the cheesy transmitter it comes with and maybe add speed holes to the frame. Give myself maximum air time for training.
Next week my goggles 2 will show up first peice of real equipment.
Havent dug into transmitter research yet but im leaning towards spending for a 10 channel overkill model just for future expansion options. Buy once cry once sort a thing.

I love having a new hobby.

>> No.1120768

Yeah that should be correct
if not, you can always direct solder some wires to the exposed pins at the rear of that white connector on the APM.

>> No.1120771

>Syma X5
Those are good for cheap trainers
>Mod the cheesy transmitter and maybe add speed holes
Why though? You've got 5 batteries, youre not gonna have any issues with flight time. Adding holes will just make it weaker imo. More likely to break on crashing.
As far as TX mod, idk how much difference it makes but if it's noticeable then go for it.
>goggles 2
pic related
seriously, if you still have time to cancel the order, do it. You're wasting money, those are pretty crap. You'd be better off with one of the single screen "Headplay style" sets out there, you can get them for like $60
>10ch transmitter
It's personal preference. watch some youtube tutorials of the programming, learn about the firmware limitations, etc. If you can, go to a hobby store or drone/rc meet and pick up a few to feel them in your hand. A lot of people like the FrSky Taranis series, which is a 9ch I believe. I myself run a Spektrum DX8, an older model but still viable. Futaba used to be popular but eh, not so much anymore.
I agree though, buy your "end all" radio now if you know what you're going to want.

>> No.1120772
File: 21 KB, 340x340, my sides.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

oops, forgot pic related

>> No.1120782

Thats a shame. Figgered an hd screen with dvi input for sim training, video out for base station, and all the channel switching goodies seemed like good times. Maybe it will end up with a chromecast shoved init.

>> No.1120784

Honestly, flying sim is only really worth it to get the hang of the controls. Flying a real quad is very different.
And the HD meme isn't really there yet anyways, none of the FPV cams we use output HD.

>> No.1120829
File: 229 KB, 1222x916, IMG_20170124_165331.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I got a battery for my 650 build today, it's huge O_o

>speed holes

I'm hoping that was a joke/troll, I wouldn't be surprised if it actually made it slower due to messing with aerodynamics (assuming it didn't just wreck it completely).

>Goggles 2

Those are one of the single screen style sets & Stu ranks them as the best of that type that he's tried.


>> No.1120877

>Goggles 2
Wait, what?
I thought those were the shite walkera ones. http://www.helipal.com/walkera-fpv-goggle-2.html

>> No.1120949
File: 266 KB, 1920x1080, Gimbal1.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

So, I've decided to try my had at a custom gimbal for a "camcorder" style handheld camera, to be mounted on multirotors or airplanes. Basing the design around the Canon Vixia HF R400 camera, as that's what I've got, but this should be compatible with pretty much anything in that size range.
I'm really just doing this because my gopro 3 silver is shite and I don't much care for buying another "action cam," while I wouldn't trust myself flying a DSLR rig. But, Ifigure I can make something fairly interesting out of this, It's got 32x optical zoom on it, with a slider that's easily servo-riggable, so it will be able to do things even the DJI stuff cant do.
What think? Going to 3D print, and using https://hobbyking.com/en_us/ax-gm2212-72kv-gimbal-motor-for-200-500g-camera-s.html.
I know balance will be a PITA to achieve, I know exactly where the camera's pitch balance is but the roll one is trickier due to the folding LCD which has to be extended to access live video output :(. I've tried to add adjustability into the gimbal geometry to use the gimbal assembly itself as counterweight, and if It's not enough I can just add coins or something, but it will still be a pain.

What gimbal controller to use? Want cheap...

>> No.1120981

>some wires to the exposed pins at the rear of that white connector on the APM.
which ones?

>> No.1121100

You've already got them labeled.
Vcc, TX, RX, Gnd. The same ones you'd be hooking up if you had the right connector.

>> No.1121115

Google 2 vs Goggles 2. I'm assuming >>1120739 bought the latter, which are apparently decent, as the former would be a crazy expense for somebody just starting out with a Syma.

>> No.1121132

I picked up a Warpquad clone (Darkside ARC 200), but I'm not quite sure how I wanna go about this build. It's my first X-frame so there's not much space available, and the Warpquad was originally designed strictly for LOS so it's even worse, but I really wanna make it work as cleanly as possible. I do have a 3D printer.

Right now I'm sorta leaning towards an ImpulseRC Helix style setup, with the under-arm ESCs and fairings, but the FPV pod will have to be arranged differently to accommodate my Runcam2. Looking for 35 and 45 degree tilt options. I'm leaning towards using the Runcam2 for FPV as well, since it has low-latency AV-out.

I'm also tempted to take the streamlining even further, but it's starting to seem like a bit of an ordeal. There's more than a few of those top-half aeropods around, but I haven't seen one yet that can enclose an HD cam, and I'm starting to see why. The bottom half of the quad seems frequently overlooked, and while I have no intention of going crazy with it (i.e. http://www.c-4rce.com/speed-needle), I'm thinking a little semi-enclosed skirt around the bottom plate, boat-tailing into the bottom of the battery wouldn't be too hard. But then I'm a bit at a loss of how to deal with the battery leads. Hell, even without a skirt present I'm not sure how to deal with them on an X-frame like this - all the pictures I see seem to be without a battery. How the hell do you keep the leads out of the props?

>> No.1121137

I'd say over-arm ESCs instead of under, keeps them from getting roughed up on landings. I wouldn't fall for the motor tilt meme, the whole point of the x frame is that you can increase the whole frames angle of attack while not adding too much air resistance. You might need to re-design the top plate and standoffs to be tilted so you can slap the runcam on there easily without wasting space.
Never use the HD recording cam for FPV. low-latency isn't no latency, and if you're concerned about having fairings to increase speed, then you're going way to fast for any latency. You can get a hs1177 mini, those are pretty small. http://www.banggood.com/FOXEER-HS1177M-600TVL-CCD-Sony-Chip-Components-PAL-NTSC-2_8mm-IR-Mini-FPV-Camera-5V-22V-with-Bracket-p-1049378.html
Or one of the cheap mini cmos cams would work ok too.
>How do you keep the leads out of the props?
Short leads, have as much of it zip tied down(or otherwise mounted) as possible.

>> No.1121158

32x optical zoom is quite a bit.
How heavy is that camera?

Without proper post processing stabilisation, requiering you set a very high shutter speed, it'll look very shaky/blurry.

Are you familiar with After Effects? Its easy to stabilise stuff

>> No.1121160

How do I design a quad with optimal characteristics using minimal trial and error?
Are there any tools/websites/part picker machines to help me out?

>> No.1121169

For smaller stuff, anecdotal community knowledge is usually all you need - nobody building 210 size racing/freestyle quads bothers with any sort of simulation.

For bigger stuff, you can use things like http://ecalc.ch/ to do simulations to see if you are overloading motors etc.

>> No.1121189
File: 876 KB, 3264x2448, IMG_3580.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Not familiar with after effects, although i don't see it as being too much of a problem. The camera itself does some auto-stabilizing,
If it does need post stabilization, I'll have to find something I can get for free. Cause adobe is buttfucking us with that whole subscription stuff.

>> No.1121200

I am familiar with ecalc. But how do I optimise for efficiency fora certain weight. I want to set parameters of what I expect and have something recommend me what to change..

>> No.1121205

ok thanks

so its safe to order that stuff from the screenshot? >>1120732

>> No.1121207

I can't guarantee, but you *should* be fine.

>> No.1121208

ok thanks i will try

>> No.1121218

i ordered it

wish me luck when it arrives in 3 weeks

>> No.1121237

How long till quad copter lazertag/ death race?

Not just pew pew you fall out the sky but shields, software dictated weapon types/upgrades and ammo/health regen via gates kinda tag race (tag hard/software already available). Next step incorporate into FC to simulate damage/hits through motor control (shakes for hit coupled with max throttle drop for damage).

Not just shooting at each other but maybe parts of the race track to trigger events. Like blinding lights on curves, fans on straight ways, the odd explosion perhaps. Adds a bit of tension to being in the lead and not have the time to react.

Then go back over with your HD playback and use the IR "Shots" to trigger special effects to spice it up for the audience and sponsors.

What about pilot/gunner co-op? With turrets!

Its a matter of when not if...

>> No.1121293


I thought about the same thing but with airboats.

>What gimbal controller to use?

Are there ready made gimbal controllers? I've seen one done with an arduino and a MPU6050 accelerometer, and it worked pretty well, but I think it had one additional esc for each rotation axis.

>> No.1121324

The general rule of thumb is that higher voltage (eg 6S instead of 4S) & larger props on slower motors (eg 15" on 380kv instead of 13" on 780kv) is how you get the most efficiency for a given build.

Remember that it's Chinese New Year, so banggood orders may well get delayed.

>> No.1121325

I don't know, seems a bit game-ish. The people I know flying in real drone races tend to be much more serious about it.
Yeah, there's ready made ones, costing anywhere from $10 to over $100.

>> No.1121345

If you want air combat just cut streamer ribbons with cheap as chips RC planes.

>> No.1121408
File: 207 KB, 1140x641, ImpulseRC Helix.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>I'd say over-arm ESCs instead of under, keeps them from getting roughed up on landings.
ESCs would be enclosed. Pic related.

And even if they weren't, with a battery strapped on the bottom there's not much chance of the ESCs touching the ground anyways unless I land on a pointy rock.

>I wouldn't fall for the motor tilt meme, the whole point of the x frame is . . .
Yeah, I'm talking camera tilt. And streamlining oriented for high-tilt flight.

>You might need to re-design the top plate and standoffs to be tilted so you can slap the runcam on there easily without wasting space.
Yeah. But easier said than done, I'm afraid. An HS1177 or such can simply be shifted forward of the FC stack, but with the Runcam I have no choice but to stick it on top. I've already slammed the FC and top plate to less than 1 cm, but down that low I have precious little space between the prop arcs themselves. It's starting to seem like I might just be forced to mount the camera up high, Wall-E style - which doesn't really seem well-suited to podding in. Maybe I should just forget about the idea of an aeropod altogether.

>Never use the HD recording cam for FPV. low-latency isn't no latency
You're not familiar with the Runcam2, are you? It's every bit as fast as a board cam.

>and if you're concerned about having fairings to increase speed, then you're going way to fast for any latency.
I've FPV'd fixed-wings far faster than any multirotor, using even a slowpoke Mobius for FPV, no problem. It's not the speed that will get you, it's proximity and/or rates.

>> No.1121594

>You're not familiar with the Runcam2, are you? It's every bit as fast as a board cam.

The discussion/tests that I remember seeing all found the latency to be >100ms, so still a long way from board cam territory.

>> No.1121613
File: 1.99 MB, 3264x1836, 20170125_172013[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Could this ever work?
It's a pullback motor from a small toy car, 90mm diameter rotor

>> No.1121630

maybe with a stiffer prop blade. And I'd lose the ring guard, it's just dead weight.
You're not going to get any long flights, certainly, but it could work. I had helicopter toys using the same principal when is was much younger.

>> No.1121632
File: 203 KB, 1500x1500, 71YpWiC937L._SL1500_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

It might fly for a few seconds, sure.

>> No.1121647
File: 1.97 MB, 350x234, HappyXmas.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.1121658

I wish for augmented reality too.

Read More Venor Vinge

>> No.1121660
File: 123 KB, 1000x1000, 61KNincZV4L._SL1000_[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Thanks, yeah the idea is that it would only go up for a few seconds as a simple childrens toy.
Not getting any luck with paper blades but i think ill try using spares from a drone

>> No.1121663

>Digital FPV.

>> No.1121675

Your point? Connex is still far too expensive/big/heavy for mainstream adoption.

>> No.1121688

>DIY Digital FPV using WLAN parts.
Your point?

>> No.1121699

The real crazy idea for hd goggles with dvi input is a "virtual cockpit" imho. All data run though computer (video, flight data and even maps/radar) then sent to goggles. Head tracking through ir leds and camera/hacked wiimote allowing you to look down at the instrument panel and straight through the screen.

The way picture software is going i can see stitching a first runthrough of a course with hd footage into a 3d texture map like google street. Then using live camera to track your position more than display whats in front of you.

But I always go too far in my futurism and get dissapointed.

>> No.1121730

Bamp for rc fun

>> No.1121737

Its already possible

>> No.1121754

If technology has come far enough to allow real time 3d reconstruction, we'll also have accessible and cheap digital transmitters. And even better receivers.

>> No.1121759


Quadcopter is not that huge a volume hobby. Sure, it's not a huge engineering challenge, but it's still quite a few engineering hours. Hours which have to be earned back.

The FPV.blue electronics look about 25$ worth of construction cost in high volume. I'm sure it will cost more like 500$ to buy and even then they need to sell quite a few to break even (I assume they hope DJ will buy them, that would be the easiest way to get rich quick).

>> No.1121804

If that was actually realistic, people would b doing it. They're not.

>> No.1121805
File: 116 KB, 635x630, autistic screeching.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>hacked wiimote
2012 called, they want their drones back

>> No.1121809

>Head tracking through ir leds and camera/hacked wiimote

You realise that FatShark goggles have had head trackers built in for years now?

>> No.1121810


WiFi is far too polite a protocol. Analogue just tries to shout across everything, that's what you need for a quadcopter video link.

If you go digital you need a custom protocol which isn't polite (although it should be frequency hopping). Also robust low latency codecs etc etc.

>> No.1121886

More like 2006 or so is when I got into controler free gaming.
I used to play GTA 3 with my finger as a gun. Reflectors on finger and thumb. Mouse movements from fingertip, click when the two blobs touch "bang".

Used a giant theatre projector in the garage (free from craigs list, burnt out after four months)... worth every penny.

>> No.1121906

Runcam HD (the first one), maybe. Runcam 2 is delayed by only 1-2 frames, depending on resolution.

>> No.1121907
File: 68 KB, 748x465, Rubber-motor helicopter.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Sure, but you'll need vanes or a second counter-rotor or else the blades will just stay put while the motor spins.

Look up rubber-powered helicopter designs.

>> No.1122068

Theres a huge industry for sensitive and accurate receivers though
Data reconstruction is a big thing too. And with miniature computers more possible every day

>> No.1122071

You mean wifibroadcast?
Hmm... what about this:
>Ricoh R dev kit
>Some wireless HDMI bridge
>Typical gaming computer
>Oculus Rift
It'd probably be heavy as shit even after stripping everything down, and range might not be too good with the HDMI bridge (unless you retrofit a directional antenna and tracker to the receiver), and resolution of the cropped-down image from the spherical video stream probably won't be HD any more in terms of pixels-on-screen, and any one of the components involved could potentially introduce shitloads of lag (most likely the Ricoh R itself due to stitching and compression, assuming it can't be disabled), but... other than that, should work, right?

>> No.1122157

So I connected a second ESC to a motor today. It made beeping noises and the motor tried to spin sporadically, but only moved like 5° and back to its original position.
When I applied 30% power to that motor the ESC went up in Flames immediatly.

What idiot misstake caused this?

>> No.1122158

>second ESC
For clarification. Its the only ESC I connected to that motor.

>> No.1122199

whats your sc?

Hey guys, idk about you but i post alot of stuff i do on snapchat. Add me if you like :D


>> No.1122204

There might have been shorted windings in the motor. I wouldn't connect another ESC to it until you check the windings. Put a meter across each lead pairing and make sure they have even resistance, and if you can get to it, check for shorts between the stator and the windings.

>> No.1122217


> The WIFI cards still obeys to the standard wifi CSMA/CA (collision avoidance).

No, it's still to polite. For FPV you want to be as polite as possible, but become an asshole when it stops becoming an option. If you need to shout other transmitters down you should try, rather than lose connection.

>> No.1122244

"1999 the NASA X-38 was flown using a Hybrid Synthetic Vision system that overlaid map data on video to provide enhanced navigation for the spacecraft during flight tests from 1998 to 2002. It used the LandForm software and was useful for times of limited visibility, including an instance when the video camera window frosted over leaving astronauts to rely on the map overlays.[161] The LandForm software was also test flown at the Army Yuma Proving Ground in 1999. In the photo at right one can see the map markers indicating runways, air traffic control tower, taxiways, and hangars overlaid on the video.[162]"

>> No.1122281
File: 93 KB, 730x716, Helicopter diagram copy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

The diameters of drone props are probably way too small, they would spin extremely fast for half a second and then run out, doing basically nothing
Also, that gear box looks quite heavy, so try using rubber instead
I got something to fly for like 3-4 seconds using a design similar to pic related

>> No.1122293

I doubt that this shit would ever fly.

>> No.1122294

Why wouldn't it? Mine sure did, but i placed the second prop right under the first one instead of the very bottom

>> No.1122454

It can and does.

In fact, a design not too different from that one is what inspired the Wright Brothers to take interest in powered flight.
>In 1878, the brothers’ father, Milton Wright, brought home a rubber band powered toy helicopter. Designed by French aeronautical experimenter Alphonse Pénaud, this toy did not simply fall to the ground as expected. Rather it "flew across the room till it struck the ceiling, where it fluttered awhile, and finally sank to the floor." Though the fragile toy soon broke, Wilbur and Orville never forgot it. They even attempted to build their own toy helicopters. In later years, Orville accredited this childhood toy as being the object that sparked their interest in flight.

>> No.1122458

Not quite the same as what you're talking about, but there are a few projects out there that are at least tangentially related to your idea. Eagle Tree already has GPS-based virtual race gates, projected on the OSD.

And Shea Ivey from LaForgeFPV set up a neat team-based capture-the-flag system.

And maybe for the blaster, you could somehow use the IR transponders already available for FPV racing. Each "checkpoint" could be somehow reworked into a gun with a very narrow beam, and could read and identify whichever target it's managed to "hit." Then it can transmit the kill back to a unified ground station over telemetry, which can then relay it to the stricken drone.

>> No.1122524

Yup. Just a matter of time. There is a lot more potential to this tech that running around in circles.
We are just stuck in a race paradigm. Treating a 3-d vehicle that accelerates faster than most can think just like cars and bikes. Lol.

Working on a light controled rc car that can be operated with a flashlight. Drone soccer soon.

>> No.1122675
File: 114 KB, 1440x809, 16422394_1364590043603039_4154448264715063213_o.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Alright, after my cats destroyed that hull I made a complete new boat. It's wider, has better flotation capabilities, rudders turn much more easily, the entire structure is just more robust. I'll take it for a... whatever it's called when airboats move tomorrow if it's not raining. It's been raining each and every day for the entire month.

>> No.1122923
File: 759 KB, 1280x720, webm2.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Dat wiggle <3

>> No.1122926

Hi there! You are literally the only tripcunt on /diy/ right now. You are not OP, and you are not bringing anything to the thread that risks being hijacked, not that that ever happens here anyway.

You faggots aren't welcome here, as you have apparently already been told, and should be able to observe. Cut it out you outrageous fucklord.

>> No.1122931
File: 54 KB, 520x307, Internet_stranger.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I use a trip on other boards where it is useful & I don't see how it can be so offensive to you/this board that I should remove it to post here.

>> No.1122932

>I use a trip on other boards where it is useful
And how is it useful here?

>> No.1122934


That doesn't look good! Is it supposed to wiggle this way?

>> No.1122936

> should a device which relies on balance and precision RPM be oscillating around like an inflatable tube man?

Of course it's fucking not..

>> No.1122937
File: 970 KB, 1280x720, webm.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Why does it matter if it's useful here? I'm not going to go to the extra effort of deleting it from the prefilled reply form every time I post unless there is a legitimate reason to do so. Your childish "tripfags aren't welcome" stance doesn't count.

>> No.1122938

It only happens when you spin up the motors while on the ground, as soon as you're off the ground it stops. I was concerned the first time I saw it, but it turns out it's a normal quirk with this frame.

>> No.1122942

I'm just trying to unpack your logic, you claim you use it when it's useful, but can't explain when it's useful, or why it is now. So you have no argument.

I'm not >>1122926 by the way. I know it may be hard for you faggots to comprehend that more than one person thinks you guys are cancer, but that's the ego at play I guess. Tripfags get routinely run off /diy/ as you're starting to see, for the year or so after we came into being we had them everywhere and the place started turning into /g/, since then it's been nothing but hostility to avoid that shit. But hey, you keep putting your name out there man, it's clearly more important to you to have recognition as opposed to, ya know, just posting good info, despite the norms of the board you're visiting. Good luck with that asshole.

>> No.1122948

I explained that it is useful on other boards & that removing it to post on this board represents extra hassle as it prefills in the reply form. So unless there is a good reason to do so, why should I bother?

It seems to me that there is simply the usual minority of immature posters who immediately jump on anybody posting with a trip as 'cancer', even if all they have done is contributed to a thread.

I recommend that you & anybody else in this thread that seems to get so irked by it just filters out my posts.

>> No.1122951
File: 59 KB, 1333x743, Capture.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Oh fuck me, you're one of them.

>> No.1122952

kek, typical tripfag logic "I dont care about you faggots, im just going to be an eceleb anyway"

this is why people call you faggots cancer. fuck everyone else, you just gotta set yourself above the rest, right?

>> No.1122953

We also hate tripfags because of the autists it brings out of the woodwork, especially on boards like ours that have none.


>> No.1122956

Collectively, you're all being a bunch of cunts. Post content.
>inb4 I have no content

>> No.1122976
File: 562 KB, 1000x1475, m9-horusrc.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>complaining about tripcunts ruining /diy/
>except this was a good thread until you started complaining about the tripcunt

Never change /diy/, you're legit ruining a good RC thread simply because one person posting constructive RC content has a trip on.

Back on topic, anybody used hall effect gimbals? Worthy upgrade from regular gimbals? Don't bother till they wear out?

>> No.1123003

Thats noice. Adding that to the custom diy transmitter Im dreaming of.

Side note: imagine that capture the flag game filmed from the top with long exposure. So each match can be veiwed as a set of tracer lines for each craft. Wonder why its not done for races yet? Audience's love shiny things.

>> No.1123006
File: 170 KB, 800x800, JJRC-H8C-10-font-b-lipo-b-font-font-b-Battery-b-font-font-b-7.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

What is the correct charger output voltage to charge this?
I have been given a drone with some of these batteries but no charger and google seems not able to solve me this question.
I've learned a lot about the lipo world in the process though. I don't want to buy a charger for I have several ways to provide current and measure voltage.

>> No.1123019

That's a 2 cell battery (2x 3.7V nominal cells in series) which means that to charge it safely you need to have an intelligent balance charger that can read the voltage of each cell individually. However it doesn't look like it has a JST connector to enable you to do that...?

>> No.1123025

yeah, they seems to have a small PCB inside at the top of it. I could serve as balancing system.
So do i just apply like what voltage to the connector?

>> No.1123032
File: 17 KB, 444x349, rcheli-diagram-charge_graph.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>So do i just apply like what voltage to the connector?

Unfortunately it's not that simple. I think in theory you could just apply 4.2V * number-of-cells & stop charging when the resting voltage of the pack reached the charging voltage, but that would only charge the pack to ~70%.

A proper lithium charger uses a voltage that tracks just above the resting voltage of the pack, maintaining constant current, then stops raising the voltage when it reaches 4.2V * number-of-cells & monitors the current until it drops to ~10% of the original.


>> No.1123034

oh, ok..
lets buy the charger then

>> No.1123123
File: 193 KB, 1440x809, 16299911_1366034410125269_9143504539935873009_o.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>I think in theory you could just apply 4.2V * number-of-cells & stop charging when the resting voltage of the pack reached the charging voltage

In practice it kind of works (i.e: if you have three cells in series you can charge them with a 12v wall wart), but it's not a very good idea because there's nothing to balance them.

There are numerous cell-balancing circuits, some batteries come with them, some do not and instead they have the bigger connector and the small connector for cell balancing.


That rudder is complete garbage. The boat would only reliably turn right.

>> No.1123166

Would differential thrust be easier than a servo controlled rudder?

>> No.1123194

It would be much easier, just two PWM signals and two motors, one spinning clockwise and the other counter-clockwise. The inertia from the rotor alone is enough to make the boat turn.

>> No.1123211
File: 1.26 MB, 2592x1456, IMG_20170129_184152896.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Check dis out:


>> No.1123224

Good work anon
looks like it could use a bit more power, but that's just my tastes...
Keep it up

>> No.1123229


I have a brushless motor and an ESC that I bought to make a larger airboat, but I think I'll make an airplane instead. Or an autogyro.

>> No.1123245

Looks like a pretty good job for a spic

>> No.1123313

Fuck man, I don't know why but all of a sudden I'm really interested in learning about quads, FPV, etc.

What's a good place to start? How much do y'all hate me for asking these questions?

Also, unrelated, but does anyone have experience with OpenROV? I've been thinking about picking one up now that I work on a tropical island for half of each year.

>> No.1123372
File: 724 KB, 1080x1920, IMG_20170129_080341591_HDR.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>Responses to every post in thread telling people his opinion
>2 lazy to take 36 question ham exam
>thinks he knows things good and does other things good too

>> No.1123429

That's preatty neato. What role does the Arduino play? Surely you just need a RC receiver with 2 channels connected directly to the motor & the servo? Or is there no RC receiver & the Arduino is serving as the receiver via wifi/bluetooth/zigbee or something?

>> No.1123448
File: 10 KB, 253x300, 16387434_691083967730348_6403309614082118196_n.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>People are literally here asking for opinions. Adding in my own opinions, however contrary to those of others, leads to insightful conversation regarding the subject matter.
>2 lazy to study for/take pointless test, that costs money to take, that has 0 relevance on my own activities, to be "legal" in compliance with laws that are never enforced
>well what the fuck do you know, then? Show me up. Show me how much of an idiot I am.

>> No.1123477

Let the troll starve fool.

>> No.1123844

>I think in theory you could just apply 4.2V * number-of-cells & stop charging when the resting voltage of the pack reached the charging voltage, but that would only charge the pack to ~70%.
That's actually not accurate, and could potentially be very dangerous. LiPos have very low internal resistance, and applying 4.2V to a discharged (let's say 3.2V) cell will result in a dangerously high amount of current flowing into the battery (roughly 50C instantaneous charge rate for a typical battery - i.e. 1000 mAh cell with 20 milliohms resistance). However, IF you were to do this (and somehow manage not to explode the battery and set your shop on fire), the battery WOULD reach 100% charge upon reaching 4.2V resting voltage.

Now, if the 4.2V power supply you apply to the cell is current-regulated (as a 12V wall wart, like [>>1123123] mentioned, generally is), it won't actually deliver the full 4.2V once connected, but will instead deliver the regulated current using whatever voltage necessary (i.e. for the 1000 mAh, 20 milliohm cell at a 3.2V resting voltage and a 5A regulated power supply, the voltage would be 0.02*5 = 0.1 volts above rest voltage, or 3.3V initial).

>> No.1123847 [DELETED] 

>What's a good place to start?
For pure introduction, watch some Flite Test videos. They're very well formatted for beginners. Also check out Joshua Bardwell's channel and OscarLiang.net for more in-depth content. That should keep you occupied for a while.

>> No.1123849
File: 55 KB, 1516x916, Dieffenbach Hoverguy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Anyone here planning on going to Flite Fest?

I kinda want to do a special build for it. Ideally something novel... a real crowd-pleaser. Still looking for ideas at the moment. So far I'm thinking:
>One or three of Otto Dieffenbach's Flyguys
>Some kind of flexible flying train or serpent, with a long segmented train/body following the engine/head
>A steampunk-style flying ship - maybe Jules Verne's Albatross gyrodyne, in multirotor form
>A caricaturized Q-plane, like so but maybe larger: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_BfO3t4lF4
>Do a formation aerobatic demo (Blue Angels style) with a few friends, some large high-visibility airframes and pan-and-tilt FPV (for the sake of tighter formation)
Input would be appreciated... additional ideas welcome.

>What's a good place to start?
For pure introduction, watch some Flite Test videos. They're very well formatted for beginners. Also check out Joshua Bardwell's channel and OscarLiang.net for more in-depth content (pretty much everything you could ever hope to know about miniquads and then some). That should keep you occupied for a while... and your wallet empty after not too long.

>> No.1123886
File: 98 KB, 1280x720, Crack Yak.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>can you recommend anything for somebody who is interested in getting into fixed wing but who doesn't have any particularly large open spaces nearby?
>Bonus if there is something cheap & which can eventually carry a small AIO fpv cam/vtx module.
Hobbyzone Sport Cub S fits the bill about perfectly, especially if you're absolutely newbie-tier since it has SAFE, which offers auto-levelling just like quadcopters do. And Hobbyzone even offers an FPV combo including the VA1100 camera, so it's a safe bet that it can carry an AIO unit.

But if you're already comfortable flying multirotors line-of-sight IN ACRO MODE, then I'd recommend building a RCfactory/TwistedHobbys 3D EPP plane instead (most any of them will do). It's not your typical beginner plane, but I've taught three beginners to fly with mine. Despite being an all-out aerobatic airplane, it works for me as a trainer because it's slow, light and incredibly durable. If you dial the rates down, you still have plenty of time to think things through, which is more than can be said for the big T-28s people were often training with a few years ago. If you DO crash, it's alright, because a) it's too slow to hit too hard, b) it's made of EPP and absorbs impact like a NERF ball, and c) if you DO break it, you can usually just glue the torn foam back together with Foam-Tac and be flying again in 15 minutes.
And despite being 32" span, these airplanes are still light and slow enough to fly in confined spaces. A tennis court is big enough for basic flight, and I can even 3D mine around my living room.
And I know it can meet your last criteria, since a friend of mine stuck an AIO on his then proceeded to fly it around a parking garage (mostly for the bragging rights of having flown an airplane through a parking garage).
And unlike other trainers, this isn't the sort of airplane you'll ever get bored of. Ever. Trust me.

>> No.1123896

Augmented reality night vision FPV on a beamer.

>> No.1123900
File: 159 KB, 1440x809, 16252533_1366016983460345_2413063995225207398_o.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


I have two arduinos, one working as a receive/motor/sevo controller and the other one as the radio control

>> No.1123918

I seriously want to go, I might be able to this year.
Agreed, I've flown a SCS on FPV before. Good luck in the wind, but on a calm day it's a decent little flyer.
Personally, I think "floaty" planes like the SCS make for terrible FPV platforms. Flying wings/pushers tend to fly better for FPV purposes. But, for a 'First Airplane / First fixed wing FPV" you shouldnt have too much of a problem with it. Just don't expect any crazy performance out of it, it's essentially he Inductrix of airplanes.

>> No.1123944

Do single engine planes bank in the same direction as the propeller is spinning on their own?

>> No.1123956

bank, no, roll, yes, same direction as prop rotation, no. Torque roll is caused by the same thing that makes helecopters spin out with no tail rotor, the fuselage will want to roll in the opposite direction of the prop. This counter rotation is typically trimmed out by slightly warping a wing, or trimming ailerons with your radio. Dropping a prop size can help as well if you have the ability.

>> No.1124064
File: 14 KB, 658x489, left-turning tendencies.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Opposite direction That's just one of four propeller-related (generally left-) turning tendencies.
Propeller torque effects
>Are the equal, opposite reaction to the torque of the engine acting on the propeller
>Act to roll the airplane about the thrustline axis, regardless of orientation
>Are proportional to power setting
>Is the result of dissymmetry of thrust in different sectors of the propeller arc (usually upward-moving and downward-moving sectors)
>Manifests when the oncoming airflow is oblique to the propeller axis (i.e. at large AOA, or less frequently sideslip), and is zero when thrustline is aligned with airflow
Spiral stream effects
>Are the result of swirl in the propwash impinging asymmetrically on the tail surfaces and/or fuselage
>Are most pronounced when the tail features a large, high-mounted dorsal fin and no ventral whatsoever
>Are minimal on airplanes which have nearly equal dorsal and ventral surfaces; i.e. modern F3A and F3P airplanes
And lastly, gyroscopic precession
>Is the gyroscopic response of the propeller (which has nonzero angular momentum) to pitch and yaw rates
>Is zero whenever the aircraft is not changing orientation
>For a standard-rotation propeller, will tend to yaw left in response to pitching up and will yaw right in response to downward pitch

All of these can, of course, be mitigated through counterrotation, as many F3P planes are now doing.

>> No.1124140
File: 52 KB, 736x552, Q-plane F:A-18.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Augmented reality night vision FPV
I'm not much of a programmer and have never even used an OSD before, so I don't really see that happening unless you're aware of something that already works off-the-shelf.
Not to mention, FPV gimmicks aren't exactly crowd-pleasers. Not unless there are giant FPV screens for everyone to watch.
>on a beamer.
Not familiar, unless you're talking about German automobiles.

>> No.1124144

I havnt had an rc car since I was a kid.

Recently found out about the traxxas xmaxx, that huge strong motherfucker.

I was so close buying it, but I figured it would be a mistake.

I would turn it into a long living hobby, and I got a niece and nephew whod cream their pants seeing it.
Good or bad idea?

Anyone here own it? Are the gear upgrades worth it too?

>> No.1124169

He means a projector.

>> No.1124191
File: 15 KB, 259x329, 1535-SPM-DX6[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Last time I was in the hobby was when the Spektrum DX6 was the hot shit, now it's old and having serious range issues. What is the go to tx these days?

>> No.1124244

That is a LOT of truck for a first hobby-grade rc... Id say start with a 1/10 scale truck for your first one, I had good fun with a Slash but there's other brands for cheaper.
Spektrum is still decent, they've kept their product line updated. I fly a older-gen DX8 myself, and people using the new versions seem to like them as well.
The REAL Hot Shit is the FRSky Taranis, though. It's a cheap 9ch transmitter with a LOT of programming flexibility. Has a steep learning curve but the benefits are worth it, to those that subscribe to the philosophy. The main weakness to the taranis is that it's so cheap, the whole thing feels like a plastic piece of garbage compared to a decent spektrum.

>> No.1124252

>Last time I was in the hobby was when the Spektrum DX6 was the hot shit, now it's old and having serious range issues.
Holy shit, I thought I was the only one.
>TFW fell for the DSM(1) meme
$300 down the toilet. At least my DSM2-only Gen 1 DX7 is still SORTA useful for ultra-micros...

>What is the go to tx these days?
I'd have to say the Taranis. Spektrum's DSMX game is still strong, though.

>> No.1124351

The brand new Taranis Q X7 is probably a better option for most users over the original Taranis X9D.

>> No.1124403

I know a guy who used a gen1 dx6 for years. When he finally upgraded, it was to a gen1 dx7... he still flies everything with it. Never any issues.
I wouldnt want to use one, I used to have a dx7 gen1 and it was so clunky compared to my current DX8.

Taranis is the go-to tx in multirotor circles, certainly, I'd say spektrum still dominates the fixed-wing market.

>> No.1124428

It was a great radio at the time and hasn't let me down until recently. The antenna on the RX are mangled and I think that's the issue.

>> No.1124491

Anyone have experience in diy transmitters? It seems like a straight forward build with lots of options. Im leaning that way but I have a junkyard of parts that keeps me awake at night with potential. I want to go further that flying vehicles though imagining a small fpv robot controlled by radio that can pilot larger vehicles through IR once in the cockpit. The price point on tech finally makes the idea of micro world live action adventure gaming a close reality.

Yeah. I wanna LARP mech warrior from the pilots POV in my back yard someday. Its a sickness.

>> No.1124540

The easiest way to do with will be through arduinos with bluetooth/radio/wifi modules, plenty of tutorials and code exist for that sort of stuff.
Good luck getting decent range out of that though. Perhaps you could get an arduino to drive one of those module-based TX systems, or get it to PPM-out into a "trainer" cable to a standard hobby transmitter.

>> No.1124597

>It was a great radio at the time
Eh, kinda. Both DSM and DSM2 protocols kinda sucked in noisy environments. FASST was definitely far superior. DSMX is just as good, though.
But what REALLY sucked about DSM is that they only ever released ONE receiver for it ever, before they completely dropped the protocol. Not only that, but it was also just a park-flyer receiver with mediocre sensitivity. And no later radios, TX or RX, were made backwards-compatible with DSM.

The Gen 1 DX8 is really where Spektrum finally struck a chord. That firmware and roller-based interface they've used on almost every radio since make for the easiest programming, by far, that I've ever had with a computer radio.
>Anyone have experience in diy transmitters?
Ehh... that kinda depends what you mean. I've played around with RC-over-telemetry (forget what it's actually called) in APM, both over the 915 MHz telemetry radios and also through a wifi-based telemetry link I put together. But nothing really with conventional-ish RC.

I have looked into more conventional DIY RC radios, though. There are some, including DIY Arduino-based radios running OpenTX, but hacking an existing transmitter seems like a better option.

>I want to go further that flying vehicles though imagining a small fpv robot controlled by radio that can pilot larger vehicles through IR once in the cockpit. The price point on tech finally makes the idea of micro world live action adventure gaming a close reality.
The real challenge there is going to be more associated with OSD development than transmitters.
>bluetooth/radio/wifi modules . . . Good luck getting decent range out of that though
Why not just use the same modules that commercial RC transmitters use?

>> No.1124703
File: 79 KB, 640x475, IMAG0747-1-1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Yes the diy community has a lot of options. Its mostly based around sending signal from switches to arduin then from arduino to transmitter packs. A lot of times an xbee but you can use the same parts from hobby products (just find the right right code for the output signal needed).
Which opens the door for any kind of switch system that has been hacked into an arduino. Any switch you can find, game controllers, even your brain waves if you got crazy. Any way. The point is a lot of work has been put into feeding those things input.
Also arduino can talk back and forth with R-pie. R-pie can talk to smartphone for programming input and transmitter menu display. This can be a shiny interface on your phone instead of a dingy LCD on the controller making more room for buttons or more compact controller.
With the main parts being plug and play, plus the nature of open source coding communities, Im surprised this isnt a bigger thing. Seems custom "riced out" transmitters would be more hip plus a great market for manufacturers. Cut out the assembly line and sell the parts.

...too soon?

>> No.1124707

I think it's a matter of lag.
The Arduino/RasPi systems you describe are going to have inherent latency, due to the nature of both the hardware and the software. Of course, no RC system is instant, but an Arduino/RasPi system will be noticeably slower than a generic AIO RC system

>> No.1124724

>>Arduino/RasPi system will be noticeably slower than a generic AIO RC system

Is it a matter of slow multipurpose chips Vs. unencumbered devoted hardware. Do the transmitter companies have a monopoly IC chips that take physical input and turn it into a signal? If so, Im patient I can wait for evolution.
Think a cheap CB/HAM radio be tuned to a receivers frequency? They get miles of range from simple antenna mods. Seems its a matter of feeding the right combo of signals (from the IC coding) at the right frequency. Right?

Might as well admit I want a control station not a transmitter at this point huh? Preferably with three screens in a small hooded booth that sits on my lap, with full dash board and flight controls. And air conditioning.

>> No.1124809

>Do the transmitter companies have a monopoly IC chips that take physical input and turn it into a signal?
Lolno, they're using COTS components. Lots of AVR, STM and PIC microprocessors at the heart of 'em. These companies don't have the budgets to be making their own semiconductor components, MAYBE with the exception of DJI (and even there, only to a very limited extent).
>Think a cheap CB/HAM radio be tuned to a receivers frequency?
Maybe the old 27 MHz AM receivers. If it's an LRS you're looking for, those already exist, mostly in 433 MHz band.
>Might as well admit I want a control station not a transmitter at this point huh? Preferably with three screens in a small hooded booth that sits on my lap, with full dash board and flight controls. And air conditioning.
This might help get you started: https://hobbyking.com/en_us/winbox-ground-control-system-v52.html

>> No.1124874

how about Turnigy and Frysky?

>> No.1124907


I'm no fan of Arduino, but if you manage to get latency into human noticeable range you're doing it wrong ... it's dog slow, but not that slow.

>> No.1124938

Frysky: FRSky. Unless there's a different "Frysky" that I'm not aware of, but it sounds so similar to FRSky that it's probably a cheap ripoff.
Turnigy: Pretty much just cheap ripoffs desu. They'll work but I wouldnt trust one long-term. I rarely ever see people using them.

>> No.1124940

oh i thought it was frysky but it might be frsky too

>> No.1124942

or maybe flysky

>> No.1124947

flysky I'm aware of, it's a cheap knockoff. Don't bother with them.

>> No.1124949

ok i might buy the 200 europoors frysky then the 16ch thingy x9 something it comes with a receiver

can i replace the receive when its broken? how much would it cost?

>> No.1125018

you mean the Taranis?
Yeah. You can get spare receivers. Anything FRsky will work with it. They cost like $25.

>> No.1125040
File: 458 KB, 1200x800, DSC08795.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


The new Turnigy Evolution has been pretty well received & seems to be a decent, compact (gamepad style), cheap solution if you're focussed purely on FPV/racing/acro multirotors. The limited number of switches & no dials etc. limits its suitability for more complex multirotors (aerial photography stuff) & fixed wing though.

The Taranis is a more traditional style radio with enough switches & dials to control pretty much anything you could ever want in your future RC hobby. The new (literally came out like 2 weeks ago?) QX7 model is also cheaper than the X9D.

The other benefit of the larger traditional style radios (like the Taranis range) is that you can add modules to the back to control different protocols. Banggood sell a cheap $10 multiprotocol module that lets you control all sorts of toy drones (Syma, Eachine, Hubsan, etc.) which is actually super fun.

>> No.1125062

I hate gamepad style, but that may be because I started with old-school nitro airplanes. Plus I've got big hands, which makes some of the smaller gamepad controllers uncomfortable.

>> No.1125064

Shit range of compatible receivers. At least the 9x and 9xr can support aftermarket transmitter modules, though, which kinda solves that issue (for a few more shekels that is). Also OpenTX.

>> No.1125547

is it this one or a knockoff? http://www.banggood.com/FrSky-ACCST-Taranis-Q-X7-2_4GHz-16CH-Transmitter-White-Black-p-1112717.html

>> No.1125609

Dont know about you but im new to all this. After a few reveiws I pulled the trigger and ordered one just a bit ago.

I really picked a good time to get into this. Every main piece of equipment im getting so far has come out recently and boggles the reveiwers minds. Bleeding edge tech is at shmuck price points.
16 channels for $120? Thank you and goodnight.

>> No.1125704

It's legit. Not sure why but there aren't many knockoff transmitters out there. Also FrSky is a Chinese company (not just manufacturing but HQ and everything) so it makes sense that they would use Banggood as a distributor.

>> No.1125744

Found mine at horusRC but had to get the battery seperate.

>> No.1125855

Whats a good flightcontroller that has gps? Maybe even 2gps so its more precise.

I wanna build a quadcopter from scratch/PNF and need good flightcontroller

>> No.1125858

Is there like a PCpartpicker but for quadcopters? Where you select radio& receiver, flight controller, motors, props, esc's etc?

>> No.1125878

That's legit. I'm not sure I've actually ever seen a fake Taranis, it's probably not an easy sell to a community that is quite technically minded & when there are so many good-enough cheaper alternatives from other manufacturers.

For GPS you're into APM/Pixhawk territory. Miniquad style flight controllers aren't really suitable - due to the fact that Betaflight/Cleanflight have none/limited GPS support.

You can look at builds on https://rotorbuilds.com/ & there is ecalc.ch/xcoptercalc.php for the more technical side of am-I-overloading-my-motors.

>> No.1126029
File: 65 KB, 1150x1322, Untitled.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Does anyone have an idea of what could be causing this issue?

I just tried to execute an AUTO mission on my octocopter, and it started behaving really strangely when reaching the waypoint and correcting the course towards the next waypoint, I thought it was going to crash so I canceled the mission altogether

I did an autotune and every calibration available in mission planner a couple of flights ago, I did see this behavior during one mission but only happened once

It seems that the octa is moving more than it's supposed to move in each axis

>> No.1126037
File: 32 KB, 1309x729, Untitled.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

This pic is from another AUTO mission on my pixhawk octa from a few days ago, the green spike shown in the graph is very similar to the one I had today

The multirotor attempts to make very aggressive maneuvers in the air and ends up losing altitude and speed when reaching waypoints

>> No.1126120
File: 163 KB, 720x1280, Screenshot_20170204-133742.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Is this a good buy for a beginner I only have little experience flying so I wanted so start out cheap and small

>> No.1126355

that quad says it comes without a receiver, the FlySky transmitter doesn't look like it comes with one. Don't confuse FLYSKY for FRSKY (mentioned earlier).

Also, make sure the goggles come with a receiver that matches the channels on the quad.

try something like this

>> No.1126358

>Miniquad style flight controllers aren't really suitable - due to the fact that Betaflight/Cleanflight have none/limited GPS support.
They are now. iNav was developed specifically for this purpose. https://github.com/iNavFlight/inav/wiki
>Whats a good flightcontroller that has gps?
Mainly DJI controllers. Most other brands I've seen tend to wander a lot in both position and altitude. Even with extensive tuning, most still just don't seem to compare with NAZA.

However, iNav isn't looking too shabby these days: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2AQf34Pgjc

>> No.1126362
File: 318 KB, 1221x916, IMG_20170204_153026.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Making progress on my 650 build, looking for advice on power distro. Battery power goes through the Pixhawk power module (which afaik is just a BEC + current sensor), then goes to the top plate of the frame which has a built-in PDB for the ESCs. What's the best way to split the power before it gets to the frame's PDB? I need to run a bunch of other stuff from battery voltage (at least two BECs for retracts/gimbal/VTXs/LEDs/etc.).

The solder pads on the frame's PDB are really small, so I don't particularly want to piggyback multiple wires to them & there must be a better solution than trying to stick a miniquad PDB in series somewhere.

>iNav was developed specifically for this purpose.

I've seen that, but considering you can get something like an APM Pro Mini for $37 (eg not much more than a F3 miniquad FC) but which runs full ArduCopter with Mission Planner support & arguably more stable/better featured codebase, it's hard to justify iNav in most situations IMO.

Obviously if you're trying to build to the absolute lowest budget (I literally saw a $100 GPS quad build a few weeks ago), or are trying to use equipment you already have, then I'm sure iNav is a good choice there.

>> No.1126807


right now i have an APM flightcontroller from a cheerson CX20 but i think its not really realiable

whats a good DJI flight controller like this that also has GPS? Preferably not too expensive

>> No.1126810

>shipping from china
>save 10%
>fake parts
>if something goes wrong it takes ages for a refund, if any ever happens
>wait 4 weeks for arrival

>> No.1126873

In my experience Banggood have surprisingly good support - they usually just resend within 48 hours, no questions asked, if something arrives faulty/incorrect.

HobbyKing on the other hand have the worst customer experience I've ever experienced & it took me about 2 months to finally get my money back for a DOA item. And the refund came from Paypal, not HobbyKing. And I had to return the item at my own expense to Hong Kong, even though it was shipped from the UK warehouse.

Naza M Lite maybe? Personally I would rather go with a APM/Pixhawk over DJI, simply for the much greater flexibility/options/compatibility. Just because whatever implementation of the APM controller came in your CX20 is no good doesn't mean that they're all like that.

>> No.1127069

I haven't messed with uC's in a few years.
That pic inspired me to break my stuff back out. Thank You!
Considering ripping the electronics out of a radio controlled car and using it as a starting point for controlling motors/servos,ect.

This is the kind of creativity I love to see on /diy/.

>> No.1127166

Yeah, Pixhawk/APM is probably the way to go for autonomous stuff. DJI products are like flying iphones, you can't really tweak them all that much.

>> No.1127642

So... after the Super Bowl I did a bit of digging.
Seems kinda interesting, especially RealSense. Apparently the Yuneec Typhoon H uses it.

I feel like it'd be more capable if the baseline could be widened, though. Most quads with collision avoidance have reduced speed ranges with it active, and I think limitations in depth perception are the main reason why. I'm thinking one camera on the tip of each front arm, instead of only a few inches apart, would help. Or use an optical flow algorithm that doesn't rely on stereoscopy.

>> No.1127708

It seems pretty impressive on the Typhoon H - there's a Flite Test video where a Yuneec rep demos it & his faith in the technology as he intentionally leads it into trees is pretty impressive. Of course we can't know what the arrangement between Yuneec/Flite Test was like, they could have had a gag order on any bad footage getting released, but I like to think not from the Flite Test guys


>> No.1127806
File: 238 KB, 635x476, optical flow.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Yeah. It definitely works up close; that's where stereoscopy-based depth perception is strongest. But I'd rather see an autopilot capable of longer-range, possibly higher-speed pathfinding, instead of this rat-in-a-maze, feel-your-way-through sort of navigation. Something that can match (or even exceed) my own abilities to navigate obstacles at high speed (after all, my FPV feed isn't stereoscopic, yet I still have sufficient perception to make my way between and around obstacles).

This seems like it could have the potential: http://people.csail.mit.edu/lpk/mars/temizer_2001/Optical_Flow/
Even though absolute distance isn't known from monoscopic optical flow, you can still deduce which direction you are headed (one of the two places in the flowfield where proper motion is zero), and then steer that velocity vector in the direction that maximizes time-to-impact (which can also be perceived from optical flow, even without absolute distance and velocity information).

>> No.1127964

>But I'd rather see an autopilot capable of longer-range, possibly higher-speed pathfinding, instead of this rat-in-a-maze, feel-your-way-through sort of navigation.

Path finding & obstacle avoidance are two different things though, so you can't really criticize a good implementation of the latter because it doesn't achieve something that it never set out to achieve in the former.

>> No.1127967

Just finished building my drone.
If I try to take off it just flips over forwards.
Motors work fine and equal so it has to be something with open cc3d
what do

>> No.1127969

This is usually the result of the outputs (motor power) producing something other than the expected result, from the flight controller's point of view. Make sure that:
>Board orientation and board orientation settings (in cleanflight) are correct, and that the little quadcopter responds correctly in cleanflight configurator when the quad is moved
>Motors are wired up in the correct order for the mixer in question (probably QuadX, I'm assuming?)
>Motors turn the correct direction when powered
>Propellers are not backwards/mixed up
I recommend keeping the props off until you have verified that everything else works correctly. One handy little trick is to arm the quad in angle mode, then tip it one way and the other. The low motors should spin faster while the high ones slow down. And for yaw, a disturbance in one direction should increase the speed of the motors turning in that direction and decrease the speed of the motors turning opposite of it. If and ONLY if that's all working correctly, then you can put your props on (making careful note to put the correct props on the correct motors... all rightside-up, of course).

>> No.1128004
File: 96 KB, 1302x768, SensorDrift.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Thanks I will get to it now.
I also seem to experience drifting sensors.
The model is perfectly still when plugged in and afterwards. It might not be 100% leveled as it is sitting on a table

>> No.1128009

After carefully calibrating and testing I found out that my motors spin up at different signal levels.
My best motor starts at 1056 us and my worst at 1178us.

Should I go for a refund?

>> No.1128010
File: 84 KB, 1300x768, calibrationNessecary.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Have a pic of my nessecary neutral calibration to visualise that

I've read from others who had this issue where it was caused by bad bearings

>> No.1128012

Have you done ESC calibration yet? And any particular reason why you're running two motors at 490Hz & the other two at 50Hz?

>> No.1128015
File: 675 KB, 1627x1078, IMGP6190.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


I've redone the esc calibration and left it to beep for 15 minutes. (high and low)

The colors indicate that the motors are all 490hz - or am I wrong? Its just the accessory switches that run at 50hz

pic related is my baby

>> No.1128053

>I've redone the esc calibration and left it to beep for 15 minutes. (high and low)

The whole process should take <30 seconds, if you're leaving it for 15 minutes I wouldn't be surprised if something was maybe going wrong.

>The colors indicate that the motors are all 490hz - or am I wrong?

You're probably right, it's been a while since I (or anybody else) used LibrePilot - why not flash Cleanflight/Betaflight? And check that your ESC firmware is up to date while you're at it?

>> No.1128055

New Problem ..
I configure the quadcopter, it receives my input just fine.
I save and disconnect usb - still works fine
I disconnect power and reconnect - it wont arm
It just wont arm.

Fuuuuuuuuck this shit

>> No.1128060
File: 211 KB, 1366x768, pieceofshit.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>why not flash Cleanflight/Betaflight
Because Cleanflight doesnt work

>> No.1128110

You successfully flashed Cleanflight onto the flight controller but then it won't connect?

>> No.1128249

>Path finding & obstacle avoidance are two different things though
How so? Is pathfinding not a sophisticated form of collision avoidance?

>> No.1128897

Whilst you could argue that on a conceptual level, I think it is the consensus of the UAV industry/community atm that they are semantically separate; that obstacle avoidance is a supplement to a human operator or set of GPS waypoints. Pathfinding necessarily includes obstacle avoidance, but obstacle avoidance can be valuable without pathfinding.

>> No.1128907

Why so namefag namefag?

>> No.1129930
File: 210 KB, 720x1280, Screenshot_20160629-091316.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Hi, I'm kind of new here and I don't really want to fly an RC drone, I want to use an infrared sensitive camera on my rifle scope so I can shoot in the dark.

I would like to transmit low latency video p2p from a cctv camera to my phone.

Since my gun will be right next to my head, can I just buy a run cam 2 or those other self enclosed cameras with wifi and pair it with my phone? Can I use a night owl or will that take some other parts?

>> No.1129940

Those cams are analog like rabbit ear tv of olden days. Look into wifi nannycams with low light/nv. You wont spook prey with ir spot (unless they have nvg too) but for critters its good. There are adapters that attach a webcam to microscopes that might work for a scope better than duct tape. The other option is check if your phone can usb-otg a webcam. That way you can wire it directly.

>> No.1129947
File: 16 KB, 500x375, elysium-manuel-adrian-holmes-screen-used-stunt-helmet-prop-set-6d10ae709ec2bb38f5a0301324106071.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

That or go all cyberpunk and get a pair of video goggles. Not the receiver type used by pilots but the movie type. With those you can wire an owl cam straight to them. No broadcasting needed.

>> No.1129968
File: 61 KB, 595x591, 347.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Ah, I see. This might be a stupid question, but how can you tell if a camera is digital or not? Is it still easy to take apart the lens so I can take out the IR filter?

I have considered doing this for the wired option, or pic related.


I'm just afraid of it getting disconnected which is why I want to go wireless. I'm also afraid of trying to disassemble this to take out the IR filter.

They're not too expensive, I might just buy both and see how they work.

>> No.1130000

Being an inspection cam i would wager lowlight is in its wheelhouse. Check description maybe spend a bit more.. Mounting it to a scope might get tricky. Pvc end cap, drill hole add gromet... never mind ezpz.

>> No.1130132

Why even bother with the phone? You could hard wire the camera straight to one of these:
Add a LiPo of appropriate size & switch, put it all in a tube, slap it on your rifle like a scope. Or go street samurai and make the display into a monocle.

>> No.1130874

>low latency
>wifi nannycam

I doubt those two things go together

>> No.1131473
File: 710 KB, 1920x1440, Engine Lube~01.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Drone with hundreds of flights
>On the workbench lubricating motors right now
>Test and flight time immediately lowered by 1min


I thought oiling would reduce noise and friction.

They're coreless brushed motors and I used ball bearing oil from the bike.

While the motors were dirty with dust, gravel and hairs entangled around the rotor they flew perfect... now that they're clean it's worse than before.

Don't understand... maybe I used too much oil and it's causing too much viscosity drag in the tight space between the rotor and the casing.

Anyone had something similar happening in toys with electric motors?

Should I wait? Should I keep using it till effect wears off? Need to put this stuff back to normal.

>> No.1131475

I was directed here from /g/

What's a good cheap starter quad with a camera you can get for $30 or so? I just want to toy with a cheap one before getting into the hobby.

>> No.1131478

Do you need the camera?

>> No.1131481

Yeah it would be nice to get some video of the flights

>> No.1131489

You don't use oil on bicycle bearings, dummy. You only use it on the chain. Bearings in things like the bottom bracket, headset and hubs need grease, not oil.

>> No.1131491

$50 will get you a Syma X5C. Although it's extremely good for the price, don't expect impressive video - we're talking about webcam quality with no gimbal/stabilisation.

>> No.1131492

Looking for a good quad for 400$ or less, any recommendations? Id be willing to up the budget depending.

I dont want a whole lot of features, a decent fpv cam with a screen on the remote, altitude hold and a working headless mode (all the dirt cheap drone headless modes don't really work as expected imo).

Also any thoughts on Arris for a racing quad? Theres a ready to fly kit on amazon that comes with a fpv headset for 400$ ill try to find the model.

>> No.1131497

I wasn't expecting a reply about the bike, but rather about the quadcopter motors. Lol

>> No.1131499

What type of drone is it that you want, exactly? You start off talking about a screen on the remote, altitude hold & headless mode, all of which are features you don't usually get/want on a racing quad, but then you ask about recommendations for a racing quad with goggles?

If you want a decent cheap racer, get an Eachine Wizard. If you want that other stuff, get something like a Hubsan H501S.

The first thing I found when googling for 'Arris racing quad' was an outdated QAV/ZMR 250 style frame, there are much better options than that now.

>> No.1131503

>it's extremely good for the price
And yet not even headless mode or one key return it has...

It's huge, you need a backpack to carry the controller and even the freakin auto-take off is missing and autopilot flight plan is non existent. Kek nice way of topping someone off of 50$...

maybe the money goes all into the 2MP camera instead of actual functionality.

>> No.1131504

Thanks, im interested in having both eventually and would be open to buying either or first

>> No.1131528

You want a GPS controlled drone for $50? Try to troll less obviously in future.

>> No.1131545

>GPS controlled drone for $50?
Hey, no one said anything about gps.

You are partially correct on that, but let's not be totally dumb either.

You need a gps sensor to send a drone 2km away do some shit and then come back automatically, but without gps modules many of these new mini drones do the same shit small scale inside your home.

Doesn't take any futuristic sensors to make a flight plan that will send the drone into the backyard, do a couple of perfect eights in the air and then return to the garage all without you even touching the controller in these new 30-50$ mini quads nowadays.

Anon clearly asked about 30$ starter quads not advanced ones.

>> No.1131550

Name one. Just one $50 quad that has indoor autopilot with no gps. Name one autopilot with no gps. Any price.
Just one.

>> No.1131608
File: 40 KB, 500x433, 51L0w-B4jpL.01_SL500_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Just the guys I'm looking for.
/g/ here, VR kinda made me forget what I really wanted, but I've just gotten back to looking at single eye displays.
I'm trying to work out what the deal with these is, we used to have the Spy Gear RC car thing, but that was monochrome, now there's this but it sticks over glasses, so it's not pressed up to your eye.
I'm also looking at old camcorders to salvage viewfinders from, or just any LCD module with a nice high res.
Anything else around?

>> No.1131610
File: 59 KB, 600x600, FPVNightVisionGogglesViewfinderMonitorMicroDisplay-SKUspanitemprop108703-descriptionImage0.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

There's also these but it looks more expensive than the module I posted above.
If I could just find a raw eyepiece that'd be fantastic... It almost looks like an off the shelf component.

>> No.1131623

How's your hacking like, Mr /g/ man?
If you can manage, try keyring digital photo frames, knockoff 6th gen iPod nano's, cheap smartwatches or regular smartwatch LCD panels if you can work out a way to drive them.

>> No.1131823
File: 61 KB, 600x888, 3c9.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Name one. Just one $50 quad that has indoor autopilot with no gps.
I could name a few models but spoon feeding you would only serve to keep you lazy and spoiled.

You are in a DIY board with a end-user consumer mentality... WTF is wrong with your head anon?

I was already doing that shit 15 years ago with my classmates in school extracurricular activities using programmable microcontrollers and cheap ass ultrasonic distance sensors to make drones solve mazes in autopilot without any human input.

Today anyone can pick tem up at a commercial store already assembled for 35$.

>> No.1131939

Just wow.

>> No.1131946

Can you actually name some? I'm the original poster who needed the recs not the one you are arguing with.

>> No.1131972

Try this

>> No.1131973

You don't know what you're talking about aren't you?

>> No.1131982

The troll knows. They just aint gonna say.

>> No.1131987

nah he's full of shit and got BTFO

>> No.1131996

>flying perfect figure 8's using ultrasonic sensors
>15 years ago


>You are in a DIY board

Which is why your trolling is so obvious. Try harder

>> No.1131998

Sure, there's a truckload of them... a quick 79$ limit search on ebay for keywords like "altitude hold", "auto take off/landing", "headless mode", "flight plan", "one key return", etc reveals quite a few.

The X301H for 54.99, the X401H for 75.99, the X601H for 72.99, the X916H for 34.99... (please tell me to stop already).

Regarding flight plan, you certainly cannot make one that will send the drone 2km away do something and then return without GPS/GLONASS positioning... but you can certainly do a plan that will send it to the garage, do a couple of perfect eights and return to the living room... and then let it fly automatically.

You know, it's for people starting out.

>> No.1132007

> perfect figure 8's using ultrasonic sensors
But who the f*ck ever said that ultrasonic sensors are used for drawing perfect figure 8's in the air????

*facepalm* this guy's hilarious.

First you say people are talking about GPS navigation when no one was even talking about GPS navigation.

Now your say people are talking about ultrasonic sensors for navigation when no one was even talking about ultrasonic navigation (they're for obstacle detection).

And you don't even understand the difference between "nowadays" and "15 years ago". Scroll up because I specifically wrote: "in these new 30-50$ mini quads nowadays" and the ultrasonic sensors was from "15 years ago".

Get off your meds lad, cause those marbles don't seem to be hitting very well upstairs.

But hey, feel free to keep replying with more of your entertaining strokes of brilliance... I rather enjoy them.

>> No.1132012


Let's recap. You said;

>Doesn't take any futuristic sensors to make a flight plan that will send the drone into the backyard, do a couple of perfect eights in the air and then return to the garage all without you even touching the controller in these new 30-50$ mini quads nowadays.

We called you out on that, because any sort of autopilot that actually works uses GPS and you don't get GPS in quads that cost $30-50. So yes, we were talking about GPS, and you have still yet to give a single example of a $30-50 quad that can do what you've described without it.

>The X301H for 54.99, the X401H for 75.99, the X601H for 72.99, the X916H for 34.99... (please tell me to stop already).

Please do stop. Because you obviously don't have any experience with these quads or even know how they work. Their waypoint navigation is based entirely upon estimates informed by IMU readings. In practice even the slightest breeze sends them drifting and they need human input to correct them. You'd be lucky if you could even have one fly out of the garage, turn around and come back in without having drifted/misestimated and flying straight into the wall.

>feel free to keep replying with more of your entertaining strokes of brilliance

Feel free to reply with an actual $30-50 quad that can do what you claim. Oh wait, you can't. Because it doesn't exist.

>> No.1132074

>any sort of autopilot that actually works uses GPS
English anon... do you speak it? Cambridge Advanced Learners Dictionary, page 403, Autopilot: noun, a device which keeps aircraft, spacecraft and ships moving in a particular direction without human involvement. Period. Whatever technology the developer chooses to use in order to achieve that goal is irrelevant. Get over it.

>we were talking about GPS
But I wasn't and pretty sure neither was the anon who requested a pointer on a $30 introductory quad.

>Their waypoint navigation is based entirely upon estimates
Exactly! Thanks for confirming what had been stated countless times before. I already mentioned that there are a few ways of achieving autopilot functionality in a drone, but some anon just keeps clinging to uncalled for satellite assisted navigation technology like a dog with rabies that just doesn't let go. Good luck with that in mapping the interior of a cave or an apartment floor.

>In practice even the slightest breeze sends them drifting
Exactly... the term "cheap beginner quad" says it all... its a beginner quad that flies outdoors, but flight plan is only reliable under a covered space... that's what indoors means. Backyard only in perfect conditions. Otherwise fly it in the living room or garage, or a large covered space if you have one.

>You'd be lucky if you could even have one fly out of the garage, turn around and come back
Agree. In a windy day yes, but you do it at night when the air is perfectly still and presto, mi amichi. If the anon who asked doesn't want to do that, he can always close the doors and windows to be safe while having the drone flying around his head in circles or going back and forth the house all by itself until he gets enough hang of it and is ready for an outdoor one.

Just to make sure we are on the same page... I hope we are still discussing "good 30$ toy grade beginner quadcopters with camera" here (as per the original request).

>> No.1132078


>Feel free to reply with an actual $30-50 quad that can do what you claim.

Still waiting.

>> No.1132121

Share the full logs, would help.

How is your COG?

What size octacopter are we speaking of?

>> No.1132395
File: 3.87 MB, 3456x4608, IMG_20170217_224300.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Building an Aurora 90mm. It'll be my ... fourth quad I guess (Hunter V-Tail 500, Blade NanoQX, DJI Mavic Pro) but the Hunter didn't go well and still needs rebuilding and the NanoQX is pretty horrible to fly. Nothing needs to be said about the Mavic.

Waiting on the FC and batteries, plus some wires/solder/bits and pieces.

>> No.1132592
File: 269 KB, 1000x1000, 20170216_092727.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Decided to take apart my hacked-together Martian and put in a BrainFPV stack. Here's its current sad state.

>> No.1132693

Ive looked into the Hubsan before but i read a lot about issues with yaw and motors burning quickly. Which is a shame because it has all the features i want out of a camera drone and the video quality looks to be really good.

Anybody here actually use one? Any other recommendations like the H501S? Id be willing to pay more for the same features just for better quality

>> No.1133451

he named a 55€ quad. Lurk ebay more and you'll find it for 50

Some retards, seriously

>> No.1133554

He named a 55€ quad. He didn't name a 55€ quad that can 'do a couple of perfect eights in the air and then return to the garage all without you even touching the controller'.

>> No.1133558
File: 486 KB, 1219x914, IMG_20170219_140351.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Why are GoPro apparently the only ones that can make an action cam with a mic that isn't complete trash? This SJCAM is going straight back.

Hubsan have so many models now it's hard to keep track. The 'original' X4 (H107 maybe?) always used to be a solid recommendation for a first indoor+outdoor quad, but that doesn't mean that all of their products are going to be as good.

>Any other recommendations like the H501S?

The problem when you start to reach that sort of price is that you're pushing second hand Phantom 3 territory, which will be infinitely better if you want a camera drone.

>> No.1134619

How do you all feel about factory reconditioned phantom 3s? Is that relaible?

>> No.1134634

how much did your makeshift frame weigh?

>> No.1134732
File: 372 KB, 1222x916, IMG_20170122_121216.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

If we're talking reconditioned by DJI or a reputable third party then I'd have no qualms, but I'd avoid random 'factory reconditioned' units from individual ebay/amazon sellers. Make sure you get a warranty, etc.

I didn't weigh the frame itself, but the whole build (without battery) is just shy of 300g so the frame certainly isn't 'heavy'. The screws are surplus to requirement now & could be removed to save a few grams, but I like the a e s t h e t i c.

>> No.1134839

Does having the flight controller too high or low on the quad impact performance or change flight characteristics?

>> No.1135200

Shouldn't make any difference. You could have your flight controller on the end of a meter long pole attached to your quad and it would theoretically fly the same - distance of the FC from the frame doesn't change rate of rotation, which is all that really matters.

>> No.1135773

Does the FC not use any sort of accelerometer filtering?

>> No.1135826

Accelerometer is only used to determine level/horizon when flying in auto-level mode, it's not used at all in rate/acro mode.

>> No.1136052
File: 145 KB, 730x730, s450911472334035227_p252_i20_w730.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I've been sorely tempted to add the Crusader GT2 200 to my collection, but I don't like the electronics on the ARF version.

The VTx seems to have a very high failure rate out of the box, and they aren't shipping the current version with the 2480kv motors that most of the review versions got.

I emailed Diatone HK today and I'm now waiting on my frame kit with the low-profile 13mm side plates.

I'm planning on sticking the TBS Powercube Elite Bundle on there and hoping it'll fit under the 13mm sideplates. I'll also have the 21mm sideplates if that doesn't work, but part of the appeal is the sleekness.

>> No.1136684
File: 259 KB, 1206x904, IMG_20170226_171122.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Glacial progress on the 650 continues! Got the Pixhawk, RC receiver, telemetry radio, GPS, BECs & strobons mounted. Got to mount the RC antennas properly, then mount the battery plate, then I'll be ready for the firmware config & maiden flight. If it all works properly I'll add the gimbal+Yi, FPV camera, video switcher, VTX & retract controller.

FWIW I use the flight controller (Diatone D-Link) in two of my builds & I quite like them.

>> No.1137510

Yeah; although I'd rather use an F4-based FC for futureproofing I'm mainly concerned about having the VTx fail and needing to send it back to China for replacement. That and I enjoy building from scratch instead of getting RTF or ARF.

Also it'd be cool to have a fully DShot and 3-6S capable setup.

>> No.1138119
File: 2.58 MB, 3456x4608, IMG_20170301_192307.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Batteries for this build finally arrived, along with a DSMX USB adapter for connecting a Spektrum TX to sims and the tiniest DSMX receiver I've ever seen (mSD card for scale).

>> No.1138327

Hey I'm new to this hobby and I have parts for drone ready to be build.
One thing is considering me which is the battery. Is it going to explode? Am I going to die?

>> No.1138709

Yes. That always happens. We are all ghosts here. Maybe a safer hobby for you. Something with tissue paper and cotton balls.

>> No.1138719

No need to scare the new guy... they only explode if you look at them funny, or say disparaging things about them.

>> No.1138801

Don't leave them charging overnight or when you're out - preferably charge them where you can see if something goes wrong.
Return them to storage charge after you use them.
Keep them in a fire resistant bag or box.
Don't over discharge them.
If they get physically damaged be very careful and preferably dispose of them.

>> No.1138841

Only if they're made by Samsung.

>> No.1138851

Most of the hobby has never seen an actual Lipo fire, but we all know someone who has.

If you don't want to set your house on fire always have your lipos charging near you and store them in a fire proof area.

>> No.1139128

What is a good forum for quads?

>> No.1139133


>> No.1139392
File: 906 KB, 1500x2563, 20170303_165114.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Got delayed by a bad ESC. We're back up and running now.

>> No.1139549

can someone explain the wide x meme? seems like a bad idea.

>> No.1139700

How about small scale ground based fpv robots with limited flight/"jumpjet" capabity?

I think im obsessed with a hoby that doesnt exsist yet.

Bought fpv gear and came to the realization im not a flight jock and have little interest in running around in circles but like running around.

I see a market full of cheap gear that can make me small, quick and agile. Flying is fun but I want to be able to land, scurry about, poke at the world and scoot away.

Perhaps a little bird like thing. Two whegs, two props and a beak like manipulator. Not intended for hovering or long flights, more like jumping/safe falling and ground effect scooting. Im working on it.

>> No.1139805

What do you see wrong with them?
They're a nice balance between H and X frames - you have a decent amount of room to work with, but you have separate arms so replacing them is a lot easier. I guess you get a bit of extra weight/drag, but I don't personally care about that too much.

>> No.1139909

in terms of speed and sharing motor load a stretched x helps, a wide x has no real purpose other than keeping the quad small.

>> No.1139917

By wide X to you mean true X (as opposed to stretched X length-wise) or do people actually make width-wise stretched X quads?

>> No.1139926


is width stretched. imo its basically a lazy design that comes from slapping the main body into a tight x

>> No.1140076

If you're talking about Alien/Martian, Armattan F1, etc. styles of frame then it gives you some of the benefit of handling/tuning that an X frame has over a H/deadcat, but while giving you a lot more build space than an X frame normally would.

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.

Not DMCA removals