/rcg/ - drone & remote control general

[Anonymous No.1340304]

What's everybody working on? We've got a week of awful weather here so no chance to fly my new Asgard32 Flowride :(

---------------------

Somebody complained the last thread didn't have useful links in the OP, so here's my pick for beginners. No UAVFutures shilling or RotorRiot douchery.

https://oscarliang.com/mini-quad-racing-guide/

https://www.fpvknowitall.com/ultimate-fpv-shopping-list/

https://www.flitetest.com/

[Anonymous No.1340692]

I'm working on this motorized glider thingy, wingspan around 2m chord 44mm and thickness 4.4mm. The frame is a carbon fiber tube and the wings are also a carbon fiber tube with 3d printed spars slid on them and then glued to keep them in place. The motor mounts and all that are also 3d printed and very light.

I'm actually considering if i could at some point start producing these in a bit bigger numbers and selling them, i could probably sell these at 2/3 the price of the cheapest glider kit while still making atleast some profit. Thoughts?

[Anonymous No.1340693]

>>1340692
Oh and i forgot to mention that due to the 3d printed nature of the design it can be adjusted to fit almost any hardware, electric or nitro, different battery sizes, gps/autopilot systems and so on.

[Anonymous No.1340741]

>>1340692
I might buy 1?

[Anonymous No.1340744]

>>1340304
any info how how to implement fpv on a quad?
also info on how transmitting works?

[Anonymous No.1340773]

noob question
Do Brushless motors really have to be CW and CCW?
or can they just be the same and invert some phases, voltage, etc?

[Anonymous No.1340784]

>>1340773
The only difference is the thread direction for the prop nut (the idea being that the prop spinning won't loosen the nut). With the nyloc nuts everyone uses these days, it's a lot less important to have the correct direction. You can swap the direction of a motor by swapping any two motor wires, or just set it in the ESC firmware.

[Anonymous No.1340788]

>>1340784
I see now, thanks

[Anonymous No.1340805]

>>1340744
>any info how how to implement fpv on a quad?

https://oscarliang.com/fpv-guide/

>also info on how transmitting works?

The overwhelming majority of us use analogue 5.8GHz systems, because digital is still too expensive, too big & heavy, has too much lag & less graceful degradation than analogue.

>>1340773
>>1340784
>>1340788

Using all CCW motors is the best option because then you only need regular threaded nyloc nuts.

[Anonymous No.1340859]

How can I make sure nothing will short from moisture if I land in wet grass?

[Anonymous No.1340862]

>>1340692
>I'm actually considering if i could at some point start producing these in a bit bigger numbers and selling them
Is the L/D ratio optimized?

[Anonymous No.1340865]

>>1340805
thanks for the quick response anon

[Anonymous No.1340866]

>>1340859
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8ycmroFQSs

here are some ideas

[Anonymous No.1340869]

>>1340859
also see here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4z8QMgTEA4

[Anonymous No.1340871]

>>1340859
Heat shrink on all of your wires, electronics in a plastic bag, and if you're really paranoid you can silicone up all of your electronics. Oh and do keep in mind that brushless motors, due to some wizardry don't give a shit about water, they will function even when submerged.

[Anonymous No.1340873]

>>1340862
The design is not that mature yet, actually how the hell would i go about achieving that? So far i've just about figured the best method to produce it.

[Anonymous No.1340878]

>>1340873
When you are selling a product you have two options: make it work good or make it look nice. ideally you should be doing both but either one will get you sales. Right now yours is neither. If you wanna make it look good, I'd get a book on military/futuristic aircraft and sketch out some designs. if you wanna make it work good read up on aerodynamics and either use a wind tunnel or XFOIL to figure out the the optimum L/D ratios. Obviously it is easier to just make it look badass so I would choose the former option.

[Anonymous No.1340885]

>>1340871
>due to some wizardry

It's not wizardry, it's just an inherent property of magnet wire.

[Anonymous No.1340893]

>>1340871
>>1340885
Really? So I could watercool an outrunner just by immersing the whole thing in water? Sounds like wizardry to me.

[Anonymous No.1340922]

>>1340885
>magnet wire
What is magnetic about it wrt any other wire?
Unless you mean enameled wire, in which case the clue is in the name, and the 'property' is the fact that it's insulated lol.
Although any water working it's way into the way of any fields will absolutely have a detrimental effect.

[Anonymous No.1340927]

>>1340922
Enameled wire is often called magnet wire because its most common applications involve using it in windings in combination with magnets to make motors, loudspeaker voice coils, etc..

>>1340893
It's not wizardy so much as simply that the wire that looks bare isn't actually bare. If the windings in an outrunner were bare wire, then adjacent windings (which are separate phases) would short against each other.

[Anonymous No.1340944]

>>1340927
>Enameled wire is often called
I know that, I just want to encourage people to think critically about using stupid names for things.

[Anonymous No.1340962]

>>1340944

Well, then you should probably think more critically yourself, because:

1.) It's perfectly normal to name an item after either its intended purpose or most common usage. The de-facto typical application for magnet wire is in making electromagnets of one kind or other.

2.) If you want to be the technical jackass that you so clearly wish to be, magnet wire/enameled wire isn't actually coated in enamel.

>Although described as "enameled", enameled wire is not, in fact, coated with either a layer of enamel paint nor with vitreous enamel made of fused glass powder. Modern magnet wire typically uses one to four layers (in the case of quad-film type wire) of polymer film insulation, often of two different compositions, to provide a tough, continuous insulating layer. Magnet wire insulating films use (in order of increasing temperature range) polyvinyl formal (Formvar), polyurethane, polyamide, polyester, polyester-polyimide, polyamide-polyimide (or amide-imide), and polyimide.[3]

So eat a dick, you god damn pedant. Nobody cares.


>>1340922
>Although any water working it's way into the way of any fields will absolutely have a detrimental effect.

Unless you're referring to something other than the magnetic fields as "fields", no, it won't. The magnetic permeability of water is almost identical to air. The increased viscosity might cause problems (especially at very high speeds where cavitation may occur), but there isn't really an electrical problem with submerging a brushless motor in water. Just corrosion (aided by electrolysis on exposed contact points), the aforementioned cavitation issue, possible degradation of the insulation due to water absorption, and lubricant being washed away.

So, yeah, if none of this is an issue for you, it's perfectly fine to use random motors underwater. That's not being sarcastic; all that might actually not be an issue in your case.

[Anonymous No.1341325]

I have a 3s drone I built a while ago for my brother, the thing is fun but really loud, I run gemfan5x3 props on it on some DIS 2300kv motors. I would like something small to fly around my house, and outside by my garden too. I already have the turnigy 9x radio so I figured I'd look into tinywhoop based designs, now brushed motors don't convince me at all, but I'm starting to see 1s brushless build popping about and those look like fun builds and perhaps with decent noise levels.
What flight time numbers do you think these sort of builds would get (stuff like build/10267 and build/10292 over at rotorbuilds)? would not running fpv gear on em give em any significant more flight time?
The one on the picture gets more than 3 mins apparently and i wonder if that's close to the maximum expected performance or it could be improved.

[Anonymous No.1341902]

>>1341325
Tell me
- what battery they use (s and mah)
- propeller diameter
- how much the whole thing weighs
And I'll work that out for you.
Optional for extra accuracy:
- the propeller hub diameter
- the inside and outside diameter of the duct

[Anonymous No.1341904]

>>1340871
>>1340885
Isn't it because motor wires are varnish coated except at the ends where the current is fed in and out of the windings?

If they put some kind of protection (heat shrink or something) over the end where current was fed in, then varnished the rest, the motor would work submerged. Never tried it though, don't intend to.

[Anonymous No.1342802]

Anyone from the UK took any nice snow shots recently? It's too windy here

[Anonymous No.1343116]

So jealous of this guy. He has all the RC stuff in the world and his gf is insanely hot.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MrbMqSN7to

[Anonymous No.1343152]

So I'm fucking around with OpenCV/computer vision for a navel surveillance project, and I'm looking for a good blimp platform to base it off. Something nice and big that can lift a large cargo, and maintain whatever gas is used to fill it for a LONG time.
Basically I'd have a blimp full of hydrogen/helium/whatever, some solar panels on the top, maybe 100w worth, a box hanging underneath with some batteries, satellite coms, gps and a custom flight controller, with some thrusters on the sides.

I won't bother with the OpenCV for now, that comes later, I just wanna get something that could work as a base platform, but I will say that I want this thing to be in the air for MONTHS at a time, over the sea, traveling at maybe 40,000ft (10km) so it never has clouds covering it's panels, during the day recharging it's batteries and having it's thrusters on, at night using that battery energy to run the thrusters. If we're talking 100w panels, 50w total thrusters, that's .6kWh of batteries.

I'm mostly worried that the balloon would deflate over time, like party balloons. Does anyone else have experience with blimps? Perhaps I could have a small hydrogen cylinder that constantly topped it up. Maybe some salt water, and just use hydrolysis if the pressure got too low.

[Anonymous No.1343157]

Hey /rcg/, what is a good heavy lift drone design I can make with 3d printed parts and carbon fiber tubes?

[Anonymous No.1343170]

>>1343157
how much do you want to lift?

[Anonymous No.1343173]

>>1343170
DSLR and Gimbal

[Anonymous No.1343178]

>>1343157
Anything big enough to hold a Gimbal that can hold a DSLR will also lift both. I do recommend some sort of cage around the DSLR, though. Something with soft, bouncy edges.

[Anonymous No.1343254]

>>1343157
Just design the frame yourself and buy they electronics as a kit.

[Anonymous No.1343871]

uFL connectors were a mistake.

[Anonymous No.1343887]

>>1343152
So essentially you want something like Google's Project Loon? What's your budget? Because I presume something like this will be 6-7 figures USD to pull of realistically.

[Anonymous No.1344200]

>>1341902

Apologies for the delay after such a generous offer with help, been away this weekend and i haven't been able to check back.

Most of the designs I'm seeing seem to be based on 1s batteries with 550mAh, though I've seen people run double 1s setups for the instances where they would be flying the same micro outside. Prop wise I've seen people praising the TBS tiny whoop props, those are 0.75mm hub size, with 30mm blades and a height if 7.44, normally on the whoop frames. I'd like to go with 0603 motors and that should land me under 25 grams without batteries, duct size I can't find the specifics. Again I'm mostly interested in a safe for the indoors micro, I like the idea of ducts and low weight in case I bump into stuff, and not something terrible noisy, I'd like to have something capable of indoor use, but for that i wouldn't mind ending up building a micro not based on a whoop frame, that is without guards and all that if it where to yield higher flight times without turning into the screeching machine my 3s is.

[Anonymous No.1344379]

>build my first quad
>live in the snowbelt
>terrified to crash it in snow and short the FUCK out of everything
>have way better stuff to spend my time on when there's no snow on the ground

~_~

[Anonymous No.1344385]

>>1341325

I've never seen a 1s build capable of flying longer than about 4-5 minutes.

Once you're past whoop-class (1102 and larger) the motors and props on 1s brushless quads are typically capable of providing enough reliable thrust for a much larger payload - you just need appropriate ESCs. So you get these situations where the primary bottleneck on flight time is battery voltage, and you can literally double your flight time just by going 2s at the same MAh. But even if you're running 2s, you get into the same situation at low voltages. So you almost immediately want to start looking at 3s.

1s is a dead end. 2s is alright but not totally ideal. 3s is currently the sweetspot for 2"-2.5" prop quads. The lower you can get weight, KV, and prop blades/pitch the longer your flight times will be per MAh.

[Anonymous No.1344387]

>>1344200
>I'd like to go with 0603 motors

Everything I have read about 0603 suggests that they are impossibly fragile. One or two crashes and you are already going to be replacing a motor. If you really want to go that small, brushed is still the way to go at this time.

[Anonymous No.1344399]

>>1343871

You're not fucking supposed to solder those

and holy shit you are BAD at soldering...

[Anonymous No.1344446]

Dji has no fault, the best.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gK2UPyoxhgI

[Anonymous No.1344549]

>>1344399
>You're not fucking supposed to solder those

Yes I know. However one of the best ways to prevent them from popping off is to solder the outside of the connector (which is ground) to the ground plane on the side of the PCB.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2afwhOXVb8c

Hot glue melts under the heat produced by the VTX, superglue wicks inside the connector & makes it impossible to remove, etc. They come with some sort of semi-hard potting compound on the stock pigtail, but that's an absolute bitch to remove & I don't have anything similar anyway.

>and holy shit you are BAD at soldering...

What, because it's a nice shiny joint? It's literally bridging between a connector that isn't designed to be soldered & around to the side of a PCB, so of course it's going to be a slightly unsightly blob, but in terms of soldering technique & in that context it's a decent joint.

I suppose you think picrelated is all BAD as well? (Though tbf the stuff on the right is far from my best.) Do you even wash your flux away with isopropanol bro?

[Anonymous No.1344550]

>>1344549
Everything on the right side of the picture is a cold solder joint.
Its not supposed to be pockmarked, your penetration is pretty poor.

Its not the worst in the world, and itll probably work, but dont go off pretending that its high level work because it simply isnt.

"being shiny" isnt the end all for soldering

[Anonymous No.1344552]

>>1344550
So that's a cold joint, according to you? Lel.

[Anonymous No.1344556]

>>1344550
>>1344552
And let me guess, these are all BAD as well? (And yes, I redid that top right one after).

[Anonymous No.1344559]

>>1344379

[Anonymous No.1344560]

>>1344556
>gets upset when critiqued
>posts even worse solder joints the second time

baffling
What sort of formal soldering training do you have?

[Anonymous No.1344568]

>>1344560
>even worse solder joints

The key to good trolling is not to be so obvious.

[Anonymous No.1344571]

>>1344560
> being a smug contrarian cunt instead if highlighting the problem.
Unless of course, there is no problem you giant faggot..

[Anonymous No.1344582]

>>1344560

I'm not that guy, and I have never had any solder training, but I have soldered many things so I more or less know when the solder flowed well and when it didn't. I really wish I had actually had some decent instruction at some point.

And it's quite possible that I need to learn much. Is pic-related good, bad, or in-between, and if it's not good, what do you think was done wrong?

[Anonymous No.1344594]

>>1344582
That's definitely not a good joint as far as critical technique is concerned, you can see 'ridges' that show that I didn't remelt the entire blob as I added subsequent wires. Really if you're doing something like this & solder one wire, then let it set before adding a second (& so on) wire, you want to reflow the entire thing & not just part of it. Of course that's in an ideal world, in reality this will be more than fine.

>>1344559
PlastiDip is superior IMO, because it peels off easily when you need to repair/change something.

[Anonymous No.1344672]

>>1344594
never would have thought about plastidip used for that, is that what's on the left of >>1344549 over teh conectors?

[Anonymous No.1344688]

>>1344672
Yup, provides some peace of mind against shorts & some modicum of strain relief for small wires.

[Anonymous No.1344696]

>>1340692
I'd definitely buy one.

[Anonymous No.1344951]

>>1344559

Nice.
Heading to the hardware store ASAP

>>1344594

plastidip is also a good idea, but it seems like it would be relatively heavy?

[Anonymous No.1344953]

>>1344951
>it seems like it would be relatively heavy?

Maybe if you're counting tenths of a gram on a tiny 1S brushed build, but if you're talking about a 4S 5" build it's utterly negligible.

[Anonymous No.1344963]

>>1344953

I'm somewhere in between. 3s on 2"

I'm considering going in deeper on my next build, but with what's on the market today I can realistically build around 2" props and plausibly exceed 12:1 thrust to weight for 3-4 minutes with the possibility of pushing that out to as much as 16:1 on a hex. So I don't feel a lot of need to go bigger.

[Anonymous No.1345399]

>No UAVFutures shilling or RotorRiot douchery.
>instead shills bardwell referral links

you went full jew theres a reason people like me come here and not shill hugboxes

[Anonymous No.1345476]

>>1344387
>>1344385
I guess I'll have to comit to a whoop with around 3 mins for indoor flying forst then and perhaps I'll build something else afterwards trying to target low noise and better flight time. I'd stilç rather skip brushed motors tho, I don't want to have to deal with replacing motors every now and then, and a ducted frame should protect my motors to an extent of I was to go with small and fragile...

[Anonymous No.1345559]

>>1340873
it can be done fairly easily with approximations of the induced drag from the potential flow theory
t. optimised a glider that way

[Anonymous No.1345642]

>>1344200
That's weird, at a guess of 60% system efficiency I got 25 minutes. Either the simulation is wrong or the efficiency is of these tiny drones are crazy low like 12% efficient.

[Anonymous No.1345644]

>>1345559
>potential flow theory
>drag
U wot m8? Potential flows are only valid for inviscid flows.

[Anonymous No.1345649]

>>1344200
Yep the maths is right, from this 0603 motor data chart the efficiency is about 19%. So there's your problem, it isn't actually the battery, these microdones just have really bad efficiency.

[Anonymous No.1345667]

>>1345399
At least Bardwell links to products he actually thinks are good, instead of UAVFutures linking to whatever crap Banggood pay him to.

[Anonymous No.1345706]

>>1343887
I was thinking more a rigid blimp with maneuverability rather than a hot air balloon.
I wouldn't want to spend much more than $6k on the balloon itself, and I've seen a couple around that price range, but nothing about how much they leak.
I might just try fabricating one from scratch myself, just need to work out a material to do so with.

[Anonymous No.1345723]

>>1345706
I know very little about dirigibles, but from what little I've gleaned in the past from YouTube videos etc. that sort of budget will get you something like a 12ft blimp that will stay airborne for maybe a few days.

[Anonymous No.1345726]

>>1345723
Then I wonder where the leaks are from, the seams in the material or small helium atoms penetrating the material itself?
I once had a balloon full of air, in a cupboard, it stayed inflated for a year and a half.

[Anonymous No.1345731]

>>1345726
Air & helium/hydrogen are completely different things. An 11" latex party balloon inflated with air will stay inflated indefinitely because the molecules of the gases that make up air are too large to diffuse through the latex. But the same balloon inflated with (pure) helium will only float for ~18 hours before so much helium has diffused through the latex that it will no longer have enough lift. Treated with HiFloat it will do 1-3 weeks. Mylar (microfoil) balloons will float for the same sort of time as HiFloat treated latex.

The larger you go the longer float time you'll get. A HiFloat treated 36" latex balloon will float for potentially a few months. But I'm pretty sure you can't use HiFloat on something like a chloroprene weather balloon for high altitude, because the expansion will probably negate the effect of the HiFloat.

[Anonymous No.1345963]

>>1345731
I thought it only lasted so long because of the size of the air molecules, oh well.
I'll check out hi float, and I was also looking at Mylar. Might just have to to some tests to see what lasts longest.

>The larger you go the longer float time you'll get
I guess this explains airships from the early 1900's then?
Anyway thanks, I'll make some mylar balloons and see how long they last

[Anonymous No.1345984]

>>1345963
Don't forget during your calculations/simulations that mylar doesn't stretch like latex/chloroprene, so for a high altitude flight your initial fill will need to be substantially beneath the capacity of the envelope to allow for expansion as atmospheric pressure reduces. Keep us updated, this sounds like a super interesting endeavour!

[Anonymous No.1345988]

>>1340304
do you have to remove flux after soldering electronic stuff?

[Anonymous No.1345998]

>>1345984
Will do, thanks

[Anonymous No.1346037]

>>1345644
It's called Prandtl's lifting line theory which is based on the lift and circulation you get from potential flow (Kutta-Joukowski)
Viscous drag comes from 2D wind tunnel tests
It's obviously not as accurate as with using CFD software but i think it good enough for that guys purpose

[Anonymous No.1346085]

>>1344582
They're not awful, but they're not great either. Looks like your technique is basically fine, but you are putting too much solder on the joint and not getting good wetting. What you need is a good flux (and not just flux core solder). This will make it easier to wet the pad fully, and then you won't be tempted to add so much solder.

[Anonymous No.1346086]

>>1344688
>>1346085
>>1344582
Just saw that these are two separate people, here's a (you) for the second (first) guy.

[Anonymous No.1346109]

>>1345667
Thats an opinion i guess, you are entitled to that.
UAVFutures is better than bardwell though.

[Anonymous No.1346275]

>>1346037
That theory is so confusing, I've never understood it. I do understand the Kutta-Joukowski theorem however. Anon should just choose a NACA airfoil with already known lift and drag coefficients.

[Anonymous No.1346284]

>>1345988
Just wipe it off? It looks kinda nasty but i don't think it actually matters at all.

[Anonymous No.1346295]

>>1345988
iirc it's acidic(?) so you should scrub it off, which is super easy anyway, just grab a toothbrush and some alcohol and brush it away. Maybe use a microfiber cloth for bigger stuff.

[Anonymous No.1346306]

>>1346284
>>1346295
Acid flux is for plumbing, rosin flux is for electronics. You shouldn't be using acid flux on your quads.

[Anonymous No.1346316]

>>1346109
UAVFutures just shills whatever flavour-of-the-week RTF quad banggood/gearbest pays him to. Bardwell actually teaches people useful things.

[Anonymous No.1346322]

Tfw maiden is successful & nothing explodes~

[Anonymous No.1346330]

Just finished punching a bunch of fake rivets into pic related. Bought a Tornado Titan Pro but hate the paint job so I grabbed a blank shell to fuck with, gunna paint it like a USAF P-51 and nose art it up as the "Sultan of Skid". Haven't RC'd for about 16 years and my last flown model was a 5 channel P-51, (lost it, a Piper Cub and a UH-1 in a house fire) figured I'd fuck around on the ground for a bit to get my reflexes back before I get back in the air.

[Anonymous No.1346332]

>>1346330
Pic related. Raced my missus down the street in her car, she overtook it at 62km/h.

[Anonymous No.1346344]

Anybody else tried Butter Flight? Just tried it on my 7" & it seems to be all hype, at least on that quad.

[Anonymous No.1346385]

>>1346306
I'm not using plumbing flux. I still clean it off tho. Maybe it's just autism...
http://www.aclstaticide.com/blog/flux-cleaning-myths-basics/

[Anonymous No.1346388]

>>1346332
That thing looks fun as fuck.

[Anonymous No.1346421]

>>1346385
Oh I clean it off too, but mainly just because I want it to look nice.

[Anonymous No.1346490]

>>1346344
Going to try it out once I get done rebuilding my quad that got fucked smashing into concrete

[Anonymous No.1346497]

>>1346316
you are so full of shit my man
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fgz1MqwnUlw

[Anonymous No.1346498]

>>1346322
ya iktf bro i built my martian 210, looks just like your pic related

[Anonymous No.1346533]

>>1346421
Wild, I'm the guy talking about tiny indoor 1s/2s quads on this thread, I was checking rotorbuilds again before going to bed and I just saw one build that looked familiar, and then I looked at it and realized it was yours... and then i see the username and it sounds familiar as fuck, thought about it for a while and remembered about /p/ irc 4 years ago... clean builds man! you got some nice stuff on there.

[Anonymous No.1346599]

>>1346275
>Anon should just choose a NACA airfoil with already known lift and drag coefficients.
It doesn't work like that

[Anonymous No.1346640]

>>1346599
>the coefficients depend on the reynolds number of the particular flow
pedant

[Anonymous No.1346750]

>>1346497
Congrats you can cherry pick one of the only times in recent months that JB has done paid promotion. Now compare that with UAVFuture's videos over the same period & almost every single one is paid capslock clickbait shill rubbish.

>>1346533
Small world /p/hriend~

[Anonymous No.1346796]

>>1346388
It is, in fact, fun as fuck. Last car I had was a Super Hornet back in high school, for a lot of reasons this thing shits all over it, never had as much fun with it as I have with this.

Also, obligatory quads, because it looks like RC = quad copters as far as /diy/ is concerned. Picked up the Visuo for cheap as a trainer form a chick at my hackerspace, already kind of trashed it because I have no idea what the fuck I am doing, and these fucking playstation style controllers they come with feel like rubbish in my hand compared to a proper Futaba controller. The larger one came off the curbside months ago, apparently the RX uses some proprietary 5.8GHz protocol which no controller can talk to though, and I can't find a battery for it. I would like to build my own FC once I am confident enough with my flying skills that my hard work will not end up stuck 30 feet up a tree.

[Anonymous No.1346821]

Any hope on getting this Esky 4-channel 2.4Ghz transmitter bound to this receiver that appears to be the same as the HobbyKing 2.4Ghz 6Ch V2 just with a different brand? The way to bind this receiver seems to be quite simply just putting in the blind blug, powering on the radio with the bind button engaged and them just removing the bind plug from the receiver when it stops flashing, the problem is that my radio doesn't seem to have a bind button. I'm wondering if i could somehow open up the radio and modify it to have a bind button or something, surely it has the necessary wiring and such in there.

[Anonymous No.1346824]

>>1346821
hmm

[Anonymous No.1346979]

>>1346796
If anything more RC diversity is what's gonna make these generals more fun. I'd be happy as fuck if someone was building a rov or some retarded shit and documented it in here...

[Anonymous No.1347042]

>>1346750
now you are just moving goalposts from your original argument

[Anonymous No.1347076]

>>1346640
??? You can't just take tabulated data of an airfoil and expect it to be the same for every aircraft.
https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/induced.html
https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/downwash.html

[Anonymous No.1347103]

Brainlet who didnt understand pids from thread awhile back, Ive got a problem, my newly built quad was flying great and I pushed the throttle way too much within the last day of flying, built it a day ago. When I came to unplug the battery saw some smoke coming out of it. Thought well fug I killed the 4in1 ESC. I took it apart but can't find damage to either the vtx, cam, fc, 4in1 ESC. I tested the fc separate and then hooked up the quad all together to betaflight config and tested the motors on motor tab, all work fine. Also checked to make sure I still get vtx signal in my googles and that works. I did leave a shit ton of flux on the board and was wondering if it was possible that the board got hot enough or something like that to catch it on fire. Pls disregard the shitty soldering I'm too retarded to figure out how this works even after many attempts.

[Anonymous No.1347280]

So i found this in the dumpster yesterday. Didnt have a remote, but from testing (hooking up 2 9 volts to one motor at a time) it works fine . if i take the circuit board of a childrens rc car and swap it out using relays to control the motors, i think i can get it to work with a toy remote. No idea how the fuck ill make it turn though

[Anonymous No.1347291]

>>1347076

[Anonymous No.1347312]

>>1347103
No caps or chips look burned, except for the very bottom left chip, and the top left could either have a hole in it or a spec of flux, I suspect the latter.
Check there's no melting where the red power lead touches the negative terminal, and make sure the mounting bolts aren't overtightened.
Could just be residue heating up, take off the props and slowly bring the speed up to 100%, look for a source of smoke. Expect to fry the 4-in-1 at some point or another.
Also check elsewhere just in case, it could be something else.

[Anonymous No.1347313]

>>1347280
>Relays on the motors
My child, learn about ESC's. ESC plus receiver plus batteries. Keep in mind, with a plastic frame, it may be a $20 children's toy, and you may spend well over that to get it to work, but it could be a good learning experience.

[Anonymous No.1347367]

Charged 8 lipos, spent 30 minutes on the bus then walked for a further 20 minutes to find a quiet & dry spot for a tuning session... Only to discover the little adapter I use to power my FatShark goggles was broken & I didn't pack my XT60 soldering iron :( Wish whoever made this had drowned the whole thing in potting compound.

[Anonymous No.1348105]

>>1347367

>Owns and maintains probably a couple thousand dollars worth of drone shit
>Can't be bothered to own and maintain a fucking bicycle

[Anonymous No.1348126]

Made a compact inline voltmeter for tamiya connections.

[Anonymous No.1348289]

>>1348105
Cycling 30+ miles in order to fly isn't really my idea of a nice weekend.

[Anonymous No.1348654]

>nothing personal kiddo
Since when did radio controllers get edgy?

[Anonymous No.1348665]

>>1348289

lmao @ your life

that's my idea of a nice week-night.

>>1348654

drone racing is destined for the e-sports crowd. best get used to the company.

[Anonymous No.1348680]

>>1348665
Yeah kinda realized it from the way it looks like a ps4 controller and that hobbyking made one thats the same concept. Gonna suck when a bunch of dumb fucked kids/teens flying into buildings and people eventually fucking everyone over with more laws/regulations. Where Im from all quads and planes are banned from parks thanks to retarded youtubers and amateur photographers with their shit flying into buildings.

[Anonymous No.1348691]

>>1348680

The good news is that the cost and technical barriers are fairly prohibitive. It's probably going to look more like the PC gaming scene than the console gaming scene.

[Anonymous No.1348712]

>>1348289
Why do people think a 30 mile bike ride is incredible? That is like my standard weekly ride

[Anonymous No.1348891]

>>1348691

[Anonymous No.1349220]

>>1348891

Cool. Now imagine what happens the first time that kid flips arm switch on his brand new $500 RTF. From 0 to Craigslist in 5 seconds flat.

[Anonymous No.1349950]

Picked up one of these little rover thingies off banggood, looks like it should be fun. I'm hoping I can just hook up a receiver to an arduino with PPM & use some dual channel motor driver shield?

[Anonymous No.1350132]

Anyone have experienced with fixed-wing drones or RC planes? I'd like to build one for FPV flying.

Theoretically, fixed-wing should be faster / longer-range than my quad, if less agile. I don't know the first thing about wings or control surfaces, though.

[Anonymous No.1350138]

Does anyone have recommendations on getting started with rc planes? My boyfriend is in to aeronautics and I want to surprise him with a gift we can both spend time working on, something preferably modular.

[Anonymous No.1350164]

>>1350132
>>1350138

Bixler

[Anonymous No.1350220]

>>1350138
>>1350132
Fixed is a very different game to multi-rotor. I like both a lot.

>>1350164
Is right in saying a bixler is a great start. I still fly mine and it's been flown to the depths and back.

that said any high wing trainer will do just fine. Have a look on Hobbyking for whats on sale. RTF is a good way to start if u just want to dip your toes in. If you already have a decent Tx then PNP is a good option.

[Anonymous No.1350232]

>>1350220
>>1350164

Excellent, thanks!

[Anonymous No.1350233]

>>1350132
Quadcopters are garbage in terms of range and endurance, so pretty much any aircraft will do better.

>>1350138
r u a homo

[Anonymous No.1350241]

>>1350233>>1350233
>Quadcopters are garbage in terms of range and endurance, so pretty much any aircraft will do better.
So tell me how well your aircraft made from foam or balsa fairs in a crash
Cheeky fucking CUNY

[Anonymous No.1350246]

>>1340304
Fucking tight OP...a nut about wiring myself
I built my first quad 5 years ago
I'm guessing this is a 250...FPV raced an Indy 2 years ago...petered out

[Anonymous No.1350248]

Last stab the impossible RoboCat...Fucking PCB toasted...back on the shelf...CC3D is old shit by now

[Anonymous No.1350359]

>>1350246
It was supposed to be a lot neater/cleaner, but the FC didn't fit lengthways :( It's a 210, which is what most people fly for racing/freestyle these days.

I have a Tarot 650 similar to whatever is in your pic, but I'm probably going to rebuild it onto a Daya H frame because the Tarot is just a massive pain to transport & setup :/

[Anonymous No.1350367]

>>1350241
Except no one is discussing crash durability. Fixed wing shits all over quads for range and endurance. And they certainly look a lot better in the air than all the frankencraft shit ITT like >>1350246

[Anonymous No.1350410]

>>1350241
>m-muh crashes!
You only crash because flying that low and close to obstacles is your only fucking option, liftlet.

[Anonymous No.1350444]

>>1350410
>>1350367
>losses vtx signal
>plane falls out of sky
OH NO NO NO HAHAHAHAHA
LOOK AT THAT DUDE HAHA
LOOK AT THE SITE OF THIS CRASH
HAHAHA
>Liftlet
Whose got you on their pay roll? Is it Horizon Hobby or maybe its Precession Aerobatics or Hobbyking they have lots of fixed wing gear? Anyways since your gonna shill at least do it properly. Your plane can't lift shit what like just one action camera. You planefags are the biggest weight weenies. Always taking about muh trimming of weight to reduce drag in order to increase efficiency. Please you fags don't have lift. What you have is the ability to stay up in air longer and go long distance. You can't lift for shit and you sure are a crashlet. The only good thing a fixed wing can do is fly over borders to take photos of warzones like Syria and Mexico.

[Anonymous No.1350452]

>>1350444
Wow, they really struck a nerve there didn't they honey. This is /rcg/, not /LOL DRON ONLY FAK U FGT/. Now go have a lie down and take one of these before your mascara runs.

[Anonymous No.1350453]

>>1350444
>stay up in air longer and go long distance
Which is the precise point >>1350367 and >>1350233 were making. What the fuck is wrong with you child? Who gives a fuck about lifting capacity? Go get a model crane if it triggers you this hard.

[Anonymous No.1350456]

>>1350452
Nice, got you to show your true colors there hobbyking shill. I had nothing against fixed wings till you tried to get me with
>liftlet

[Anonymous No.1350464]

>>1350456
Im actually >>1346330 >>1346332 and >>1346796, but hey, if meming at me helps you to forget what a putrid little cunt you are, you go right ahead. Internet is srs bzns, right faggot?

[Anonymous No.1350465]

>>1350453
>>1350453
>>stay up in air longer and go long distance
>Which is the precise point >>1350367 and >>1350233 were making. What the fuck is wrong with you child? Who gives a fuck about lifting capacity? Go get a model crane if it triggers you this hard.

Yeah I said it cause its the only thing you've got.
>>1350367
>>1350367
>Except no one is discussing crash durability. Fixed wing shits all over quads for range and endurance. And they certainly look a lot better in the air than all the frankencraft shit ITT like >>1350246
Lets see who the child is here cunt.
Or maybe you where mad cause I had wrote Cheeky fucking CUNNY.

[Anonymous No.1350467]

>>1350465

[Anonymous No.1350468]

>>1350464
>>1350464
Wow nigger did I hurt you so bad that now you have to go onto the personal side of things to make up for your weak defense. Listen up cunny I don't care if you like cars or planes or barbies.
>>1350233 this little cunny came around and started shit so its probably you since your a nigger.

[Anonymous No.1350505]

>>1350468
Not that guy but nothing >>1350233 said is wrong, so why get mad over it?

[Anonymous No.1350535]

>>1350505
>Not that guy but nothing >>1350233 said is wrong, so why get mad over it?

>en·dur·ance
>noun. the fact or power of enduring an unpleasant or difficult process or situation without giving way. "She was close to the limit of her endurance"

In terms of long range its relative cause it depends on what the RX and tx can handle. Sure now GPS and patch antennas are standard for long range fun but the same shit applies. Long range must be down within line of site due to federal air aviation laws. Anyway other wise is being a nigger and breaking the law so a quad going in one direction would reach the same distance as plane but wouldn't make the return trip so long range is null except if you say round trip.
Now the biggest point "endurance." This little cunny picked an incorrect term, as endurance refers to broad range of things. Uptime, durability, ability to handle harsh weather conditions these factor into endurance. Now before you CUNNYS say some dumb shit like planes do all all that and more where are talking in terms of radio control line not fucking industrial sized aircraft. Foamies, that weird material I see the test flight guys use that looks like cardboard, and balsa do not factor into durability and being able to handle weather conditions such as harsh winds and heavy rain. Sure I've seen that newer composite material made that's extremely durable and light for planes but it still brittle in heavy crashes. And in terms of standard materials carbon fiber is used for most quad frames except for the very cheap shit that uses plastic. Carbon fiber is not a weak CUNNY material.
>before any nigger posts it
>muh cheap Chinese carbon fiber a weak bitch
Yeah its a known fact that shit can't hold up cause it ain't cut correctly and the layerings arent done properly(3K carbon fiber with a 0°/45°/90° layup). That's why you avoid extremely cheap carbon fiber you can still buy Chinese carbon fiber if its cut right.

[Anonymous No.1350542]

>>1350367
That Frankenquad was the first on the market 6 years ago Princess when you were still playing Build A Bear. I have numerous quads as well as fixed wing. Gee not seeing any pics of your stuff girlfriend...jelly much?

[Anonymous No.1350559]

>>1350542
>post gf
>lol I bet u r a virgin
You could not even refute what I said so you go with the most basic insult of any board dam your parents must be proud of their son with his gf"male"
Are you winning now when you pound away at that boipucci while looking at your walls of wrecked fixed wings while muttering
>well she fly real good till that wind there got me at my 6oclock knocking me into the tree

[Anonymous No.1350563]

>>1350559
>/b/tard trap fapper detected

[Anonymous No.1350568]

>>1350535
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endurance_(aeronautics)
don't be a dense faggot

[Anonymous No.1350570]

How about both/all of you just shut up and stop ruining what was a nice thread?

[Anonymous No.1350572]

>>1346979
I made lawny and working on modding powerwheels and making a robotic lawnmower swarm from Power wheels gear boxes, rc motors and esc, and build lithium packs from ebay laptop batteries. Used 18650s.

Kind of obscure and i have no idea how to code the arduino but its been fun so far. Really want to get into fpv drone soon.

https://youtu.be/s_1LSKAKnss

[Anonymous No.1350573]

>>1350568
>nah uh thats wrong I meant this definition
>uses a broad word and then tries to change it for his own purpose
Fucking cunny nigger you just like those stupid faggots talking about their fucking flight time
>muh superior flight time in zero wind conditions
Your probably one of those niggers that shit posts his flight time on rcgroups and never specifics the conditions or movements

[Anonymous No.1350574]

>>1347280
Servo bruh

[Anonymous No.1350575]

>>1348126
10/10!

[Anonymous No.1350577]

>>1349950
Yup. $20 on amazon for one.

[Anonymous No.1350578]

What the fuck is this pedophile throwing a tantrum about?

[Anonymous No.1350579]

>>1350578
it's called autism

[Anonymous No.1350580]

>>1350570
>being this mad about nothing

[Anonymous No.1350583]

>>1350570
Every general on any board will turn to shit eventually, /diy/ is no exception.

[Anonymous No.1350603]

>>1350570
>>1350570
>How about both/all of you just shut up and stop ruining what was a nice thread?

What a nice thread? You should be grateful little faggot I gave this thread a bunch of bumps even if it was baiting. These threads always end the same being pruned before reaching bump limit cause its always the same shit. Barely see that much discussion of rc anymore. So the thread goes no where cause no one says anything. Its always filled with questions left unanswered cause noone bothers to help, "heh nothing personal kiddo." Sure you get one or too debates going on physics or if something will work. But its always the same shit when someone asks to do something crazy even if its bait.
>muh rc community
Bunch of fucking numale faggots to afraid to try something new and stick to the same old shit. And to all the fags talking about diy in decline its the whole site dumb fucks. Can't post anime on an anime board cause 4chan isn't anime anymore isn't that right faggots.

[Anonymous No.1350612]

>>1350603
Who touched you as a child?

[Anonymous No.1350623]

Do mods have a permission to delete shit like this? Certianly ruins my boarding experience desu.

[Anonymous No.1350630]

>>1350623
Just report the autists for bans, no need to delete the thread.

[Anonymous No.1350632]

>>1350623
Nothing will happen unless you report the trash. Your report might get ignored, though.

[Anonymous No.1350649]

>>1350632
Reported and gone that simple

[Anonymous No.1350662]

[Anonymous No.1350718]

>>1350662
Is that an aluminium body fixed wing? With a glow engine? Looks neat whatever it is.

[Anonymous No.1350746]

>>1350718
It's an actual surveillance plane employed by some middle eastern country, pretty neat that an ordinary person could easily build a plane of the same caliber nowadays.

[Anonymous No.1350768]

>>1350132

Flying fixed wing is very different from flying quads. Maneuvers are the opposite of what you are used to;

With a copter, you yaw onto the heading you want, and then roll to correct.

With fixed wing, you roll onto the heading you want, and then yaw to correct.

Aside from that, fixed wing controls can get a lot more complex than anything found on quads. From an RC/hobby perspective, this means that your equipment rapidly gets a lot more expensive. Your radio and receiver need more channels to accommodate servos.

Because fixed wing can't just throttle up to punch out of a bad situation, low proximity flying is more challenging. You can't correct your heading without spending either altitude or speed - and yaw happens slooooooowly.

Because of all this, flying fixed wing with quad-tier equipment feels quite cramped. You'll immediately want longer range transmitters. Along with those servos we were talking about, this adds cost and weight quickly. Which adds wingspan even more quickly. It doesn't take long before you want your ham radio license and a real PPL so you can fly crop surveys.


The really interesting stuff happening with fixed wing UAVs is happening at the level of commercial, enterprise, and military operations.

The really interesting stuff happening with quads is happening on the hobby scene.

Pick your poison.

[Anonymous No.1350779]

>>1350768
Most of your post sounds quite sound and informative, until you start talking about wings needing more channels than 'quad-tier equipment' can accommodate, which immediately strikes me as complete bullshit.

If anything, quad flyers use _more_ channels than wing flyers. Simple race quads will use at least 5-6 channels, while AP quads will frequently use 9-10. In comparison many wing flyers won't have any use for more than 4.

Where exactly are you coming from? I agree that fixed wing is different to multirotor, but the former certainly doesn't require more channels and thus more complexity/expense than the latter.

[Anonymous No.1350781]

>>1350779

I wasn't really thinking about AP quads, but even so;

If you want a "real" fixed wing UAV you need servos for every control surface - one or more for ailerons, one or more for rudder, or or more for elevators, one or more for flaps, and then possibly independent trim tabs.

and THEN a gimbal.

"Race wings" can be quite a lot simpler, but 6 channels is extremely restrictive to what you can do with fixed wing UAVs.

[Anonymous No.1350783]

>>1350781
How exactly does more than one servo per control surface work? Control surfaces are rigid, having more than one servo hooked up to them makes zero sense, no?

>6 channels is extremely restrictive to what you can do with fixed wing UAVs.

Who is running a 6 channel tx/rx these days?

[Anonymous No.1350785]

>>1350783
Depending on how an RC aircraft is built. Think ailerons. It can take more than one servo to provide control on one axis. You can fake it with linkages or whatever, but that's more weight, more moving parts to break, etc

[Anonymous No.1350786]

>>1350785
>It can take more than one servo to provide control on one axis.

Of course, but we have mixing in our transmitters, so I'm still failing to see how 6 channels can be restrictive for controlling a wing. If you've got 4 channels for throttle/ailerons/elevons/rudder then 2 more for flaps and whatever else, what else do you need for control services?

Just a Taranis and X8R gives you 8 physical servo outputs and if you need more than that you're almost certainly going to have some sort of flight controller that takes a sbus signal and gives you access to 16 channels.

[Anonymous No.1350790]

>>1350786

I guess I don't know. I know a fair bit about how to build and fly real fixed wing aircraft, and I can build and fly quads pretty well.

I know that high-end RC airplane transmitters have shitloads of channels. I guess I assumed it was for a good reason.

[Anonymous No.1350794]

>>1350790
>I know that high-end RC airplane transmitters have shitloads of channels. I guess I assumed it was for a good reason.

These are the same transmitters people use for quads.

[Anonymous No.1350989]

>>1350542
>Gee not seeing any pics of your stuff girlfriend
>>1346330
>>1346332
and
>>1346796

[Anonymous No.1350992]

>>1350542
>Gee not seeing any pics of your stuff girlfriend
>>1346330
>>1346332
and
>>1346796

> when you were still playing Build A Bear
I'm prolly old enough to be your father faggot.

[Anonymous No.1351006]

>>1350132
So this guy, >>1350768, is mostly right. However, most planes will only use 4 channels. You'll only need multiple servos per surface when you get into large scale models. Trimming is typically done by moving the entire surface to achieve level flight, not with trim tabs like a manned aircraft.

Can you post your current Tx and an idea of what kind fixed wing you'd want to fly? You'll get better answers. Here's some examples of channel assignments:

Typical: Throttle, Ailerons (usually 1 channel run through a Y-cable), Elevator, Rudder
More Advanced: Throttle, Ailerons (split again), Elevator, Rudder, Retracts, Flaps (typically 2-channel, can be 1). You can also run ailerons on 2 separate channels and use them as flaperons or as crow on a glider
Flying wing: throttle, left elevon, right elevon

[Anonymous No.1351007]

>>1351006
>Flying wing: throttle, left elevon, right elevon
Delta config in TX

[Anonymous No.1351021]

>>1351007
forgot to mention that, thanks. If you're using any kind of programmable Tx, it will have a setting for delta mix. Flying wings are easy, that's why they're popular. I need to fix my C-1 Chaser...

[Anonymous No.1351177]

I reckon this is gonna be a lot of fun :)

[Anonymous No.1351303]

>>1340692
>i could probably sell these at 2/3 the price of the cheapest glider kit while still making atleast some profit. Thoughts?

Did you account for the emotional cost of dealing with customers and unreasonable (warranty) demands?

Hell is other people and RL faggots who bought something from you can't be as easily ignored as us.

[Anonymous No.1351969]

>>1350164
Bixler, hmm. I was looking for something more modular from the design aspect, as in the fixed wing craft itself, maybe using foam for most of it and just getting something working that way, not just a kit for a pre-built model.

[Anonymous No.1352428]

Talk to me about motor efficiency ratings. As a general rule bigger motor and/or lower RPM = higher electrical efficiency.

If I go from 3 percent efficient motors to 4 percent efficient motors with all else being equal, does that translate to 33 percent longer battery life?

[Anonymous No.1352452]

>>1352428
What do those percent efficiencies mean? It would make sense that they would mean the percentage of energy wasted by the motor.

[Anonymous No.1352857]

I was right, this is super fun :)

[Anonymous No.1352876]

>>1341325
Do a low kv larger prop build if you want it to be quiet maybe an emax babyhawk R but I've never heard one so idk if it still close to the noise levels of a 5in

[Anonymous No.1353497]

>>1352876
Any small high-performance quad like a Babyhawk R is going to scream like a swarm of angry hornets.

[Anonymous No.1354067]

dead thread

[Anonymous No.1354357]

>>1354067
even deader now

[Anonymous No.1354369]

>>1354357
If you're going to bump the thread at least try to contribute something.

[Anonymous No.1354598]

[Anonymous No.1354628]

So how stupid would it be to buy a ParkMaster Pro as a first plane?
I really want it but the wife would be pissed if I don't use it because it's too much for my skill level. I already bought a transmitter so I'm thinking 'why the fuck not?'

[Anonymous No.1354755]

Is there any convenient way to bind two transmitters to one receiver, and configure betaflight to switch between them as a mode?

I'd like to introduce family/friends to FPV and I was thinking that a "tandem" aircraft would be a good way to do that. I could let them take the stick, but take over before they dump it in the drink

[Anonymous No.1354763]

>>1354628
tons of expo and even then tons of travel limit ot youre going to drive it straight to pound town....

[Anonymous No.1354786]

>>1354628

It takes a special sort to enjoy flying LOS fixed wing. I've never found it to be a positive experience at all.

[Anonymous No.1354790]

>>1354755
Yeah its that trainer mode go look it up to see how to use.

[Anonymous No.1354791]

>>1354786
I concur as I have flown fixed wing for 30 years which led into helis etc...Quads are a no brainer these days . I started 6 years ago before anyone knew what they were and you had to adapt and program it all. Fixed wing varies from tail dragger to lowing each having its own challenges. I can maiden anyones plane now with ease....that takes years of experience from a ducted jet to a J3 Cub. If you think that's boring or easy try it sometime. Flying is easy until you have to use the 4th channel (rudder) instead of ailerons and maintain altitude takes an acquired skill. I don't fly the new self leveling shit its all thumbs. Not bragging its just that I can fly anything knowing what you should know without a tip stall or torque roll...cross wind landings as well...3-D heli its all boring to me now. I like my Phantom 4 Pro as it gives me a whole new ability to explore a different experience. Never limit yourself in this hobby if you truly want to command it...That being said my 1/4 scale GeeBee was an adrenaline rush especially when landing, very few survived...try it on the flight sim (Phoenix)...when you can land this you're a pilot

[Anonymous No.1354798]

My last old school heli before all the self save bullshit...6 yrs old and still flying

[Anonymous No.1354799]

One of a kind

[Anonymous No.1354800]

Chromed it out only one I know

[Anonymous No.1354810]

Hand painted GeeBee pilot before I sold it and the guy pounded it.....fitting
I put a lot into this bitch of a plane to fly. I chose the toughest fucker made and won...If you think fixed wing (Planks) are easy...you don't fly Rc...I knew when I sold it this guy would die again

[Anonymous No.1354813]

It was a death machine...flying an RC model made me sick from adrenaline....Mine lived and didn't even break the pants...bragging yes...humble maybe...but you kids have no idea what Rc was when you had to fly the fucking thing....old fucker out


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UmmeWVAt6A

[Anonymous No.1354858]

>>1354628
You'd be much better off buying a cheap high-wing trainer as your first plane. That kit is ridiculously overpriced. At the very least, get a simulator.

[Anonymous No.1354870]

>>1352857
So anon, how fast does this thing go? Are the tracks really useful?

[Anonymous No.1354883]

>>1354870
It's slow, like less than walking speed, but I guess the torque should let it drive over much rougher terrain than my apartment floors.

[Anonymous No.1354904]

>>1351303
Good point, i haven't really even begun to consider what kind of a return policy i should have, i'm tempted kinda to just declare that there are no returns or something but idk if that's legal.

[Anonymous No.1355095]

>>1340304
Does anyone have any good recommendations for flight contollers?

I'm looking for something not too pricy, but maybe still with GPS, magnetometer, and Sonar.

[Anonymous No.1355112]

>>1355095
The cheap solution for GPS/magnetometer enabled flight is iNav which uses normal race quad flight controllers. See the list of supported boards here;

https://github.com/iNavFlight/inav/wiki/Supported-boards

However iNav doesn't have sonar support afaik.

The next step up is to run Arducopter on some sort of Pixhawk flight controller (there are Chinese ones for relatively cheap, but not as cheap as an Omnibus for iNav). This is more expensive, but Arducopter is a much more fully featured, longer running, more mature platform & includes support for more things (including sonar).

[Anonymous No.1355258]

German law says using FPV-goggles and flying a sub 250g plane/copter below 30m is "within visual range", wich is the limit on how far you are allowed to fly.

What stopps me from flying my mini skywalker below 30m at a long distance?

>inb4 trees
>inb4 25mW rule

[Anonymous No.1355427]

>>1355258
Who cares really, i'm sure the law enforcement has something better to do than go around policing some guy playing around with a small foamie.

[Anonymous No.1355681]

>>1355427
Guess why the transmitter has 600mW.
It is just about looking plausible...

[Anonymous No.1355890]

>>1355258

[Anonymous No.1355951]

>>1350132
Do you have runway available?

[Anonymous No.1355988]

>>1355258
>What stopps me from flying my mini skywalker below 30m at a long distance?

Not much, apparently. And this is a full size skywalker. Flying over all these houses is a bad idea, though.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSk5lCoJuuo

[Anonymous No.1356083]

This weekend I learned that having an antenna on your video receiver is completely optional if you're flying less than about 200ft away. Had my goggles plugged into my groundstation receiver, but forgot to turn off the goggles' internal module (which had no antenna on it) & didn't notice 'til I tried changing channel when I got breakup at longer distances :3

[Anonymous No.1356207]

>>1349950
Wait, the entire frame + wheels + tracks? Can you send link?

[Anonymous No.1356253]

Hello,
I am going to build my very first, cheapish drone.
Id like some opinions on these parts... am i doing anything wrong?
Thank you! :)

[Anonymous No.1356257]

Less tricky parts.

[Anonymous No.1356283]

>>1356207
https://www.banggood.com/DIY-RC-Robot-Chassis-Tank-Car-Tracking-Obstacle-Avoidance-With-Crawler-Set-p-1254211.html?rmmds=myorder&cur_warehouse=CN

>>1356253
>>1356257
These are all really shitty, obsolete, no-name parts. At least buy Racerstar from Banggood.

[Anonymous No.1356291]

>>1356283
Well of course theyre kitty.
But theyre all compatible with each other, and there doesnt seem to be anything wrong with the flight controller and controller, or is there?
I just want to make something that flies.

[Anonymous No.1356310]

>>1356291
My point is that you can get substantially better, newer, branded stuff for pretty much the same price & they will give you far fewer headaches during build/config/tuning/use.

Those motors are an absolute joke, the seller is just trying to shift ancient RC plane stock to people that don't know better & want to build their first quad - see those janky adapters? They only exist because back in the day people wanted to build quads but all they had were plane motors. Things have advanced a LOT since those were current tech. Racerstar do a modern 2212 980kv which is actually designed for quads, will perform a helluva lot better & is only $2 more for a 4-pack.

Those props won't work on anything but a Mavic, because they have a proprietary mounting mechanism.

That flight controller is a generic clone of an obsolete flight controller from Airbot (the current version is v5).

The radio is a decent bargain basement radio. It's cheaper on banggood.

In other words, do some more research - you're about to spend $200 on a bunch of obsolete junk when $210 would get you something actually semi decent.

[Anonymous No.1356324]

>>1356310
Can you recommend a flight controller?
I dont think i could get a better radio than that one near this price, if you can recommend a better one go ahead.
Ill get those racestar motors.
Generic 30amp ESCs ok?

[Anonymous No.1356618]

>>1356324
>Can you recommend a flight controller?

Omnibus F4 v5 if it's within budget.

https://store.myairbot.com/flight-controller/omnibus-f3-f4/omnibusf4v5.html

>I dont think i could get a better radio than that one near this price,

No, the next worthwhile pricepoint is the Taraniz Q X7 which is ~$100.

>Generic 30amp ESCs ok?

For that setup 20A is fine. Look for something with blheli_s, there's no reason to be buying obsolete simonk ESCs today. Racerstar do a set of 20A blheli_s ESCs for $40 Australian.

Banggood have really good customer service, returns, replacements, etc. btw. Much better than having to chase a bunch of different eBay sellers when stuff arrives broken.

[Anonymous No.1356657]

Alright the electronics are pretty much done, now all i've gotta do is get around to finishing the wings and then assembling everything.

[Anonymous No.1356686]

>>1356324
Hold up, go to gearbest and grab the hglrc 28esc they are cheap can be found from $2-6 and fine for you since you won't be pushing it. Motors you can use furibee 2206 they are $7 each. All this is shit if you race but it doesn't seem like you will be doing that so you will be fine. They you buy the matek f4 11 mini it will be good for what you are doing. Its $25 and good quality.

[Anonymous No.1356694]

>>1356686
2206 is no good if he's looking to build a Disco style quad with 8-10" props.

[Anonymous No.1356842]

I have a flip32 f4 and a spektrum serial receiver with a dx6 transmitter. I have it on uart1 and set that as the serial rx port in betaflight. The values stop going haywire if I turn off the dx6. So I know they are talking. They just aren't talking properly. Tried all the uart ports and same thing happens. I have the configuration set to spektrum serial rx receiver and spektrum 1024 receiver. (worked on my last flip33 f4 before I burned it out). Channel map is also set to spektrum. Throttle thresholds are set to 1000-2000. I'm so lost on what is wrong. I've tried fuckignprinter everything and I'm about to smash Thai fuckery with a bat. I've searched Google 500 fucking times. Y'all are 5 times smarter than I am.

[Anonymous No.1356854]

>>1356842
Is there by any chance a hardware inverter on UART 1 RX? Many flight controllers will have a hardware inverted on one of their RX pads because FrSky's SBUS protocol is inverted. Spektrum is not inverted so it won't work on such a pad.

[Digital FPV Peopleperson No.1356864]

Are there any cost effective DIGITAL diy transmitters/solutions avaiable yet?

A ping of 100ms is still very acceptable to me

[Anonymous No.1356947]

>>1356854
I tried both uart1 rx ports the flip 32 has both inverted and non inverted. The last f4 I had worked just perfect. This is the same baord same chip same everything. Only thing that I can see that is different is the boot button. Could this be a firmware problem?

[Anonymous No.1357263]

>>1356947
Have you tried flashing an older version of the FW?

[Anonymous No.1357466]

>>1340692
Alright the prototype is nearing completetion, just gotta finish up the wings and it's time to fly, the project has been advamcimg somewhat slow so far due to printer issues and school but it ought to ramp up from now on.

[Anonymous No.1357469]

>>1357466
And here's a closeup.

[Anonymous No.1357482]

>>1357466
that chord is way too small

[Anonymous No.1357491]

>>1357482
How so? it has an aspect ratio of somewhere around 40, a fairly common aspect ratio for gliders.

[Anonymous No.1357534]

>>1357263
I will try that tonight. I think I'm having driver compatibility issues with Windows 10

[Anonymous No.1357742]

>>1357491
Maybe that's the AR at the tip, but not at the root. Your stabilizers also look way too small. Where are the control surfaces? Do a glide test and see what happens

[Anonymous No.1357743]

>>1357491
Do a glide test and see what happens. Where are your control surfaces on the tail?

[Anonymous No.1357884]

>>1357491
>what is a reynolds number

[Anonymous No.1358014]

>>1357491
my intuition says it's gonna stall like a motherfucker, so please keep us updated

[Anonymous No.1358413]

>>1358014
My question is: small drone, or big drone?

[Anonymous No.1358414]

>>1358413
I have this crazy idea.
What it i made a drone frame mold out of styrofoam, do the carbon fiber all around it than shoved it in like gasoline for a bit to dissolve the styrofoam, so it just leave the hollow carbon fiber shell.
Is that crazy? It wouldnt dissolve the epoxy i think, right?

[Anonymous No.1358435]

>>1358413
big drone for endurance
small drone for agility

[Anonymous No.1358895]

>>1354883
I like it, though I prefer things that go fast! Have you tried it on grass or other terrain?

[Anonymous No.1359514]

7" didn't look that big with twinblades, but these triblades make it look huge compared to 5" O_o Weather looks good tomorrow for a test :)

>>1358895
Not yet. When the weather improves I want to take it outside & explore though.

[Anonymous No.1359535]

>>1358414
Depends on the expoxy, but it might be easier to just bake it and melt the styrofoam that way instead of gasoline

[Anonymous No.1359537]

I just got done building my first racing drone using a budget guide on youtube. As far as I can tell I did everything right and everything is fully functional, but when I power it up and apply throttle, it spins on the Z axis. Spring is around the corner and I really want to take it outside as soon as the snow melts. Plz help

[Anonymous No.1359544]

>>1359537
Motors spinning correct direction? Props on the right way? FC calibrated? Channels correct?

[Anonymous No.1359556]

>>1359544
FC and ESC's are calibrated and channels are correct. How do I tell if the motors are spinning the right way? They spin too fast to tell when I power them up lol. And the props have to be on the right way because the quad does lift up into the air, it just spins as it does it.

[Anonymous No.1359575]

>>1359556
I've had that issue before, yeah what the guy said before is a problem to check for first just leave the props loose with the nuts off. Use the motor tab to spin and see they spin the correct way. Then check the alignment of motors and make sure when you spin motor 1 its the correct motor 1 like in the diagram. And each numbered motor spins properly in the right location. Sorry if this doesn't make sense im bad at explaining search for "quadcopter flips on takeoff" and you can find answers there.

[Anonymous No.1359649]

>>1359575
>leave the props loose with the nuts off.

Or don't be an idiot and just take them off entirely. You can just feel the motor bell with your fingers to see which way it's spinning.

[Anonymous No.1359787]

>>1359556
Remove props and put a piece of tape on the shaft.

[Anonymous No.1360100]

Working on a new build. I saw this frame on ebay and instantly pulled the trigger. As far as I know it's one of the few/only true H-frames in the brushless micro class.

Wheelbase is around 100mm, and the frame in total weighs about 7 grams. Everything is just so well thought out. Frame-integral motor-wire strain relief? Why the fuck isn't that standard on bigger quads too? Holy shit.

The PNP version weighs in at ~34 grams with 1103s, which is fucking insane. Saves roughly ten grams over last year's best and lightest 90mm. There are heavier whoops. I'm building with much heavier motors and expect to stay sub-40.

[Anonymous No.1360134]

>>1360100
>Crash once on your top plate
Nothing personnel kido

[Anonymous No.1360209]

>>1360100
>Frame-integral motor-wire strain relief? Why the fuck isn't that standard on bigger quads too? Holy shit.

If you're talking about those slots down the middle of the arms, those seriously compromise strength which becomes an issue with anything larger/heavier than a 34g micro.

[Anonymous No.1360378]

Does anybody have any experience with the Xiaomi drone? Specifically, I want to know how much it weighs with/without the gimbal. Where I am you are by law required to register any drone above 1kg with The Man, what I want to do is detach the gimbal and stick something like the SQ12 onto it, to make a drone which is less than 1kg weight (or at least, use that defense if the po-po ever come).

[Anonymous No.1360396]

>>1360134
>>1360209

I must admit I'm a liiiiittle bit concerned about durability, but the arms don't exhibit as much flex as I thought they might, and it's an $11 frame which is cheap enough for occasional replacement.

[Anonymous No.1360487]

Rate my combat robot

It's finished and combat ready but the support shaft needs upgrading. I'm going to turn a new one from 7075.

[Anonymous No.1360565]

New HQ 7" triblades seemed really nice through the FPV feed, but now that I'm watching the HD footage at home they have lots of high frequency jitter :(

>>1360378
The Mi Drone is pushing 1.4kg & I'd be surprised if the camera & gimbal is more than 200g of that. Remember that a large chunk of the weight is the battery. And by removing the camera you'd lose a lot of the drone's functionality (because you'd have no live video feed).

>>1360396
Probably won't be an issue with such a small/light quad, they don't have enough mass to break on impact unless you're really trying.

>>1360487
Probably the most interesting thing in this thread so far. Can you share a photo showing the internals?

[Anonymous No.1360751]

>>1359537
I did what >>1359787 suggested and concluded that all the motors are where they should be and they spin the correct direction. I'm at a loss on what to do next.

[Anonymous No.1360755]

>>1360751
When you said 'it spins on the Z axis', what precisely do you mean?

[Anonymous No.1360769]

>>1360755
When I apply throttle, the quad rises in the air as it should, but it spins on the Z or "yaw" axis either clockwise or counter clockwise (I can't remember). I confirmed with cleanflight that it's not the controller either.

[Anonymous No.1360776]

>>1360769
Well, if it rises into the air without immediately flipping out, that at least means that all of the motor directions, props, FC orientation, etc. are correct.

Can you post a screenshot of your receiver tab while the quad is powered up with the transmitter bound?

[Anonymous No.1360779]

>>1360776
Like this?

[Anonymous No.1360793]

>>1360779
Hm, looks fine, was hoping it was just a channel mismap. Does the preview image on that tab yaw when you arm & raise the throttle? Does raising the throttle channel have any affect on the yaw channel?

[Anonymous No.1360799]

>>1360769
Did you calibrate all the ESC's?

[Anonymous No.1360820]

>>1360799
Wouldn't cause the quad to rotate, the gyro would pick up the rotation & compensate.

[Anonymous No.1360823]

>>1340304
I'm trying to build a cheap little Whoop. I'm going pretty barebones on this one in terms of what i'm using, because i'm new to this. But:
Eachine TX01s camera
JJRC H36 frame and props
Eachine E010 flight controller
Stock 150 mAh 30c batteries

I'm currently waiting on some Racerstar 59,000 rpm motors to come in the mail anyday now, and I've just ordered some new batteries.

[Anonymous No.1361107]

>>1360823
if you want get a programable flight controller like a beecore v2 so you can tune your quad and do some limited freestyle.

[Anonymous No.1361110]

>>1360769
did you calibrate the accelerometer? and it could be your prop direction.

[Anonymous No.1361148]

>>1361107
Yeah, I was thinking about that. Right now I'm saving up for a transmitter, but getting a new flight board is definitely on the to-do list.
Do you know of other good ones, or is the Beecore v2 alright?

[Anonymous No.1361206]

>>1361110
If it was prop direction the quad wouldn't lift off, it would flip out as soon as it tried to move off the ground.

[Anonymous No.1361646]

>>1361148
Not >>1361107, but I use a beecore2 and it's pretty nice
speaking of, I seem to drain my stick batteries on that way too quickly.
My setup uses racerstar 61K rpm motors, a TX05 at 25mw, and it can fly pretty well without wind but it sucks the life out of gaoneng 250mah batteries in under 2 min. Is this normal for the KV?

[Anonymous No.1361943]

>>1361646
Have you tried other stick batteries?

[Anonymous No.1361957]

I'm building a boat drone, I'd like to track its position as precisely as possible. I use an EZ-0048 gps for position and an mpu9250 mems for attitude and heading.
What's the best way to get precise altitude information? The gps gives ellipsoidal height but not very precisely. Is an atmospheric pressure sensor calibrated with an identical static reference sensor the best option?

[Anonymous No.1361964]

>>1361957
atmospheric pressure changes all the time. doesn't seem safe/static enough to me....

[Anonymous No.1361996]

>>1361964
If I place one pressure sensor on land at a precisely surveyed point, it gives me a reference value for pressure.
I can then send this pressure value to the boat over radio and the boat uses the hypsometric formula (it relates temperature, altitude difference and pressure) to calculate boat altitude.
The MS5611 sensor claims to get precision of 10cm. The only issue I can think of is if there is a temperature difference between the land and sea.

[Anonymous No.1362004]

>>1361996
id just make a physical button on bottom of the boat and let gravity 'press' the button. just make your boat drone decent at a slow enough pace to not cause any problems. have it land fast until 10m and then do a slow decent and let the physical button tell the boat to power down its props. once this button is activated the boat will know to turn into boat mode. ta-da

that is my method but im a retard so good luck with your boat drone.

[Anonymous No.1362012]

>>1362004
It's not a seaplane :D just a simple boat that stays on the surface. I'm going to put a sonar on it to make pictures of the bottom, that's why I need to know it's altitude.

A seaplane would be cool as fuck though.

[Anonymous No.1362017]

>>1361943
that was going to be my next move, but I wanted to be sure there wasn't an obvious problem with my setup

[Anonymous No.1362018]

>>1362012
ahhh cool project. well lets hope someone can assist you. this is a slow board so could be hours. maybe post in the /ohm/ thread since its related to electronics.

[Anonymous No.1362020]

>>1361957
Surely any extra accuracy that a base station sensor might give you over a simple Internet weather tool would be entirely negated by the difference in air pressure between the base station & the boat?

>>1362012
Wait, won't the sonar literally tell you the boat's altitude?

[Anonymous No.1362026]

>>1362018
thanks, I'll check it out

[Anonymous No.1362035]

>>1362020
If the boat is over a surveyed area, I can get the altitude from the sonar, yes.
The plan is to survey areas that haven't been surveyed yet and areas where river mud or sand change the seafloor quite rapidly.
I will use an internet weather tool also for comparison but I'm hoping to get better results by setting up my own sensor close to the area I'm surveying, or even several sensors around the area and then interpolating.
If the drone boat is operating off a larger boat (eg research vessel) I could set up a reference station on the large boat and use the altitude sensors (very expensive gps systems and intertial systems) of the large boat to calibrate the barometric sensor on the drone. In mid-ocean you can get waves of several meters so a 10cm precision would be useful.

[Anonymous No.1362048]

>>1362035
Wait a minute. What use is 10cm precision on height if you're using a regular GPS receiver with much worse than 10cm precision on lateral position? Surely you want a RTK GPS setup, which would also solve your height problem? If you're talking about situations where a manned research vessel is being chartered then surely RTK is within budget.

[Anonymous No.1362071]

>>1362048
The International Hydrography Organisation has standards for surveys in which the horizontal precision requirements are different than the depth precision requirements. For example, for depth of 50m, they would be happy with horizontal precision of 10m but want depth precision of 0.8m.
It's a personal project and I can't afford RTK.. Also, if you can keep cost to a minimum you might be more willing to risk the drone in dangerous areas or build more of them to make a faster survey.

[Anonymous No.1362764]

>>1362071
TIL. Does each survey point capture quite a wide area, or are they only interested in a single point per certain area, etc. to make the horizontal precision that much less important?

[Anonymous No.1362770]

Air pressure varies, that's what wind is.
What altitude are you taking about? If its on the water as a boat air altitude will be 0. No amount of jiggery pokery is going to give you underwater height from air pressure.

[Anonymous No.1362821]

>>1362764
It depends on the depth and the type of shipping expected in the area. It's all written here:
https://www.iho.int/iho_pubs/standard/S-44_5E.pdf
page 15.

For a ship 200m long, 10m either side is not that much. In the open seas, a captain should keep well away from areas he could run aground. (In port entrance areas where the captain has no choice, the horizontal precision requirement is more strict). However, if a whole area is charted to be 16m underwater and the ship has a draught of 14m, a 2m error is catastrophic.

On nautical charts, the numbers should be the highest points in their areas. You don't really care if on average it's deep enough for the ship, the shallowest points are what's important.

[Anonymous No.1362827]

>>1362770
Because of tides, in some areas the sea surface goes up and down more that 10 meters. You also get waves, so you need to know your altitude. Anyhow there are different '0' heights, (geoids, quasi-geoids, ellipsoids) because the earth is like potato. (It could be flat though, I'm not sure.)

[Anonymous No.1362840]

>>1362770
Underwater height you get from a sonar

[Anonymous No.1363306]

Noob question here, want to get a drone for photography stuff, does building one make sense from a cost perspective vs buying A DJI or something? Circuit boards are cheap, I imagine you can save a lot of money if you're interested in a racing drone, but the cost of good quality camera equipment probably cancels out the savings you get from the electronics.

[Anonymous No.1363314]

>>1363306
You can still save some money by building it yourself, but it really depends on the features you want and the amount of time you're willing to put into it. What would you be looking to spend on the DJI? Do you already have a camera you want to fly?

And regardless if you buy one or build one, read up on where you can fly it and don't do stupid things with it.

[Anonymous No.1363319]

>>1363314

I'm looking at the specs of the Spark DJI drone, the specs seem pretty good. For $600 I can get
>2 axis gimbal 13mp camera with 1080p video
>12-15min flight time
>2km range
>50kmph max speed
>300gram (important, I legally have to get a license for any drone above 1kg so I need it to be less than that)
How much money would I have to spend to get comparable specs? Will the end result be able to meet the weight limitation?

[Anonymous No.1363331]

>>1363306
The simple truth is that it just doesn't make sense to build your own drone for photography, both in terms of cost & in terms of features/performance.

A second hand older DJI (Phantom 3, etc.) will cost you less than _just_ the HD video downlink for a DIY build. And I cannot stress enough how valuable having full integration of something like the DJI app is, allowing you to control all of the settings of the camera remotely, which you simply wouldn't get at all with a DIY build.

[Anonymous No.1363335]

>>1363331

Yeah, that's what I figured. Thanks anon.

[Anonymous No.1363947]

>>1363331
>cost you less than _just_ the HD video downlink for a DIY build
Are you talking about something like the Connex or FPV blue? That's unnecessary, you can fly fine using the regular FPV feed.

>>1363319
You'd have to spend around $300 for the quad, batteries and transmitter. Add in the camera and gimbal and you're looking at the same price (maybe more depending on the camera) A phantom 3 is 1280g, according to DJI's website. It will be difficult to stay below the 1kg mark for something in that category. The spark is only 300g, so it might be you're only option. Don't forget to buy the transmitter, otherwise it's just hand signals.

[Anonymous No.1363987]

>>1360487
What is the shell of that made of? Looks like plastic-dip covered laser-cut metal?

[Anonymous No.1364057]

>>1362071
>I can't afford RTK

RTK is inexpensive now brej. NEO-M8T

https://github.com/Francklin2/RTKLIB_Touchscreen_GUI

I wish someone had shown me that link a fucking year ago before I bought a NEO-M8P. Both the fully built base and rover for less than I paid for my supposedly better M8P base module.

[Anonymous No.1364136]

>>1363947
>That's unnecessary, you can fly fine using the regular FPV feed.

As somebody who has built a quad for photography with a regular FPV feed, but who also works commercially with DJI gear (& recently bought a Spark for myself), the two aren't even remotely comparable. And again, I have to emphasize how valuable the full camera control that something like a DJI setup gives you is, compared to a DIY approach where at most you will get the ability to start & stop recording.

[Anonymous No.1364530]

I've tried changing vtxs, I've tried 2 different cameras, I can't find jack shit on google about this issue. I have 2 caps one on lipo to 4n1 ESC and one on power for vtx. Still get issue with and without caps. Have tried osd on off. Changing betaflight settings and osd does nothing. My guess is my fc is fucked. Anyone knowing anything about this issue?

[Anonymous No.1364772]

Is it possible to build a DJI quality (camera + battery run time + distance) drone at a cheap cost? Or are all the components they use actually worth the cost of the drone? I'd like a really nice camera drone but like hell I'd pay that much for something I'd probably only use a handful of times a year.

[Anonymous No.1364822]

>>1364772
>Is it possible to build a DJI quality (camera + battery run time + distance) drone at a cheap cost?

No. Buy a second hand DJI.

>Or are all the components they use actually worth the cost of the drone?

It's partly that & partly the fact that the integration between all of the components & the smartphone/tablet app simply doesn't exist in any DIY form.

[Anonymous No.1364826]

Got my 7" quad flying ten times better today than it did last weekend (not that you can tell from a 2.4mb webm).

[Anonymous No.1365069]

>>1364057
Thanks! I've put that on my list of future possible upgrades.

It looks like a NeO-M8T costs around 80 dollars (and they suggest you buy an antenna costing another 70 dollars). You would need two of them, one for the rover, one for the base station so that would be around 300 dollars ( not including data transmission from base to rover), does that sound correct?

My current solution would cost 35 dollars for the gps and 40 dollars for the two atmospheric pressure sensors.

[Anonymous No.1365090]

>>1365069
Your current solution almost certainly won't work anywhere near as well as RTK though, so you can't really just compare the costs like that.

For RTK though don't forget that you need additional processing at both basestation & rover to actually handle the RTK calculations - if your boat is running from a STM32 controller like a Pixhawk or similar that won't be enough & you'll need some sort of companion computer. The Emlid Reach units I've used come attached to Intel Edison boards for this purpose (plus very nice config software).

[Anonymous No.1365100]

>>1364136
when someone says "I want to buy my first drone for aerial photography" I don't usually assume they're looking for that level of detail. Maybe we should add something like this to the OP since it's brought up every thread.

[Anonymous No.1365163]

>>1365100
What do you mean by 'detail'?

[Anonymous No.1365220]

>>1365163
Significant camera controls. I think most people just want a flying camera.

[Anonymous No.1365251]

>>1365220
Being able to start & stop recording, or switch between taking photos & videos, is not 'significant'. These are the absolute bare minimum functions that anybody asking about a first drone for aerial photography is going to want/expect.

And when something like a second hand Phantom 3 can often be had for £300/$400, with full control of the camera via smartphone app, telling somebody that building their own for a similar cost but with a fire-&-forget action camera is even remotely sensible is incredibly poor advice.

[Anonymous No.1365635]

6s batteries with 12v motors.
Will they die?

[Anonymous No.1365722]

>>1365090
Agreed, what I have now is the bare minimum.

The github link shows them using raspberry pies for processing and displaying RTK. My boat uses Arduinos to compute attitude, control the rudder servo and the ultrasonic sensors, with a Raspberry Pi as a central controller. I think the Raspberry could probably handle RTK calculations as well.

I'm new at this but I'm guessing an aircraft drone needs a lot of processing, Kalman filters etc to keep it flying with the weight of the microcontroller being important. Controlling a boat is a lot simpler, you just have one rudder and one propeller, not a lot can go wrong. Adding an extra raspberry pi would increase total weight by less than 1%.

[Anonymous No.1365744]

>>1365722
Drones don't need lots of processing power, but they do have real time constraints - flight controllers are based around microcontrollers (mainly the STM32 family), not computers. An Arduino Mega is plenty to run a plane, multirotor, rover, etc. If you need more 'heavy' processing (for RTK, image processing, etc.) you have a separate 'companion computer' (Raspberry Pi, ODROID, etc.) but the flight control stack still has to run on the microcontroller.

>>1365635
Probably, yes. Use 3S batteries.

[Anonymous No.1365960]

>>1364826
nice
looks like there was a bit of shuddering on that first swoop down but after that everything seemed smooth to me

[Anonymous No.1366332]

>>1365744
If I need to read attitude data from one device, gps data from another and sonar data from a third and write 'attitude, position, sonar depth, time' lines in a text file, will it be better synchronised if I use a microcontroller (eg Arduino Mega) vs a computer (Raspberry Pi)?
Speed is not an issue. It doesn't matter if it gets written to the file even with a 5 second lag. The issue is that the lag should be the same with all devices.
Tbh no one at my university could tell me how to find out processing times..

[Anonymous No.1366356]

>>1366332
GPS data is just time data, so that will probably provide enough synchronisation, no? It's not like you're going to be taking thousands of readings a second right?

[Anonymous No.1366388]

>>1366356
With the sonar, 20 readings a second is typical.

The issue is that as the boat is rolling, I need to match the roll angle with the sonar signal. The mems accelerometers and gyros are outputting some current which is processed by the breakout board and sent to an Arduino which uses an algorithm to deduce roll angle and sends it to a USB port in the Raspberry Pi which is read by a Python code and written to a file alongside the sonar depth value that happens to enter the Raspberry through another USB port right after and the time value coming in from the USB port connected to a GPS module.
I don't know how much time elapses between the current leaving the mems gyros and accelerometers and the roll angle being written into the text file.

If it takes, say, 0.1 seconds, the boat is rolling at a rate of 90 degrees/second, and it takes the sonar signal only 0.01 seconds to get to the text file from the transducer head, that means there will be an 8.1 degree mismatch between the depth signal and the roll angle. If the sea floor is 200m deep, that could mean a 40m position error.
My intuition is that these time differences are so small the errors would be negligible. Still, it would be nice to know for sure.

[Anonymous No.1366400]

>>1366388
I think your intuition is probably right, but you could probably relatively easily integrate a Real Time Clock (RTC) into your Arduino setup & timestamp the data you send out to the Raspberry Pi for logging? As you have GPS, you should be able to bootstrap/sync the RTC against absolute GPS time?

[Anonymous No.1366442]

>>1366400
I have a DS3231 RTC that works with my Arduino. Do you mean I should connect a DS3231 to both the Arduino and the I2C pins of the Raspberry, edit the Arduino code to write a timestamp next to the 'roll' values and edit the Python code to write a timestamp next to the sonar values and GPS values?
I think I could get the RTC clock to synchronise with GPS time.

[Anonymous No.1366936]

>>1366442
I was thinking you could maybe just connect the RTC to the Arduino & have the Arduino write out timestamped lines of data to the Pi? Eg each serial.print line (or whatever) would simply be <RTC time> <sonar data>

[Anonymous No.1366937]

>>1366442
>>1366936
Ah wait, just realised that the sonar is USB to the Pi. Maybe you would want some sort of synchronised RTCs, but I still think the discrepancies would be negligible.

[Anonymous No.1367607]

>>1363987
SLS Graphite impregnate nylon, and the metal parts are water jet cut GR5 titanium

[Anonymous No.1367994]

I'm trying to make babby's first flying wing. I have a shit ton of time on a Sky King f959 and am ready to upgrade, but I'm too poor to buy a new prebuilt wing. I'm working on some dude's Tern 2.0 designs but he didn't lay out many details on how to actually complete the thing.

Should the wing's tips face straight forward? My build so far has them slanted slightly horizontally, but that may be due to my noob-level building. I can't quite tell on his picture (pic related) if they point straight or are angled in/out.

[Anonymous No.1368000]

>>1367994
Also, any rate on my electronics purchases for this?

[Anonymous No.1368363]

>>1368000
What is it with people buying obsolete trash on eBay? Judging by the 'USPS First Class Package' I'm guessing you're in the US, so why not just order from an actual online hobby store, rather than ebayers who are just trying to resell obsolete crap they bought in clearances? You've got lots of Turnigy stuff there, so just buy from HobbyKing.

Q X7 is solid, X8R is also solid if you actually need that many servo outputs, but if 3 or 4 servo outputs would be enough then X4R-SB & X4R respectively are cheaper & lighter (plus their wire antennas are easier to mount than the PCB antennas of the X8R).

If you want a dirt cheap charger, get a B6 AC clone. That way you actually get a display & some controls rather than that dumb charger you've got there.

Oldschool motors like that with collets are a pain. Get something more modern with a proper threaded shaft.

Battery & ESC are probably fine, but again buy direct from HobbyKing - that ESC is actually cheaper direct than from that eBay scalper.

[Anonymous No.1368396]

>>1368363
I have a ton of eBay gift cards.

Thanks for your input on the hardware. How obsolete is the stuff? Like is it obsolete like a TI 83 calculator where it will still do 110% of what I likely need it to do? Or is it obsolete like an iphone 4?

I'll look into the X4R. I figured the X8R would suit any future need I had

[Anonymous No.1368698]

>>1368363
I migrated my list to hobbyking and that should save me like 40 bucks. Bummer I won't have gift cards to them though.

[Anonymous No.1368755]

Thread is about to drop off the bottom of the catalog, new thread

>>1368754
>>1368754
>>1368754

>>1368698
I would still recommend that you go with a different motor that has a threaded shaft so you can just use a nyloc nut to secure the prop. Oldschool smooth shafted motors like that which need collets to secure the prop are a royal pain.