/rcg/ - drone & remote control general

[Anonymous No.1459397]

In /rcg/ we discuss anything & everything remote controlled - multirotors, fixed wing, cars, rovers, helis, boats, submarines, battlebots, lawnmowers, etc.

>How do I get started with racing drones?

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

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

>What about planes?

https://www.flitetest.com/

>What about aerial photography/filming, is DIY viable?

Not really, DJI is the boring but sensible choice if good results are your priority.

>I want a dirt cheap drone to fly around my yard/garden

Syma X5C

>I want a dirt cheap drone to fly inside my house

Eachine E010/Hubsan X4

>What are some good YouTube channels for learning or fun?

Joshua Bardwell - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCX3eufnI7A2I7IkKHZn8KSQ
Painless360 - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCp1vASX-fg959vRc1xowqpw
Flite Test - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9zTuyWffK9ckEz1216noAw
Peter Sripol - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7yF9tV4xWEMZkel7q8La_w
7demo7 - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCTa02ZJeR5PwNZK5Ls3EQGQ
ArxangelRC - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCG_c0DGOOGHrEu3TO1Hl3AA
RagTheNutsOff - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWP6vjgBw1y15xHAyTDyUTw

[Anonymous No.1459411]

Flew my FT Blunt Nose Versa wing earlier and was slightly disappointed in the radio range. I got 300yds from home and was at 55ish db but expected another 300yds. I think it's because I use a 1.2ghz vtx though. 7 miles flight distance was cool though.

I was disappointed -perhaps unreasonably- in this $35 Chinese screen. The detail isn't enough to fly fpv unless I have VERY clear landmarks.

[Anonymous No.1459563]

>>1459411
Don't use screens for flying, they are only good for spectators. Get a good pair of goggles like an Attitude V3/4, Focal 1/2 or better.

[Anonymous No.1459630]

>>1459411
>I was disappointed -perhaps unreasonably- in this $35 Chinese screen. The detail isn't enough to fly fpv unless I have VERY clear landmarks.

Can you elaborate? The fact that the text in that photo is clearly legible means the screen should be more than sufficient to display an analogue FPV feed as well as it's ever going to look.

[Anonymous No.1459695]

Does anyone use the T-motor motor shields? How does it affect the cooling of the motor?
I do like the idea of covering up the lower parts from debris and whatnot but I don't want to overheat my motors.
Also it only comes in red so I have to order the reactor red version of the motors with the matching red 5040 cyclones. I read somewhere that the red motors are also faster and cooler, is this true?

[Anonymous No.1459698]

>>1459695
>I do like the idea of covering up the lower parts from debris and whatnot

With such an open design you'll still get crap in the motors from the openings on top.

>I read somewhere that the red motors are also faster and cooler, is this true?

How would the colour of the anodizing make any discernible difference?

[Anonymous No.1459700]

>>1459698
>How would the colour of the anodizing make any discernible difference?
My RC cars were always faster with racing stripes. I always measured at least 5km/h increase in top speed.

[Anonymous No.1459703]

I received a ton of input and advice on my starting build in the last thread. I greatly appreciate everyone that helped. I have compiled an updated build and wanted to post here to make sure I am not making any mistakes or missing anything essential. The goal of the build is a racer/freestyle hybrid, being heavier on the freestyle side since I'm a novice. ***Racer is in the sense that I want 2gofast and not in the sense of it being a serious competition build.

FRAME -- TBS Source One
requirements: has ability to mount action camera on top of FPV

MOTOR -- Racerstar Racing Edition 2205 BR2205 2300KV

BATTERY -- AHTECH Infinity 14.8V, 1500 mAh, 85C w/XT60

FC: DALRC F405 AIO Betaflight F4 Flight Controller

ESC: Flycolor Raptor BLS-Pro 30A

VTX: ImmersionRC Tramp (6-18V, 5.8GHz)
Notes: Purchase international version only

ANT (antenna): -- Lumenier AXII 5.8 GHz

FPV CAM: RunCam Micro Swift 3

Footage CAM: Either Go Pro Session X or Run Cam X depending on budget etc.

MOUNT Footage Cam: Generic

PROPELLER: Dalprop Cyclone T5040C

RADIO & Receiver: FrSky 2.4G 16CH Taranis X9D Plus Transmitter

VISUAL DISPLAY W/ VRX: Fatshark Attitude V paired with True-D attitude VRX

FIRMWARE and SIMS: Betaflight // Liftoff

[Anonymous No.1459704]

>>1459703
>MOUNT Footage Cam: Generic
Make it 3D printed TPU holder 25-35°. PRCJ on ebay makes pretty nice holders for gopro, holds the original Runcam 3 well. Runcam 3s needs a separate size holder.

Sims: look into FPV Air 2 as well, cheap, looks okay, flight feels nice.

[Anonymous No.1459707]

>>1459704
>PRCJ on ebay makes pretty nice holders for gopro, holds the original Runcam 3 well. Runcam 3s needs a separate size holder.
Thanks for the info. Likely a better option compared to the generic banggood one I was considering.
Added FPV Air 2 to my list as well.

[Anonymous No.1459708]

>>1459703

Hey, looking over the build I build and I like it.

I would just say that the Lumenier AXII Lollypop style antenna is a racer specific antenna and you might get better freestyle results with something like a TBS Triumph or Foxeer.

Lollypop antenna are a newer compact design for proximity.


Also, the ImmersionRC Tramp and TBS unify are good VTX that became very popular with people using Kiss setups. But I tell people using betaflight to get an AKK VTX because they are priced well, work just as good and have built in audio.

If you are on a Kiss build people add audio with a cam or a PDB and people who buy Kiss gear like to spend a lot of money so they buy the most expensive gear possible because that is just the kind of people they are.

[Anonymous No.1459711]

>>1459708
ImmersionRC Tramp also has audio beside the IRC telemetry port. Unify uses the audio port for the smartaudio telemetry, so you either have audio transmitting or the VTx control, can't have both.

[Anonymous No.1459713]

>>1459708
>>1459711
This might be a stupid question but why would you want audio? Won't the operating noise be the only thing you will be able to hear?

[Anonymous No.1459715]

>>1459703
>MOTOR -- Racerstar Racing Edition 2205 BR2205 2300KV

These are fine, but for £6 more (total for a set of four) you can get the newer Racerstar 2306S. There's nothing wrong with the old 2205, but even for a new pilot they might be slightly underwhelming, especially for a heavier build with HD camera (eg my picrelated with them).

>PROPELLER: Dalprop Cyclone T5040C

For a heavier quad with a HD camera I'd recommend the T5046C. I've flown both on a ~600g freestyle GoPro quad & the 5040 just feel a little anaemic.

>RADIO & Receiver: FrSky 2.4G 16CH Taranis X9D Plus Transmitter

You'll want an actual receiver to go with that Taranis ;) The R-XSR is the go-to for miniquads today.

[Anonymous No.1459717]

>>1459711

Smartaudio and Audio does work on the AKK because they are separated by RIGHT and LEFT channels.

Unify did not engineer their VTX that way. This is why Mr. Steele made his PDB with audio

[Anonymous No.1459719]

>>1459713

Many reasons audio is good.

You get more instant motor feedback. You can hear your quad at long range. You can hear your quad from a pack of quads. You can hear your quad if you are flying from inside a building or car. ect.

[Anonymous No.1459720]

>>1459708
>I would just say that the Lumenier AXII Lollypop style antenna is a racer specific antenna and you might get better freestyle results with something like a TBS Triumph or Foxeer.

I used to run Triumphs (before I realised what a douchebag Trappy is & stopped buying TBS products) but honestly if you're going for a 'full size' antenna they just don't perform as well as a pagoda. The only benefit of the Triumph is durability, but if that's your concern then AXII are better. Anecdotally I'd say I get at least as good reception with AXII as I ever did with Triumph.

[Anonymous No.1459721]

>>1459713
If the audio is filtered well you can clearly hear the prop noise and can judge the battery condition better than squinting away for the telemetry readout. Mr Steele and many others use audio for this.

>>1459715
Anaemic is good for a beginner. I'd recommend anon to buy both, 2x 5040C and 2x 5046C sets. At least.

[Anonymous No.1459726]

>>1459715
>Racerstar 2306S
Thanks. I will switch to the newer motors in that case since it will be on the heavier side with my component choice. Also noted on the prop choice, will buy both sets just so I can learn what the difference in flight feels like.
>R-XSR
Added to my list. I completely forgot about the receiver. Thanks for catching that.

[Anonymous No.1459730]

>>1459719
>>1459721
>audio
That makes sense. You have a better understanding of your operating state with audio.

[Anonymous No.1459734]

All this talk about live audio made me think. Is it possible to add a mic to a setup with an otherwise great camera that doesn't have a mic?
Are there any mics available in stores? I mean good quality ones.

[Anonymous No.1459736]

>>1459726
One other thing about motors, banggood often sell sets of four where two motors have regular threaded shafts & two have reverse threaded shafts. The idea is that (as long as you put the right ones on the right corners) the spin of the motors will only ever tighten the nuts, never loosen them. This is how the propellers stay on something like a Phantom, they just 'self-tighten'.

However if you use nyloc nuts (which is what everybody does these days for miniquads & in fact pretty much all motors come with nyloc nuts for this reason) you don't need to worry about the nuts coming loose regardless of the thread direction, so having two motors with reverse threads just becomes a hindrance (particularly when it comes to replacing motors/buying spares, you have two different types to consider, plus finding reverse threaded nuts locally when you're desperate to get out & fly can be difficult/impossible).

So I'd recommend you buy four motors with regular threaded shafts, even if it means buying them individually for a few cents more rather than buying a set of four where two of them are reverse threaded.

And before you ask, no there is no difference between 'clockwise' & 'counterclockwise' brushless motors except for the thread of the shaft - brushless motors inherently work just as well in either direction.

[Anonymous No.1459740]

>>1459721
Honestly Ive been flying for a couple months now and I still cant say I could tell the difference between the props I have. Obviously get some Cyclones, shits the best, but really Id advise him to just get as many props as he can for the money. Racerstar 5048s are bad, neither are the Kingkong 5045s.

[Anonymous No.1459741]

>are bad
Racerstar 5048s arent bad*

Where the fuck does auto correct get off "fixing" a word to the exact opposite of the original intent?

[Anonymous No.1459743]

>>1459730
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXvkGcqgKLI

[Anonymous No.1459747]

>>1459711

The Tramp has an Audio input so you can add a microphone to it but like you said they are not working with smartaudio at the same time unless you configure the channels correctly.

The AKK VTX's have a MIC right on the board.

[Anonymous No.1459750]

>>1459734

Is it possible to add a mic yes. But if you use smart audio you have to think about which channel you can use for audio without getting the smart audio beeps while you fly.

[Anonymous No.1459762]

>>1459630
I thought it was weird that the text is so clear as well. For instance, I was flying in a field that had some horses in it - black horses against light brown wheat grass. I could hardly see them even as black dots on the screen when I was close to them.

In the same place as vid related, I can hardly see my dark truck against the dirt in the screen, even when I'm close. I have to pretty much follow roads and rivers to be able to orient myself.

[Anonymous No.1459764]

>>1459747
Tramp doesn't have smartaudio. Tramp uses the IRC Tramp protocol on a separate telemetry port.
It has the control and the live audio at the same time.

[Anonymous No.1459768]

>>1459762
Yep, definitely get a pair of goggles like I said in >>1459563

[Anonymous No.1459769]

>>1459762
What sort of FPV camera are you using? Is it some cheap crappy generic CMOS unit by chance?

[Anonymous No.1459771]

>>1459769
Nope, it's a fauxPro. SJ6 Legend. Recording at 1080p60fps. It's capable of 4k24fps. Costs like USD$130 or so.

[Anonymous No.1459772]

>>1459768
I'll look into it. I was hoping a screen would work better though so spectators and I could look though it together.

[Anonymous No.1459773]

>>1459771
Use an FPV camera with a GoPro(like) recording along, Runcam Swift 2 or Eagle 2 Pro are nice, Micro Sparrow 2 Pro if you can find one. And get a pair of goggles.

[Anonymous No.1459775]

>>1459772
Keep the screen for spectators, I keep mine for the same reason, scrapped from a HK DIY goggle set. It was awful but the screen is usable.

[Anonymous No.1459778]

>>1459771
In that case I would strongly recommend that you spend £15 on a CCD FPV camera to see if that fixes your issue before spending substantially more money on a pair of goggles. As the text is sharp & legible on your LCD then there obviously isn't an issue with the LCD nor with the VTX.

A HD recording camera like your SJCam is designed to produce pleasing/natural looking footage, it's not designed to produce diagnostic high contrast/dynamic range for flying by like a dedicated FPV camera is.

I fly by both LCD & goggles, the image is the same, there's nothing about an LCD which is going to magically make it worse while leaving the text intact.

[Anonymous No.1459784]

>>1459736
Makes sense. So basically just buy all CL motors so that you can get the standard CL nyloc nuts, right?

[Anonymous No.1459785]

>>1459743
Thanks. I always underestimate the amount of questions that a search can answer

[Anonymous No.1459788]

>>1459784
You want to buy motors labelled as CCW (counterclockwise) because these will have regular (clockwise) threads on them.

[Anonymous No.1459792]

>>1459788
Ofcourse. Sorry for being an idiot and not thinking through that.

[Anonymous No.1459794]

>>1459792
No need to apologise, it's something that still catches me out & makes me double check every time before ordering motors.

[Anonymous No.1459796]

>>1459794
Yeah, it's good to know that it's thread direction that is the only distinguishing factor between the CCW and CW designators. I automatically assumed it had something to do with the motor's electronics but I've heard that you can just set rotation within the firmware so it did not make sense to me.

[Anonymous No.1459799]

>>1459796
The motor has no electronics, it is just 3 sets of coils with magnets around it. The motor geometry is the governing factor of the performance.
Reversing direction is just switching any two of the three leads to the coils (wires).

[Anonymous No.1459800]

>>1459799
>>1459796
...but yes, direction can also be reversed in firmware.

[Anonymous No.1459802]

>>1459796
>>1459799
>>1459800
The only other thing to be aware of is that _brushed_ motors, the very small kind with two wires that are common on toy grade drones, Tiny Whoops, etc. _do_ have a specific direction they are supposed to operate in & will fail much sooner if ran in the 'incorrect' direction.

[Anonymous No.1459804]

>>1459800
I dont see why you guys do it in firmware, seems easier if all you have to do is swap and 2 wires coming out of the motor..

[Anonymous No.1459807]

>>1459804

I just wire up the motors wires cleanly and then reverse them if needed.

Because I go in BL heli anyway to flash the ESC.

I flash my ESC so I can get Dshot Beeper working.

[Anonymous No.1459809]

>>1459804
It often just depends how you build. If you're building with a 4in1 ESC that uses a neat little 3cm JST cable to connect it to the FC stacked on top, it's not convenient to connect a servo tester to the ESC & by the time you get to the point that you can actually power up, connect USB & go into Betaflight to start setting up & test the motors, the solder joints for the ESC wires may well be difficult to get to. But closing Betaflight & opening the BLHeli suite & just changing a drop down menu option is simple.

[Anonymous No.1459810]

>>1459799
That makes sense now that you put it in words. Haven't had the chance to learn component level details yet as I've been too busy assembling/understanding the component list at a high level.
>>1459802
Ok. Don't think I will deal with those but good to know anyway

[Anonymous No.1459843]

>>1459703
>X9D

This radio is pretty nice for quad stuff.

Another option is the QX7S. The S version has the upgraded Hall Sensor gimbals. They are better.


The only reason to get the X9D over the QX7S is because you absolutely must have Crossfire for long range.

But for long range the R9M from Frysky is really cheap right now and nearly as good. For all purposes the R9M is pretty amazing and cheap.

Crossfire protocol might have a slight edge in latency but its so slight its not even worth spending the money for it. And its only helpful for racers who need the lowest latency possible when flying proximity.

If you want long range R9M is the way to go.

[Anonymous No.1459849]

>>1459807
>Dshot Beeper

If you dont have a Beeper and you do have Dshot capable ESC you can turn on Dshot Beeper by flashing your ESC to 16.7 firmware.

[Anonymous No.1459879]

>>1459843
>upgraded Hall Sensor gimbals
>Crossfire vs R9M
good to know. Thanks.
Since I am a novice I'm sure that R9M will meet my needs at this point. I was just going to go for a standard R-XSR.

The upgraded gimbals are a nice touch since this will be in my hands for many builds to come so will keep a look out for the QX7S.

[Anonymous No.1459924]

>>1459879
The same gimbals can be had in the X9D something something version. Someone do a quick search for me, please.

[Anonymous No.1459952]

>>1459879
>>1459924
X9D Plus SE. You can also buy the gimbals separately for both models & swap them in yourself

[Anonymous No.1459976]

>>1459952
Honestly can't believe people are willing to pay for this monstrosity. Sure I run a DX8 but I traded a gaming pc for my quads.

[Anonymous No.1459978]

>>1459976
There wasn't really any alternative for a long time.

[Anonymous No.1459982]

>>1459978
Is the QX7 some recent development?

[Anonymous No.1459993]

>>1459982
Yes, the X9D has been around since 2014 (I think), whilst the QX7 was introduced in 2017 (I think). The QX7 was essentially supposed to be a cheaper alternative to the X9D.

The QX7 has a smaller screen, is wider overall & doesn't work with Crossfire. I've heard lots of people who pinch say that the QX7 isn't as good as the X9D. Other than that, they're pretty much the same.

[Anonymous No.1459997]

>>1459993
Oh I didn't realize the QX7 didn't work with Crossfire. Oh well at this point, R9M is plug and play and works just as well for most people's needs.

[Anonymous No.1460001]

>>1459997
And it's a fraction of the cost - I bought my first three R9 Mini receivers for less than the price of one Crossfire Nano receiver.

[Anonymous No.1460006]

>>1460001
Wont lie, only thing turning me off R9 right now is you get the R9 module, flash the firmware, get the QX7, flash the firmware, get the receiver, flash all their firmware. By that time theres new firmware for the R9 so you gotta do that again. From what Ive read youll get some random shit with 1 of the receiver so you have to reflash the old firmware then flash the new.

Seems like a pain in the dick.

[Anonymous No.1460013]

>>1460006
The module hasn't had new firmware since May (& that was only for EU users, US users haven't had to flash new firmware since March) & the R9 Mini receiver has only had one firmware update since its launch.

>From what Ive read youll get some random shit with 1 of the receiver so you have to reflash the old firmware then flash the new.

I've not heard anything like that, nor have I had any issues like that on any of my five R9 receivers.

I'll admit that the R9 system wasn't the most polished when it was first released, but at this point you can just buy the module & a bunch of receivers, they'll probably come with up to date firmware already on them, & you can just go fly.

[Anonymous No.1460019]

>>1460013
Ive been looking around, it is possible they ship with new firmware, but I havent found a single site selling it that even mentions the firmware. I would expect GetFPV and Racedayquads to list what version is currently being run on the sale page.

As for the receivers I simple remember reading a review, which to be fair was probably a couple months old at the time, mentioning that one of the receivers he got had to be flashed 2-3 times before it would bind.

Another thing that concerns me is replacement antenna. Currently you can put TBS immortal T antennas on R9 Slim and R9 Mini receivers. But it would not even remotely surprise me if Trappy changed the connector on those things just to spite Frsky. Far as Ive seen they dont make their own replacement, so a fucked up antenna is a new receiver.

[Anonymous No.1460020]

>>1460019
Actually looking at it now the only review for the R9 mini on Racedayquads mentions flashing the firmware, made just a little more than 2 weeks ago. I realize its not that difficult of a process but the resellers not doing it is kinda sad. This hobby is still kinda small and the US based companies probably get a small fraction of the quad based business that Banggood does. They really have no excuse to be selling shit that needs an update out of the box.

[PoppyBoi No.1460023]

really curious how i could make an extra controll so i could make like a bomb that i could drop

[Anonymous No.1460024]

>>1460023
>real answer
Servo
>realer answer
Youre a fucking idiot, unless youre straight talking about dropping a toy paratrooper or some shit like fixed wings used to be built for

[Anonymous No.1460032]

>>1460019
>But it would not even remotely surprise me if Trappy changed the connector on those things just to spite Frsky.

Wat.

First, he would have to screw over every single one of his existing customers. Even Trappy isn't dumb enough to do that.

Second, what would he change it to? TBS use industry standard RF connectors just like everybody else. They don't have the resources to design their own proprietary connector that could actually perform on par or better than what is already available on the open market. Even if they did, China would just clone it.

>Far as Ive seen they dont make their own replacement, so a fucked up antenna is a new receiver.

FrSky recently announced a whole range of antennas, including one in the same style as the Immortal T which is what triggered Trappy's latest hissy fit where he demanded his resellers to stop selling R9.

Also, these are just bog standard 868/915MHz dipole antennas with bog standard IPEX/uFL/whatever connectors. Lots of people make compatible antennas, there are even generic chinabrand ones.

https://www.banggood.com/900MHz-Long-Range-Receiver-Antenna-for-TBS-CROSSFIRE-NANO-FrSky-R9-Slim-Receiver-p-1340123.html?rmmds=search

>>1460020
>I realize its not that difficult of a process but the resellers not doing it is kinda sad.

The receivers come from the factory sealed & with a hologram sticker for authenticity, if I received one from a reseller which had been opened I'd be immediately suspect it was either fake or previously used/returned.

[Anonymous No.1460040]

>>1460032
You act like resellers opening OEM packaging would jeopardize the sanctity of the RX. Wouldnt be hard to crack it open update it and reseal it with a new sticker that says Upgraded by GetFPV for your convenience. Theyre a trusted company, so why the fuck not?

Also would you trust your $400 quad a mile away to a Chinese knockoff antenna? You buy a 1/4 wave antenna off Banggood right now and I guarantee you the exposed parts of them will range from 24-36mm.

I thought trappy was bitching about just them using a T shaped antenna. Which at this point is even funnier because they added t shaped antennas to at least 3 other receivers and the external on the X lite.

[Anonymous No.1460051]

>>1460040
If updating the firmware on a component when you get it is something so abhorrent to you, this might not be the right hobby for you.

And I like how you think a 868/915MHz dipole from China with FrSky's or TBS's name stamped on the bag is going to be any different to one with no name on it. They almost certainly come off the same production line.

And how do you 'knockoff' a bloody dipole? It's the simplest antenna design known to man, invented over a century ago.

[Anonymous No.1460055]

>>1460051
>how the fuck do you knockoff a dipole
Thats a question for Trappy, he seems to think he owns dipoles as far as quads go.

Id certainly like to think the antennas on R9 and Crossfire systems are just Chinese hit or miss shit. Like I said its damn near impossible to find a correct length 1/4 wave antenna, almost all of them will be too short which will effect the range. Although I admit I am no expert, the R9 and crossfire systems dont use exposed parts of the antenna, least as far as I can tell. Hell the RXs on my quads look like the antennas are just short pieces of insulated copper wire.

[Anonymous No.1460068]

>>1460055
>Thats a question for Trappy, he seems to think he owns dipoles as far as quads go.

*snap*

saving that in my zen koan folder

[Anonymous No.1460072]

>>1460055
>the R9 and crossfire systems dont use exposed parts of the antenna, least as far as I can tell.

Of course they do, how else do you suppose they work? The colour of whatever is covering the active elements doesn't dictate whether it is transparent to RF or not, regardless of whether it is transparent to your eyes.

[Anonymous No.1460074]

>>1460072
Fair enough, of course the RF can get through but I suppose I thought it mattered considering some are completely covered and other leave the ~34mm completely exposed.

[Anonymous No.1460102]

looking to upgrade from my current Whoop setup. should I just get an FT Gremlin?

[Anonymous No.1460107]

what FC should I get if i want to make a 2.5 or 3 inch build with OSD?

[Anonymous No.1460117]

>>1460032
>>1460040
>>1460051
>>1460055
>>1460068
I've made my own circular polarized antennas with harbor freight welding wire and they work just as good. Tested with a SNR meter. It does not matter.

[Anonymous No.1460121]

>>1460074
Of course it matters. What you're not grasping is that some black stuff blocks RF while some black stuff doesn't block RF. The fact that an antenna is 'completely covered' in black stuff doesn't say anything about which sections of that black stuff are hiding RF blocking material & which sections aren't.

[Anonymous No.1460124]

>>1460032
>https://www.banggood.com/900MHz-Long-Range-Receiver-Antenna-for-TBS-CROSSFIRE-NANO-FrSky-R9-Slim-Receiver-p-1340123.html?rmmds=search


Dang these long range RX are soo cheap.

[Anonymous No.1460426]

>>1460124

Ohh wait that is just the antenna lol

[Anonymous No.1460443]

>>1460426
Actually the R9 Mini is <£10 which is crazy cheap. Mfw my beepers are bigger than my long range receivers :3

[Anonymous No.1460450]

>>1460443

I plan on getting a R9M and the R9 Mini for my setup pretty soon.

Just the other day I lost radio link for a couple seconds and I was only flying 300 feet away with a few small tree's blocking signal.

[Anonymous No.1460463]

Twitching drone guy here.
The damn thing is twitching even more. Replaced motors, reflashed EScs, reflashed FC, Downgraded to BF 3.2.5 then back to 3.5.1, twitching the same.
Turned off filtering, turned off dynamic filtering as well, no change. Reduced yaw P, the thing is twitching.
The strange thing is the twitching is becoming more frequent, latest hovering it stopped responding to my roll and pitch input but disarmed okay, so the receiver is fine.
Blackbox shows the twitchings but it doesn't show rapid impulse change in stick inputs. Twitching usually starts with a sudden yaw drift, 10-40 degr/s then it tries to stabilize itself, sometimes it starts with rapid roll or pitch drift with around 40 or more degr/s

Could it be that the MPU is faulty in my FC or can it be something else? Checked ESC signal wire connections, all solid, all other solder connections are also solid. Everything says it should fly okay but it doesn't.

[Anonymous No.1460465]

>>1460463
I also tried to reduce gyro readout from 8kHz to 4kHz then 2kHz to no avail.

[Anonymous No.1460467]

>>1460450
Try adjusting your antennas first. The carbon frame can block the signal so it is no good if both antennas are in the same plane as the bottom plate.

[Anonymous No.1460488]

>>1460467

I have them in an L shape going out the back.

[Anonymous No.1460501]

>>1460463
are you able to data log every input and output on the actual drone controller?

[Anonymous No.1460504]

>>1460501
Yes, blackbox does this.

https://github.com/betaflight/betaflight/wiki/Black-Box-logging-and-usage

[Anonymous No.1460520]

>>1460488
The verticals are too close to the frame, they have to be 2.5cm away from the carbon or only the horizontal will be operational.

[Anonymous No.1460522]

>>1460501
The FC is Matek F405 CTR, it has an sdcard blackbox

[Anonymous No.1460527]

>>1460520
That's... that's not how radio waves work.

[Anonymous No.1460561]

>>1460522
Have you tried this all with a different FC?

All things considered at this point it seems like the gyro took a hit.

[Anonymous No.1460675]

So why is it that we don't have anything diy that comes close to DJI? Has no one taken apart one of their drones to see what kind of voodoo they have inside to make them fly? It's hard to believe that it's impossible to recreate them using chinesium components.

[Anonymous No.1460689]

>>1460675

Obstacle avoidance with sensors is kid stuff.

The future is gonna be motion prediction with 360 cams and 3D mapping of the environment.

Skydio R1 is wayy more high tech than the DJI. It can hover with a GPS that is not vodoo. The Stuff the Skydio can do blows it away.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnnrDQVeU8c

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scpcG5Re0-M

[Anonymous No.1460695]

>>1460689
That vehicle in the first video is insane. Is that a custom made thing? Also I wasn't saying DJI is top of the line, but it's so much better than the diy stuff on the market.

[Anonymous No.1460705]

>>1460695

Well its all software and coding. Its got nothing to do with parts for sale.

You seem to want a Camera Drone that can GPS hover like DJI. Then you want an INAV GPS drone but the reason INAV is not popular like betaflight is because the software sucks.

Nobody made really great software that does all the things you want a Camera drone to do.

In the DIY we are flying acro and racing drones. Yes there are some people doing long range and camera stuff but they are not very common.

Maybe if there was some really amazing GPS camera drone software it would be a better option than buying a DJI.

See the INAV program is not even for drones its for planes because its a long range flight configuration.

Nobody made a Camera Drone Specific software configurator for flight controllers.

INAV can do some stuff with GPS I dont know how good it is because I have no interest in Camera GPS drones at all.

[Anonymous No.1460706]

>>1460695

What is more insane is that nobody is flying that drone. Its using machine learning to actively track the vehicle and weave through the tree's.

[Anonymous No.1460708]

>>1460706
It's not too incredible, the methods/concepts it uses are actually simple and feasible. The only hard part in making that tech is optimization and finding the hardware to run it.

[Anonymous No.1460713]

Are fpv racing drones illegal in the US?

[Anonymous No.1460727]

>>1460713
Yes, every single one of us, and thousands of others across dozens of public websites and facebook groups are meticulously planning our next flight spot to avoid being caught. Thats why FPV backpacks are so expensive, faster you can get your shit in there the better, gotta be ready to jump when your spotter sees the five oh.

[Anonymous No.1460770]

is there a way to get a simple artificial horizon OSD on a wing without spending a fuckton on an OSD unit that i'd only use 1 or 2 features on?

[Anonymous No.1460792]

>>1460770
any FC that supports INAV would work for you man. Less than 50$ and you're good to go

[Anonymous No.1460877]

>>1460675
There's no 'voodoo', it's simple scale of R&D, manufacturer, etc. You can't DIY a drone comparable to a Mavic, the same way you can't DIY a smartphone comparable to a Samsung Galaxy S9.

[Anonymous No.1460881]

>>1460561
I will replace the FC to the older F3 I have but it will need to wait till I get home. Got the Matek because I had too many wires with the old FC and it picked up a lot of noise in the camera feed. I don't have the spare wires to be able to connect all the leads.

[Anonymous No.1460882]

>>1460705
Only old DJI use GPS only for hover. New DJI uses separate cameras for ground texture recognition, much like the optical mouse does but with the extra motion in roll and pitch.

[Anonymous No.1460886]

>>1460882
Optical flow/texture recognition is used in addition to GPS/IMU/etc. & only when the drone is close to the ground. It's all sensor fusion anyway, there's no one sensor/technique.

[Anonymous No.1461027]

>>1460877

I bet if you went to China you could make your own Phone.

I seen some video where they add a phone jack and add more storage to an Iphone.

Mavic does not do anything really special. It has sensors on it so that you can see objects and avoid hitting them.

So put some sensors on your DIY quad and then code Object Detection and put it into betaflight or Inav. Get to work boys if you want DJI DIY camera drones you have some coding to do.

[Anonymous No.1461031]

>>1460882

Writing the code and having the Machine Learning that can identify the ground is the hard part here.

The reason why we dont have it already is because the people who are smart enough to do that kind of coding are busy making money. They would not just give us all motion detection for nothing. Why should they waste their time writing code that allows Hobbyists to have that kind of functionality for free?

[Anonymous No.1461036]

Our answer should be to back engineer and hack the work that is already out there into our software.

[Anonymous No.1461055]

>>1461027
>I bet if you went to China you could make your own Phone.

Of course you could. But it would be twice as thick, would lack a bunch of features & would look like shit.

>So put some sensors on your DIY quad and then code Object Detection and put it into betaflight or Inav.

Sure. Give me a team of experienced software developers, optics experts, embedded systems engineers & let's say a year's worth of salary for them all? Then give me the setup funds for the production lines to manufacture all the custom hardware?

If it was even remotely as easy as you seem to think it is, people would already have done it & we'd have sleek, reliable, turnkey DIY drones that compete with DJI. But it's not that easy, so even though DIY people have already been working on it the best we have is big, clunky Arducopter builds with companion computers running OpenCV, which require huge undertaking/skill to get working & even then perform like shit compared to a $500 DJI.

[Anonymous No.1461150]

>>1461055
>Our answer should be to back engineer and hack the work that is already out there into our software.

[Anonymous No.1461154]

Betaflight is an open source project.

If you have any suggestions you can go tell them or help them.

The guy who added GPS recovery into betaflight 3.5 was a single man who had an idea and he wanted to help.

[Anonymous No.1461165]

>>1461154
You just don't get it, do you?

People have already been working for years to bring the sorts of features that DJI's drones have to open source platforms. But the simple reality is that it's a gargantuan problem space that no open source community stands a chance at competing with in big picture terms.

The amount of work required to implement Betaflight's rudimentary GPS recovery is laughably tiny compared to what it would take to produce a viable open source alternative to a Mavic. It's simply not something that a non-commercial entity will ever be able to do.

[Anonymous No.1461260]

Will pairing the Flycolor Raptor BLS-Pro 30A
ESC with the Racerstar 2306S be a problem considering the ESC is rated for 30A with 40A burst and the motor specs claim a 33A load current?

[Anonymous No.1461263]

>>1461260
I could be wrong but I dont think the burst on an ESC is the maximum it can take. Ive watched my power draw spike above 80A before and nothing shit out. Theres also the possibility I was looking at the total power draw of all 4 motors and Im retarded.

[Anonymous No.1461266]

>>1461260
rotor builds lists seems to be using 30A ESCs which makes me wonder if I'm misunderstanding something
>>1461263
I don't know enough to comment on what tolerance an ESC has. I don't even know the definition of burst minus an assumption it means it can handle it for a short period such as the advertised 10s

[Anonymous No.1461286]

>>1461266
Looking at the tech specs for those motors, I believe when it says load that is the maximum draw of those motors. So they only draw 33A at full throttle, which would be the 10s window when the ESC is peaking. Usually you arent going full throttle for very long.

[Anonymous No.1461309]

>>1461286
makes sense, so basically 33A is motor peak while 40A is ESC peak therefore safe
thanks

[Anonymous No.1461313]

>>1461309
Keep in mind though those specs claim 33A is peak with a 5045 prop, theres a possibility you can overdraw the ESC with a 6 inch prop or a more aggressive 5 inch like a 5152 or 5051.

[Anonymous No.1461324]

How many here actually use simulators?

Do they carry over even half decently to your flying ability? I figured out power loops and flips with little damage but I find myself wanting to do tricks that Im too big of a bitch to actually try, I dont have the money to replace quads parts every time or even half the time I crash.

[Anonymous No.1461327]

>>1461313
Will keep that in mind
Plan on using a mix of Dalprop Cyclone T5040C and T5046C both 5 in.

[Anonymous No.1461411]

>>1461324

That is what simulators are for.

I try all the really hard tricks in the Simulator before I try them in real life.

Some Simulators are better than others.

What makes a simulator good is if you can put the same rates you fly on your quad in the Simulator.

Liftoff and Velocidrone do that.

[Anonymous No.1461539]

>>1461411
Well I realise that's what they're for, I'm just concerned they don't carry over well. I'd hate to spend a bunch of time in the simulator and end up good with that and shit with the real thing. Would just be another video game.

[Anonymous No.1461561]

>>1461539
They are very useful for learning how to fly rate/acro mode at the very beginning, because for a lot of people it's something that has to 'click' before they can do it at all. In the sim you can crash a dozen times a minute while trying to figure it out, but with a real quad doing the same may well end up breaking something long before it clicks.

Beyond that, sims are useful for trying new/different moves where you need to get your head around the stick movements & I know plenty of people who will try out a new move in a sim before trying it with a real quad.

Time spent in a simulator isn't going to hinder your real flying. As a beginner it will definitely help you get going quicker, but then as a more experienced pilot its utility sort of tapers off unless you have something specific you want to puzzle through.

[Anonymous No.1461856]

>>1460770
most f4 flight controllers use betaflight osd and usually its a standard to come with an osd.

[Anonymous No.1462848]

Some lady came up to me while I was flying and said "Can you stop flying around the trees?" My response was, "Can you not come up to me while I am flying?" Then she says I am scaring the birds and my flying around the trees is torturing them. I didnt stop flying, I didnt take my goggles off. She just got in her car and when I landed I saw her on the Phone. She was probably calling the cops so I split

[Anonymous No.1462878]

>>1462848
Generally speaking most people dont know jack shit about the laws regarding our quads, including the cops. Its well within your right to keep going but it would probably be a good idea next time to just appease her and fly around some trees in the other direction. I personally have yet to be confronted, I would most likely just pack my shit up and move to a different spot. Reason being is I live in an area with a high concentration of stupid people, and Mexicans, not that they are very different. Because of that Ive lost most of my patience with stupid and would probably get into an argument with some dumb bitch telling me Im scaring birds.

Bitch a bird will fly to the next fucking county if its scared, act like they find a park they like and stay there for life.

[Anonymous No.1462881]

This is the 3rd time I have had someone approach me while I was in the Goggles and I am starting to really not like it.

I was watching her from above but the next time somebody gets near me I am going to put the quad between me and them. I have the skill to be intimidating with it but I have tried to be nice.

I just had that feeling so I when I was done with that pack I just left. And on the way home I stopped at another spot I know and finished off my last two packs. So it its whatever.

[Anonymous No.1462914]

>>1462881
>I am going to put the quad between me and them. I have the skill to be intimidating with it

This is exactly the sort of shit that gives our community a bad name. Fuck off.

[Anonymous No.1462915]

>>1462881
Honestly not a good idea but whatever.

Generally speaking when someone approaches you the best idea would be to land and remove the goggles. A 5" quad is damn near 4 meat grinders flying at ~80MPH, flying distracted isnt he best circumstance and at that flying anywhere near someone whos actions you cant predict is even worse.

Ive been around enough pissed off moms/aunts/grandmas to know if you give them the chance they will try and grab it out of the air. It will be their fault but that doesnt mean they arent gonna be retarded about it. Far as Im concerned avoiding any and all trouble is always the best idea. Personally Id rather take the risk of talking to a cop after finishing my packs than trying to intimidate someone with my quad. Besides, you start doing flybys and buzzing her tower then youre going to have an issue with the cop when he shows up.

[Anonymous No.1462930]

>>1462881
>I am going to put the quad between me and them.

ignore those two pansies. wire it with a loudspeaker so you can give them lawful orders like GET OUT OF MY AIRSPACE NORMIE REEEEEEEEEEEEEE. They'll learn. If not, buzz their hair a bit.

[Anonymous No.1462940]

>>1462930
Of all the times to actually have one of the bait imagines saved.

Its a retarded idea and I fully agree with the other anon, you should both probably fuck off.

But on the other hand, fukkin do it pussy. The FAA has actually released a list of people fined for being dumb with their drone. Average seems to be about $1000, the dude that crashed his on the White House lawn paid $5500. You purposefully fly a quad to intimidate and they get hurt you could very likely be facing assault charges. Enjoy thousands of dollars in fines and possibly prison time for being too daft to just move. You dont seem to understand they are annoying you but you are annoying them. Cant just decide youre in the right and be a douche.

[Anonymous No.1462999]

Should I instead land my quad, take off my goggles pick up my water bottle unscrew the lid and douse them with it. Because I really dont like people coming into my space and bitching at me when I cant see them.

[Anonymous No.1463002]

>>1462999
>pick up my water bottle unscrew the lid and douse them with it.

channeling Elliot Rodger is not a good life choice, anon.

[Anonymous No.1463004]

I know what will happen, when they come up they will knock my $600 dollar goggles off my head and hit my radio making me also smash my drone and then I will bust their fucking face in.

[Anonymous No.1463015]

>>1463004
How hard is it to explain to someone that you need to safely land your drone before you can converse with them?

[Anonymous No.1463017]

>>1463015
Most people I come in contact with are not assholes and they wait till I land before they approach me.

The only times I have been approached with googles on is when they were coming for conflict.

[Anonymous No.1463022]

>>1463015
Not bothering someone who is clearly doing something in deep concentration is a normal behavior.
Getting into someone's face doing something is full retardation. Just asking, what do you get from the police when you bother someone driving their car in busy traffic, out of your own agenda? Because that is what you should get from bothering someone flying their quad.

[Anonymous No.1463023]

>>1463017
Just tell them you are filming the whole thing including them harassing you and when they call the police you will be more than happy to hand over the evidence to the officer.

[Anonymous No.1463024]

>>1463023
Also you can ask the officer if their precinct have any drone squad, and tell him you can help them doing practice in flying and maintenance, also basic theory of operation.
This will not only show him you are a helpful citizen, you can get some extra good points, maybe some spare change, from knowing how to fly a drone.

[Anonymous No.1463104]

Am I just buying shitty buzzers or do these things break getting hit no harder than a small flick?

[Anonymous No.1463143]

Found a nice quiet spot today.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTll-Bnsodc

[Anonymous No.1463180]

Would using a 3s battery with double the MaH of the 4s I usually use on my quad offer much greater flight time?

[Anonymous No.1463193]

>>1459397
I bought a DJI Phantom 2 at the thrift store. Need a remote. How can I tell which I need? 2.4 vs 5.8

It looks like it was upgraded a bit, high end gimbal etc.

[Anonymous No.1463195]

>>1459397
>>1459397 (OP) #
I bought a DJI Phantom 2 at the thrift store. Need a remote. How can I tell which I need? 2.4 vs 5.8

It looks like it was upgraded a bit, high end gimbal etc. I have a dx8 (for my hexagon flamewheel), which won’t work. Trying to avoid cracking open the shell.

[Anonymous No.1463200]

>>1463195
Transmitters dont use 5.8ghz.

You literally just get a Phantom 2 transmitter in whichever mode you like (mode 1 throttle on right, mode 2 throttle on left.

[Anonymous No.1463223]

>>1463200
Then why does the 2Vision say it uses 5.8?

[Anonymous No.1463228]

>>1463223
Than Phantom 2 Vision uses a 5.8ghz Wifi connection for the app on your phone for telemetry and camera feed.

Stupid question anyways.

If you got a Phantom 2 Vision, buy a Phantom 2 Vision transmitter. If you bought a Phantom 2, buy a Phantom 2 transmitter.

Incredibly simple if you stopped to think about it once.

[Anonymous No.1463236]

>>1463228
>transmitters don’t use 5.8ghz, use any controller
>except the one you cant use, which is 5.8

>it’s so simple

[Anonymous No.1463376]

>>1463200
>Transmitters dont use 5.8ghz

You dont know everything.

2.4 and 900 ghz are common but yes some drones use wifi which does use 5.8 ghz

Its used for Lightbride communication. Like a Digital Video with control signals.

[Anonymous No.1463380]

>>1463376
>900 ghz

I think you mean mhz m8

[Anonymous No.1463382]

>>1463380
Ya ya, 2.4 ghz and 900 mhz

[Anonymous No.1463425]

>>1463104
Buzzers are out of style now.

Nobody uses buzzers, we use Dshot beeper.

Dont you have Dshot Capable hardware?

[Anonymous No.1463440]

>>1463022
>>1463015
>>1463023
>>1463024
Here's how I have handled some situations. I fly at a park during low usage times (like sundays during church hours). I observe my surroundings and make myself approachable and friendly. I have introduced myself to coaches and other leaders who organize things and ask them where they would like to be and avoid flying around them. If they don't like the ideas I offer them a ride with the drone and usually they ask for a second one. I just go with being polite and having common courtesy. Yes it can put me out because I have to be above the foolish behavior by those outside our world.
Once had to deal with a particularly hostile person. Yelling while I flew back, fast, I disarmed and dropped my drone about 10 ft from me. And took my googles off and asked, "Do you yell at a driver like that when you're in the car? Let me show you something." Show them the props on my 3in. Then continuing, "this is a hazard when it's not being flown properly. Now, how can I help you?"
Bear in mind most of the people that live in my area, my self included, have an LTC. So, being polite but not a push over is critical, especially in my state. I have all the requirements to fly as a hobbyist and the papers to back it up. And taking the 15 minutes to descalate and educate has won me friends where that hostile situation had people taking up on my behalf, embarrassing the hostile party simultaneously making them the odd duck.
The high road is harder but damned it feels good when you have people take up for you because were awesome with them.

[Anonymous No.1463447]

>>1463440
What does having Litecoin do with being polite? If I don't have any Litecoin I can't be polite enough?

[Anonymous No.1463457]

>>1463447
I hope you're trolling,
*sigh* license to carry. It usually means a concealed carry of a firearm.

[Anonymous No.1463474]

>>1463457
I'm sorry, not everyone is a sisterfucker burger to know firearm buzzwords.

[Anonymous No.1463482]

>>1463425
I always use buzzers, the Matek MCU ones are so much louder than dshot beacons every will be.

[Anonymous No.1463487]

>>1463482

Dshot becons are loud enough for me. Never had any problem with not hearing them.

If you are worried about a lost quad then you should be worried about an Ejected battery because then your buzzer wont work.

You should get a battery powered buzzer they are a lot better than one you put on the board. They are loud and if the quad is not powered they will buzz for days.

[Anonymous No.1463508]

>>1463425
Yes 2 of my drones are DSHOT_600 compatible I believe?

I didnt know you could make them beep like a piezo.

[Anonymous No.1463509]

>>1463474
Yea, everyone else is refugee bait.

[Anonymous No.1463515]

>>1463482
Your Dshot beacon is not strong enough because your motors are weak piss shit. Get stronger motors, then you can compare.

[Anonymous No.1463518]

>>1463487
Those Matek ones use the same beeper module as the VIFLY Finder battery powered units, which are hugely louder than regular 5V beepers that connect directly to the FC & ridiculously louder than dshot beacons. I very rarely have batteries come unplugged (I actually can't remember the last time I did) but I frequently crash in long grass & being able to hear the thing from 100ft away is a big help.

[Anonymous No.1463520]

>>1463515
Even on 2408 motors dshot beacon is absolute shit compared to those Matek beepers.

[Anonymous No.1463524]

>>1463482
>>1463518
Do you survive a crash?

Wasnt kidding when I said a small flick, I break a buzzer in pretty much any crash.

[Anonymous No.1463527]

>>1463524
>I break a buzzer in pretty much any crash.

Wtf, how? I mount them like >>1460443 so how could it possibly get broken?

[Anonymous No.1463531]

>>1463527
Thats why Im asking if Im just getting shitty buzzers, which Ive already found out there are like $20 ones so apparently. I just bought a pack of 6 of the little round ones on Amazon. Ive tried hotglue, mounting tape, zip ties in various locations. Even a light tap with my finger when just testing it can noticeably effect the volume. Ive been lucky enough before to just give a broken one a little tap and itll start beeping again, but Im running out of the damn things now and have 2 quads without one.

[Anonymous No.1463538]

>>1463531
The Matek ones are ~$3.60 each so much more expensive than the generic 5V piezos, but well worth it in my opinion. They're mounted on a small flat PCB which makes them easy to mount, just put them in a piece of heatshrink then a bit of 3M VHB on the flat bottom.

[Anonymous No.1463546]

>>1463538
Guess Ill try some.

From the looks of it the actual noise apparatus isnt the same design as the generic 5v ones so hopefully its a little tougher.

[Anonymous No.1463630]

Anyone using a Matek F405-Wing Flight Controller with INAV? I could use some help!

[Anonymous No.1463640]

>>1463546
>From the looks of it the actual noise apparatus isnt the same design as the generic 5v ones

Yeah it's a different type of noise apparatus which is why the connection style is different as well - it doesn't just connect with two wires to the buzz+/buzz- pads on the FC, but instead uses three wires to 5V/gnd/buzz-.

[Anonymous No.1463672]

>>1463474
Alright. I'll give you not everyone knows every day American English. I should have thought about that before responding. But seriously it is important to be aware of that should you visit a lot of places in America.
I had to Google light coin to know what you were talking about.
>>1463509
Here's your (you)

[Anonymous No.1463681]

>>1463672
>heres your (you)
What are you retarded?

[Anonymous No.1463886]

Ok, so I have a couple vortex, a 150 and a 230.
I crashed my 150 and separated the bell from the motor. I cannot find the replacement clip for the little guy. I have a new motor to put in. The original motor is fine minus missing the clip. I can't find anywhere that has the clip to replace it. Do you guys have a resource for getting that kind of thing?

I think the shaft is 2mm but the normal e-clips and c-clips in that size I've found rub on the outer bearing race. Any help will be appreciated

[Anonymous No.1464059]

>>1463886
Banggood, Amazon, GetFPV, Flitetest.

They all sell those c clips but if they wont fit all I can really come up with is try to sand the outside of one down? Either that or you could try and contact ImmersionRC, maybe theyll send you the stock clips for the specific motors. But they will probably charge you shipping which may not be worth it for such a tiny piece.

As mentioned I would try and take some needle nose pliers and a hand file and sand the edges of the ones that dont fit down.

[Anonymous No.1464321]

>>1464059
I might give it a shot. My new motor came in today so I'm going to have a work bench day and get it replaced. Then tinker with the C clip issue on the benched motor.

[Anonymous No.1464647]

Having to use USPS is almost enough to make me get over the price differences from Banggood and other places like GetFPV.

Banggood "cant" find my home address so my only option for delivery is my PO Box. But fuck me if USPS isnt the laziest goddamn company. Takes 3 days to get something to Denver from China and another 3 for the last 80 miles to be delivered. Useless fucks close at 12 on Saturday and you can bet your ass they prepared early so they can lock up and be gone by 12:01.

[Anonymous No.1464754]

>>1463195
>I bought a DJI Phantom 2 at the thrift store.
Is this a meme?

[Anonymous No.1464768]

Twitchy drone guy here.
I had the time to replace the Matek F405 board with my older F3 board. The drone stays in the air like it is nailed there. The problem is definitely the FC. Examining the blackbox logs more I am sure the gyro is fine, it shows in great detail how the drone spazzing and twitching around. The RX signal looks fine, the gyros look fine, everything in the log looks fine apart from the twitching.
I suspect the problem is in chip, something sends fals signals or something locks up temporarily inside the MCU. Can't be fixed so I have to get a new one. Banggood says I fucked it up so no refund or replacement.

On other news I found out Hitec came out with a new PPM/Sbus receiver for racer drones. It is fucking expensive. Staying with my trusty old de-pinned PPM Delta-8 for now.

[Anonymous No.1464769]

>>1463886
Use e-clips, they are stronger and smaller than c-clips. Or get new motors that use screws instead of those dodgy clips.

[Anonymous No.1464796]

>>1464768
Are your motors/FC soft mounted?

[Anonymous No.1464805]

>>1464796
Soft mounting the motors is stupid, it gives more problems than what it solves.
The FC is soft mounted by bobbins but the gyro also has filtering. The fact that the slower F3 board with 2/1kHz gyro/pid is stable and the F4 one with 8/4kHz gyro/pid spazzes out no matter what I do with it makes it a solid case. New FC is faulty, needs replacement.

[Anonymous No.1464837]

>>1464805
Would have to disagree, Ive solved problems with more than just a Lizard95 by softmounting motors.

[Anonymous No.1465212]

I have a damaged 4s battery with one dead cell. Can I safely take it apart and use each cell separate for other, non-quad, projects? The battery sat for a few months before I discovered the dead cell, so if the other cells were bad they should have drained by now, right? How safe is it to peal them apart?

[Anonymous No.1465347]

Anyone here use Inav on a fixed wing? Could use some help

[Anonymous No.1465359]

>>1464837
All right you shitbag, I really hate fucking dumbass know-it-alls telling me what they think is right while NOT KNOWING A SINGLE THING ABOUT MY PROBLEM AND WHAT I DONE TO SOLVE IT!

I said the final solution where the fault is, part has to be replaced and it can't be solved any other way, ESPECIALLY NOT BY SMEARING FUCKING SNAKE OIL ON IT!

If you think otherwise, please feel free to tell me what the problem is, what the symptoms are what I done to search for the cause of the problem and post my goddamn blackbox logs. If you can't you may as well shut the fuck up!

>>1465212
Older cells were easy to separate, newer ones are more fiddly with the braised tabs instead of the older soldered wires. If you see a tiny spark you fried the next cell in line, if not the rest of all the cells. It is definitely a good excercise but don't expect anything new to come out of it. I think that explains the "safely" part as well.
I would just submerge it in salty water for the night and throw it out (in the battery bin of course)

[Anonymous No.1465375]

>>1465359
Did you just pond a rail or some shit?

Calm the fuck down Captain Autismo.

Soft mounts on motors aren't snake oil anymore than softmounts on FCs are. Was merely a suggestion, but for all I care at this point your battery can go up in your face.

[Anonymous No.1465378]

>>1465375
Why do you think softmounting the motors would solve the twitching? Care to elaborate and support it with some blackbox logs?

[Anonymous No.1465383]

>>1465378
Sure, go Google softmountimg motors fpv. Every single video and site shows reduced noise and vibrations getting to the gyro after softmounting.

And no I don't intend to find links for you just because you're having s fit over your toy not working. I bet you bought a FC with a history of shit like this anyways, stupid is as stupid does.

[Anonymous No.1465391]

>>1465383
I know what softmounting is and what it does.
Why do you think it will solve the twitching?
I'll make it easier for you: why do you think it will solve the KIND OF twitching my drone has with only the new FC?

[Anonymous No.1465396]

>>1465391
Because it's helped me and others with similar issues on other quadcopters. Like I said it was merely a suggestion to consider, since you can't really find anything else that works short of a different flight controller.

At this point it's likely there's something wrong with the FC, but since your guess is as good as anyone's you have no reason to flip a bitch.

[Anonymous No.1465406]

>>1465396
>similar
Why do you think "similar" means "exactly the same"? Do you seriously think a "similar" problem can be solved by a "similar" solution?
How far are you up your own ass to think just throwing in "softmounting your motors" will instantly solve anything? Why are you saying unrelated things when you know nothing about the problem?
I assume you are a child who just solved his first big boy problem on his drone and now things it is the sacred elixir of the world. It is not. Real world problem solving is much more complicated and you have to do all the loops and frustrating search for the cause, all of which I did. Did you assume I did nothing but sit on my ass and hope for some high school dropout would solve my problem online by merely suggesting random solutions for random problems? No, I did not, because I am not a high school dropout fucking shitstained little punk. I have an engineering degree and 10+ years of WORK EXPERIENCE searching for various problems. How about you take your fucking tone back, shut the fuck up and go back to school? You might learn a thing or two.

Also just to educate you, four way fourier transformation is all it takes to filter out the motor vibrations through the FC softmount, which is only use to dampen the vibrations (read: not eliminating it, the vibration stays) so the gyro readout doesn't go outside of it's physical boundaries. Softmounting the motors will only ensure your motor thrust vectors are not parallel. Just think about it, you have to tighten the screws tight enough so the motors don't vibrate even stronger and the screws are pulling on the motors. The motors are vibrating laterally, perpendicular to the screws direction. What part of the vibration will the softmount soak up and how much since it is strongly tightened down? Not much, actually insignificant amount. Softmounting the motors is a futile effort and retarded.

Now go back to school and try not to drop out this time.

[Anonymous No.1465412]

>>1465406
Yea definitely not reading that tirade.

Don't care bromego, stay mad. I'll be out flying my working and completely stable quadcopter. Have fun with your garbage quad and garbage attitude.

[Anonymous No.1465419]

>>1465412
Yep, definitely a high school dropout. Have fun with your working quad you bough with your dad's credit card.
I might have a currently not working quad but I will fix it soon and I will also enjoy having a disposable income in the mean time.
Oh, wait, my quad does work OK with my older FC, so the joke's on you.
But I guess you are unable to learn from this one either.

[Anonymous No.1465421]

>>1465419
Got some intense projecting issues, dont you?

Get a load of this guy, so smart he cant even fix his own shit. Are you sure you dont belong with the rest of the kiddies still using those gas powered RC cars? I think quads might be a bit too hard for you.

[Anonymous No.1465430]

>>1465406
Pretty sure this guy is smarter than you.

https://youtu.be/97-z5B__CCg

[Anonymous No.1465433]

>>1465412
>>1465419
>>1465421

ordinarily this general is one of the best.

NOT TODAY LOL

[Anonymous No.1465447]

>>1465433
Not sure what to tell you.

Normally we dont have some retard get so mad he insults the intelligence of those he sought help from. Apparently hes smarter than all of us so I dont get why my quad flies so much better than his.

[Anonymous No.1465605]

>>1465433
The colors are all fucked.
Looks like a protanopia filter.

[Anonymous No.1466003]

As of putting the frame together, I don't see how people say this frame is difficult to work in (Frog Lite).

It comes with carbon pieces to give you 4-5mm more space under the hood.

[Anonymous No.1466010]

>>1466003

Without those spacers it barely fits a 2 stack

[Anonymous No.1466020]

>>1466010
Did it not always come with the spacers or are most people trying to use them as an antenna mount like the Youtubers seems to think they are for?

[Anonymous No.1466805]

I just ordered the Frsky long range module for $30

It comes with an RX but I will need to get a 2S battery. I guess I will just get something and stick it to the back of the radio and solder on an XT30

[Anonymous No.1466871]

>>1466805
Why would you want a 2-3" long range build?

[Anonymous No.1466880]

>>1466871
Wait I think I misread the post...

Does that thing need external power?

[Anonymous No.1466882]

>>1466871

I will use it for a 5 inch.

But you need a 2S battery with a XT30 connector to plug into module to power it.

You can use it from the radio battery but it will use power very fast from the internal radio battery when you have it on higher power levels. Like 500 or 1 mw

If you are on the lowest setting you can use the battery in the radio sure. But then your range is about the same as 2.4 ghz

I plan on running at the 1 mw mode because it has Adaptive Power on that setting.

Meaning when the quad is close it will use less power and when the quad is farther away it boosts up power to 1 mw max. Do do that you need the extra battery plugged into the back.

You need 2S because 3S will overvolt and fry the module.

[Anonymous No.1466894]

>>1466882
Yea I misread the comment, didnt realize that thing needed external power. Leans me towards an X lite and R9 mini.

[Anonymous No.1466896]

>>1466894

Yea you can also put a larger 2S battery into the Radio. But the Battery compartment size is not huge.

If you use an External battery the Internal battery works at the same time. Like the internal battery can power up the radio or the module. But if you plug in the XT30 in the back you can power the module for longer.

And you could just put a 2S battery the radio just connecting it with the balance port then you dont have a battery hanging out the back.

[Anonymous No.1466912]

This thing is 95mm long and will fit on the back of my radio between the two hand grips.

I should be able to use some 3M dual lock and just stick it to the door to the battery compartment.


https://www.banggood.com/ZOP-Power-7_4V-3000mah-10C-Lipo-Battery-For-Frsky-Taranis-X9D-Plus-Transmitter-p-1279432.html?rmmds=mywishlist&cur_warehouse=CN

[Anonymous No.1466999]

>>1466894
>didnt realize that thing needed external power

It doesn't.

>>1466882
>If you are on the lowest setting you can use the battery in the radio sure. But then your range is about the same as 2.4 ghz

Even at the 25mW setting the R9 will have greater range over the Taranis' internal 2.4GHz at 100mW. Range/power isn't comparable when dealing with different frequencies.

>>1466896
>If you use an External battery the Internal battery works at the same time.

It's not as simple as that, because the module will always draw power from whichever source is higher voltage. If you're using something like a 3S LiFe to power your radio, then the R9M will always choose the internal battery over an external 2S LiPo.

[Anonymous No.1467003]

>>1466003
You would see if you only had a simple FC needing a PDB, minimOSD, big VTx etc. like we had 1-2 years ago. It was not that long time ago.
The new BF OSD fcs make a big difference

[Anonymous No.1467057]

>>1466999

I fly the FCC version and we dont have 25mW

We have 10mW and it goes up to 100mW as the next step.

Yea It can run off internal power and it has External power because it drains the internal too fast on the higher power settings.

[Anonymous No.1467074]

>>1467057
The power drain with the module at 100mW is probably very close to the power drain when using the regular internal 2.4GHz tx (which iirc is something like 60mW before antenna gain). Unless you're flying hours long fixed wing flights at 20km that actually uses 1W, or smashing through a hundred miniquad packs per session, external power doesn't seem like a requirement to me.

I've been flying the 25mW EU mode the most, but also some of the 100mW FCC mode this last week while I was in the US on a work trip & I've not really noticed a difference in battery life.

A lot of people considering R9/Crossfire assume incorrectly that they are going to need 1W/2W all the time, when in reality most people will be just fine on 25mW. I guess that's where the FCC adaptive & the EU/AU Flex firmware comes in though.

Anyway, I guess my point is, try flying with it a while before spending money on a new battery & making your tx bulkier for potentially no reason.

[Anonymous No.1467080]

The Adaptive power mode will probably use 100mW most of the time when I am flying. I just dont know how much it will switch to the 1 watt and use more battery.

It makes sense to fly on adaptive power because I can do most stuff I will need on the 100mW setting but if the RSSI gets low it boosts itself into the high power mode of 1 watt

One nice thing about having an External Lipo with my QX7S is that I wont need to get into the internal battery as much.

The Internal pack is not a lipo but it has a full charge of about 8v and hangs around 7v - 7.5v most of the time. Low Alarms at 6v

So when I have a Lipo 2S plugged into the back the radio will be using power from that. Because it will have a higher voltage.

[Anonymous No.1467483]

How long does it take for a GPS to get a satellite lock?

If you have the betaflight GPS rescue setup you can not Arm the quad if you dont have like 8 satellites.

So like how long do you have to wait each time you power up the quad before you can Arm it?

[Anonymous No.1467495]

>>1467483
No idea about one with betaflight but all those premade drones like the Hubsan or DJIs typically pick up satellites in less than 30 seconds.

[Anonymous No.1467622]

>>1467483
Cold start on a M8N is 30 seconds in optimal conditions, 1 second for a hot start, so in theory you should only have to wait for the first pack of the session then when swapping subsequent packs it will be much faster.

[Anonymous No.1467749]

>>1467622

30 seconds in optimal conditions is not too bad. But I was watching a video and it took a guy 3+ mins before he had enough satellite to arm the quad.

With GPS recovery in betaflight you cannot arm the quad till you have a lock.

[Anonymous No.1467842]

Tfw went all the way to US/Canada & barely got to fly ;_;

[Anonymous No.1467981]

>>1467483
You can always turn off the gps arming flag

[Anonymous No.1467984]

>>1467981

Ohh you mean you can just turn that off and arm as soon as you plugin and it just gains a link when you fly?

I will have to look closer into the CLI commands I didnt know you could do that.

[Anonymous No.1467987]

Wait that would be a bad thing. Because it only knows where home is when it gains a lock.

So if you fly before you get a lock when it does it a lock it will think that is home.

So it will fly to the wrong homepoint. That is not good.

[Anonymous No.1467992]

>>1467984
I assume...you can in INAV at least. >>1467987
I only use GPS on my wing with inav. but again in inav you set set a new rth in flight

On a side note. Can anyone recommend a good motor and prop combo for a 6inch build that will be freestyle and cruising around?

[Anonymous No.1467996]

>>1467992

Cant recommend 6 inch for any reason.

I can get really long flight times on 2205 2300kv motors with 5x4x3 props. Like 10 mins cruise speed.

I dont know any 6 inch setup that can do better.

[Anonymous No.1468000]

>>1467996

I bought a 6" Armattan Chameleon frame
Just not really good at picking out motors and props so needed some recommendations

[Anonymous No.1468040]

>>1468000
Depends on budget as always.

If you dont care to spend $100 on motors then I like the Emax Lite series at about $17 per motor. Cheaper theres the Brotherhobby Returner R2, more expensive I personally like Brotherhobby, T Motor, or Emax RSII.

[Anonymous No.1468061]

>>1468040
Don't mind dropping 100$ on motors

[Anonymous No.1468065]

>>1468061
I think the most popular right now for that sort of cash would be T Motor F40 Pro, probably the 2306 for a 6 incher. I would get some Brotherhobby Returner R6s, but I'm a sucker for looks.

As for props Dal cyclone 6040s or US 6x4x3 would be a good choice for freestyle but if you want long flights with a few powerloops you'd want bi blades such as the avan flow long range.

[Anonymous No.1468072]

>>1468065
Phone corrected HQ to US...

[Anonymous No.1468073]

>>1468065
I see the F40PROII comes in 3 different KV ratings

[Anonymous No.1468086]

>>1459695

Good sir, I can definitely vouchsafe to you that red ones do indeed provide superior velocity.

[Anonymous No.1468090]

>>1468073
For a 6 inch youd want 1900-2200 Id say, getfpv has the 2150kv F40 Pro II so Id go with that.

I believe you can run higher kv with a 6 inch but youd need some beefy ESCs.

[Anonymous No.1468251]

>>1467996
All things equal, a 6" build is going to fly for longer than a 5" build, it's simple physics/electronics.

[Anonymous No.1468284]

Just watched UAVFutures Smooth Operator review.
What do you think?
For me it looked like an overpriced overdesigned piece of edgyness with the general idea of "how to design a racing drone that looks and works like a toy car"
The only thing missing was the plastic parts and maybe an aerodynamic cover.
Also "let me show you this very very clever thing"
>proceeds to screw out a handful of screws
Damn it Stu, I ain't going to mess around with a ton of screws in the field just to adjust my VTx/receiver/whatever!
The thing has literally a metric ton of screws to hold it together! And do they expect me to mess around soldering the FC in a small recess like that?
Maybe this is designed to have a difficult DIY build to encourage people buying the prebuilt things for a whopping $800! Fuck this shit!

We have the TBS Source One and Rotor Riot CL1, also Armattan Chameleon/Rooster and similar well proven designs that cost way less and much easier to build.

Did Stu sound like he wanted to say good things about it but in fact he couldn't even justify the frame for himself?

links:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKuVHwJo6kc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1LtvdfpcBg

[Anonymous No.1468289]

>>1468284
>Did Stu sound like he wanted to say good things about it but in fact he couldn't even justify the frame for himself?

He's one of the biggest & most shameless shills in the community, why does this behaviour still surprise you?

[Anonymous No.1468311]

Has anyone done commercial/industrial builds?
I'm trying to build a multi rotor that can carry a decent payload. Some where in the neighborhood of 12 to 14 lbs.

One of the challenges I'm having is finding any info on motor/prop combos. And I think the lumenier QAV500 frame looks like a contender. But I'm wondering if having 6 or 8 props might do me better.

All day long I can find stuff for mini quads and prebuilt drones for their applications but I am really having a hard time finding any info on anything larger than 6in quads.

[Anonymous No.1468322]

>>1468311
Commercial/industrial clients tend to just use COTS solutions (DJI Matrice, Freefly Alta, etc.) since at that sort of level you want the turnkey reliability & proven track record of an established product rather than something DIY, due to the value of your payload etc.. As such, the number of people doing DIY builds at this size is very small compared to those building miniquads, so there is understandably a lot less information out there.

Search through RC Groups for similar builds, use eCalc to inform your motor/ESC/prop/battery choice & estimate payload capacity & flight times.

>I think the lumenier QAV500 frame looks like a contender

That's an obsolete frame which is very 'one trick'. If you try to mount any payload other than a front mounted GoPro gimbal the style of the frame just doesn't work.

[Anonymous No.1468357]

>>1468251

lmao, you guys keep saying that but cant back it up with flight times.

[Anonymous No.1468359]

>>1468251

Everything about a 6 inch quad is heavier. That weight steals all the gains you imagine you have.

You are just like the 6s people who think they will get longer flight times when really they are using a lower KV motor.

And a 1500 4s battery is equal to a 1000 6s.

[Anonymous No.1468362]

A 6 inch quad with 2205 motors will fly about 7 mins.

A 5 inch quad with 2205 motors will fly about 10 mins.

Its simple physics and math.

You imagine that the bigger props will help you but its one big formula and everything adds together.

[Anonymous No.1468370]

Mr. Steele is wrong to say that a 6s setup gives more flight time than a 4s.

His 1100 mah 6s battery has more capacity than the 1300 mah 4s he is used to flying

And his low KV 6s motors have less thrust.

That is how you end up with more flight time when the rest of the setup is the same. With more battery and less powerful motors.

[Anonymous No.1468371]

I could Downsize the motors Steele uses to 2205 and put a 1500 mah battery on and probably get longer flight time than his 6s setup.

[Anonymous No.1468375]

>>1468359
>>1468357
>>1468359

I'm not sure where you're getting your information &/or whether you actually have any personal experience, but it is common knowledge in the community, based both on theory & experience, that with similar 5" & 6" builds the latter is going to fly longer than the former.

If you want theory, just put some numbers into eCalc - like I just did with picrelated. Even if you add a 50g discrepancy in weight between the two, the 6" still has longer flight times. And that 50g discrepancy is completely unrealistic - I'm not sure where you're getting this idea that 'everything about a 6 inch quad is heavier'? Taking something like the FlosStyle as an example, the 5" version is 85g whilst the 6" version is 92g. You're talking about 2205 motors for both, so you're not gaining any weight there & the difference in weight between a set of 5" props & a set of 6" props is <10g for the whole set. So where exactly is this substantial weight gain you're thinking about coming from?

And if you want experience, I regularly fly 5", 6" & 7". The 5" have the shortest flight times, the 6" is in the middle & the 7" has the longest.

[Anonymous No.1468376]

>>1468322
I figured the DIY industrial was going to be niche in a niche. I will check out Ecalc. Thanks for the insight, probably the most information I've gathered in a couple days

Dang, I was hoping that frame might work. I guess I will have to see if I can find a local carbon fiber dealer in my area and get to cutting.

[Anonymous No.1468377]

>>1468375
Actual picrelated of eCalc, but I'm sure you have your own subscription.

[Anonymous No.1468380]

>>1468376
Just because the QAV500 is an obsolete janky design doesn't mean that your only remaining option is to design & cut your own. Look at Tarot's frames, look at Daya's frames, even look at things like the DJI Spreading Wings frames, etc.

[Anonymous No.1468387]

>>1468375
>And if you want experience, I regularly fly 5", 6" & 7". The 5" have the shortest flight times, the 6" is in the middle & the 7" has the longest

You still dont get it.

The combination you have on your 5" is more power hungry then the others.

You probably have some 2306 motors on it. Also steep pitched props.


Your larger quad are not as power hungry and what about that power source eh? yea

I know what I am talking about.

You wont find any 6 inch builds that will have a longer flight time than a smaller 5 unless they are making sacrifices to get more flight time. Like adding a bigger battery.

You can always put on a bigger battery for longer flight times. But a 5 inch is for a 1500 mah battery when you have it setup for freestyle. If you want long range you can strap on any bigger battery and get really amazing flight times.

Same with any bigger quad.

Bottom line is I can get 10 min cruise time using just a freestyle sized battery on a 5 inch, that is a really hard benchmark to reach for. I think ive even seen like 11 mins before. That is using a 1500 mah battery.

So if you go to 6 inch using the same battery you will get 7 or 8 mins because the props are bigger and harder on the motors. Sure you can upsize the motors and the battery but then you change the whole formula.

[Anonymous No.1468390]

I think I could get the same flight times on a 6 inch as on a 5 inch if I could pick all the right parts I wanted.

But I find that 5 inch parts are cheaper and I have more choices.

[Anonymous No.1468399]

>>1468387
>The combination you have on your 5" is more power hungry then the others.

I literally gave you an eCalc screenshot of exactly the same quad where only the props are changed, because you specifically mentioned using 2205 motors on both. Back in the ZMR250 days we used to do precisely this - we would swap from 5" props to 6" props when we wanted to cruise for longer.

>You wont find any 6 inch builds that will have a longer flight time than a smaller 5 unless they are making sacrifices to get more flight time

Yes, yes you will. Literally any 6" version of a 5" build will fly longer with the same battery.

>Sure you can upsize the motors and the battery but then you change the whole formula.

The 'formula' is precisely what eCalc does.

[Anonymous No.1468415]

>>1468380
The Tarot hex frame looks really promising, and with the props it will swing looks like it will give me the flight time I'm wanting.

[Anonymous No.1468416]

>>1468375
>>1468387
>>1468399
Wasn't trying to start some 5v6" thread I just wanted to know a good combination of motor and prop for a frame that I already have.
Sorry guys

[Anonymous No.1468424]

250mm quad is 6 inch sized.

If you put 5 inches on its like down propping.

[Anonymous No.1468428]

When you put a larger sized prop on the same motor you loose efficiency.

Its because the prop has more plastic and its longer so the weight is more out at the edge. So its harder on the motor.

[Anonymous No.1468429]

>>1468415
I would personally recommend against the Tarot 650 Sport, I did a build with it because it looked pretty neat but it turned out to be a dumb design that led to a super awkward build. The Ironman range from Tarot looks better, but if portability is of any concern then any folding X style frame is going to suck compared to a folding H.

>>1468416
To address your original question, if you want a 6" cruising/freestyle quad & assuming you're going with 4S, you're not going to want anything too high kv, probably no higher than 2300kv. I wouldn't go as low as 1900kv as I find that a bit lacking on some 6" props.

If you're willing to spend a bit more money on 'good' motors, then something like the 2150kv T-Motor F40 Pro II would be right up your alley.

But if you're looking to save some pennies then really any popular 2300kv motor will probably do you just fine.

>>1468424
Funny how so many people enjoy flying 5" props on frames that can accommodate 6" props, for exactly the same reason that many people prefer stretch X to regular X. It's almost like 'down propping' like that isn't an issue.

[Anonymous No.1468432]

>>1468428
>When you put a larger sized prop on the same motor you loose efficiency.

So? eCalc knows this. Everybody that flies 5" & 6" knows this. The result is still that 6" flies longer.

[Anonymous No.1468443]

>>1468432

No, if you loose motor efficiency you dont fly longer buddy.

[Anonymous No.1468445]

>>1468429
Yes going with 4s
I know it's lame but as far as I can tell the 2150kv tmotors only come in that blue. Wanted a black/gray

[Anonymous No.1468453]

The typical person who wants 6s is the racer who has F80 Pro KV2500 2408 motors with 5x4.8x3 props on a 1300 mah non graphene battery and then when they fly they wonder why they get sag and a under 2 min flight time.

Basically its their own fault for buying that gear they need to replace. They had to keep pushing and pushing the system to the limits till they reached the limit of the battery and then they complain about Sag sell all their gear and buy 6s stuff at top dollar prices.

[Anonymous No.1468454]

>>1468443
I'm not sure what more I can tell you. Community consensus is that 6" flies longer. Theory/science (eCalc) says that 6" flies longer. All of my experience over the last 3 years says that 6" flies longer. You are literally the only person I've spoken to that wants to refute that.

I mean come on, >>1468377 literally proves the exact opposite of what you're telling me. And it's a scenario I've actually tested IRL on many occasions.

>>1468445
Just take a look at the current offerings in the 2100-2300kv range from T-Motor, Brother Hobby, Emax, etc. There's no shortage of decent motors out there today & plenty of opinion here & elsewhere about whether something that takes your fancy is any good or not.

[Anonymous No.1468459]

>>1468454

The 5 inch model would be smaller and have longer flight times in the end.

[Anonymous No.1468461]

The one with 6 inch props will eat up the battery more than the one with 5 inch props when you do more than hover.

[Anonymous No.1468466]

>>1468459
>>1468461
Are you even reading anything I'm saying?

The 6" quad is _more efficient_ than the 5" quad. The 6" quad will 'eat up' _less_ battery than the 5" quad.

Yes of course flight style/characteristics/etc. might affect then differently. But when it comes down to the level of gross generalizations of whether 5" or 6" flies longer, the answer is always going to be 6".

Picrelated is a smaller, lighter 5" quad vs a larger, heavier 6" quad. Everything else _exactly_ the same. Oh look, even giving the 5" an unrealistic 30g advantage it still doesn't fly as long as the 6"!

I really hope you're just trolling for fun now, because anybody that is so adamant about their position when given so much that proves them patently wrong has some serious issues.

[Anonymous No.1468471]

>>1468466

The Gram/watt thrust ratio changes as the throttle goes up.

If you see on the Maximum its using more watts and more power. Its even over amping the ESC.

6 inch props just will use more power than 5 inch.

[Anonymous No.1468474]

>>1468357
Literally the only way to increase the flight time is increasing efficiency.
DJI somehow did it with the Mavic having crazy flight times being a 6-7 inchish? size drone. Micro gimbal with only the very innards of the camera on he gimbal and the rest is in the body, motors designed strictly for one use, props same, and increased weight to mAh ratio in the batteries. Maybe a lower C rated but reliable design battery and the electronics make sure the motors never exceed the boundaries.
There is much optimization can be done if you design everything around one frame, one use and one flight envelope.
Simply putting on more batteries don't do anything or even make a worse efficiency due to increased weight. Motors also have an efficiency curve with a single optimum rpm where it delivers the best g/Amp ratio in thrust. Putting on more weight makes the motors spin more and getting further away from the optimal rpm making them consume exponentially more amps. And so on etc...
Just because it is bigger doesn't make it better. The key is efficiency.

[Anonymous No.1468475]

>>1468474

Larger bi-blade props is how they are doing it, yea with a lower C rating battery because its not flying Acro.

The motors are wound for Efficiency, not thrust.

[Anonymous No.1468477]

>>1468429
Good news, I don't need to worry about portability. I wouldn't mind a folding frame, but I don't really need that feature.
I will take a look at the iron man frames

[Anonymous No.1468481]

>>1468475
There are no "efficiency type windings", mate. You have to carefully balance and design a motor so it's peak efficiency falls within your general usecase boundaries. Stator geometry, wire material, coatings, enamel, cross-section shape, magnet size, strength, airgap size, number of stator poles and magnet poles, etc...
You don't make an efficient motor by just "winding it efficiently"

[Anonymous No.1468482]

>>1468481

Yep, that is what I mean.

They choose design elements for efficiency and the way you wind it can actually add efficiency.

[Anonymous No.1468488]

5 inch is the sweet spot for tri-blade props.

You can put some 5x3 bi-blade props on and get longer cruise speeds but you will have much less thrust.

It wont be good for freestyle because of bi-blade vibrations and propwash, they wont handle good. But for cruising will have nice flight time. So its only good for one thing. Open up throttle and they flatten out and flutter.


If you get into bigger quads what you want to do is copy what DJI is doing for long range and use bi-blades with a low pitch.

The only reason to build a bigger quad is to go father out. Not for proximity stuff. So you need some efficient motors to pair with bi-blade props.

[Anonymous No.1468498]

>>1468482
...
just do your homework

[Anonymous No.1468500]

>>1468471
>If you see on the Maximum its using more watts and more power.

Which is irrelevant if you're looking for maximum flight time cruising, when you're never going to be pushing full throttle.

>6 inch props just will use more power than 5 inch.

At full throttle? Sure, that's fucking obvious. But for actual cruising around, we can all clearly see that the 6 inch props use _less_ power at hover/mid throttle & for cruising that's where your throttle is going to be.

Go actually build & fly a 6" quad before you continue spouting crap that risks misleading people who are newer to the hobby trying to use these threads to get genuinely useful advice.

[Anonymous No.1468505]

>>1468500

Doing freestyle or racing doing anything with the throttle other than hovering the 5 inch will have more flight time than the 6 inch.

When you are doing long range you like to buzz around and its more than just a hover.

But also you might want the quad to do more than just buzz around. If you want it to also do freestyle stuff ect then yea the 5 inch is always better.

You are putting out bad advice because people think they will get more flight time on 6 inch and when they buy a 6 inch freestyle frame they dont get it.

Its back to the mentality of the racer that thinks if he just goes a bit bigger its going to be better and faster but it it just throws off the balance.

[Anonymous No.1468510]

>>1468505
I am literally talking from experience of flying both 5" & 6" for years, with 6" consistently giving me longer flight times all round.

Do you actually fly 6" yourself? It sounds like you don't.

[Anonymous No.1468515]

Na you can say whatever you want but you have to show setups and data or its just talk.

There are 5 inch quads flying over ~10+ mins on youtube.

If your 6 inch is better, "Show Me"

[Anonymous No.1468521]

>>1468515
I've given you huge amounts of data, what more do you want? I've told you about quads I've had that flew longer on 6" than 5"? You want a photo of an old ZMR250 that flew 8 minutes on a 1800 3S with 6" props but only 5 minutes on the same pack & 5" props? What is showing you a setup going to prove any more than the overwhelming amount of evidence you've already had?

Seriously, just go listen to the community consensus from people that actually fly both 5" & 6".

And I'm just going to assume now that you don't actually fly 6" so have zero credibility whatsoever when it comes to this debate.

[Anonymous No.1468537]

>>1468521

Then he shows a quad with bi-blades lmao

Ofc I already explained those get longer flight times at the cost of thrust and propwash ect.

[Anonymous No.1468542]

>>1468537
I never said the props in the picture were either of those from the comparison I gave. I posted the photo to emphasise how pointless your notion of 'showing setups' is. I could say anything I want about that photo, that it got 12 minutes on 6x4x3 triblades & only 7 minutes on 5x4x3 triblades, wouldn't mean anything.

What does mean something are actual eCalc data & years worth of community consensus, both of which you are claiming to be untrue from your position of apparently zero practical experience.

[Anonymous No.1468544]

>>1468542
>claiming to be untrue from your position of apparently zero practical experience

Welcome to /diy/ and/or /g/

[Anonymous No.1468552]

>>1468542
>I could say anything I want about that photo, that it got 12 minutes on 6x4x3 triblades & only 7 minutes on 5x4x3 triblades, wouldn't mean anything.

It would be a lie lul.

You have to be able to compare setups to each other you dont get anywhere. Its just logic.

I have flown my own personal 5 inch quad for over 11 mins before. Ive yet to see any comparable 6 inch setup that can do better.

[Anonymous No.1468553]

I could put bi-blades on my 5 inch and fly for over 11 mins.

[Anonymous No.1468562]

>>1468552
>You have to be able to compare setups to each other you dont get anywhere.

That's exactly what I've been doing - comparing setups that I have actually flown.

What you're doing is talking with authority about stuff you have no actual experience of, making claims that go against the entirety of community consensus & theory.

[Anonymous No.1468566]

>>1468562

I dont need to make the mistakes that other people have.

I already saw the testing. You can just look at motor data on miniquad test bench ect.

[Anonymous No.1468573]

If I wanted to I could build a cruiser that would fly over 20 mins. Like a Mavic

[Anonymous No.1468582]

>>1468566
If you want to be ignorant & believe that you know best even when your beliefs are at odds with literally everybody else in the community, including those with substantially more experience & knowledge than you, then go ahead. Just don't shit up these threads any more giving people false 'advice' that could harm their enjoyment of this hobby.

[Anonymous No.1468602]

>>1468582

Your advice is terrible. You generalize too much thinking that going for a 6 inch will give you longer flight time.

If that was the actual case everyone would fly them.

But the reality is most people fly 5 inch. I dont have to waste time talking to you anymore because you have a bad mentality. Anyone can do what they want and you can get enjoyment however you want buddy. If 6 inch makes you happy do it.

But seem to think you know better then the rest of the world who fly the sweet spot of 5 inch.

You are not understanding the nuance behind the words when somebody says 6 inch can fly longer. Its only conditionally true.

[Anonymous No.1468625]

Hi all, I'm looking for a glider to do some thermal soaring with, any recommendations?
I'm actually working on my own from-scratch autopilot for long-range autonomous flight, with some solar cells on the wings to give just enough power to run the servos, with most of the energy coming from thermal soaring, so far both of these look like promising platforms. Any advice appreciated

[Anonymous No.1468770]

The Diatone GT-M515 is essentially a 5 inch endurance quad.

With a 1300 mah 4s battery it can get 15 min cruising flight times. With about a 5 min hard flying flight time.

You could strap a huge battery to it and fly over 20+ mins at endurance speeds.

[Anonymous No.1468793]

Anyone here have any experience with Spektum or LemonRX receivers?

The antennas on my spektrum RXs are just 2 copper wires, both of which came off in a crash. Ive resoldering them back on and the quad works fine as far as I can tell, but both antennas ended up being a few millimeters shorter than the were before. Both are around 30mm now, not really sure what they were at before.

Is that going to cause any issues?

[Anonymous No.1468796]

>>1468602
>You generalize too much thinking that going for a 6 inch will give you longer flight time.

Listen to your own advice. You generalize about something you don't even have experience of, to the extent that you say you 'Cant recommend 6 inch for any reason' apparently without even trying it yourself.

Of course one particular 5" quad can get longer flight times than one particular 6" quad, nobody is arguing that. But that's not the point. The point is that in general people often go to 6" when they want longer flight times, so telling everybody that a 6" setup will never be better suited for them than a 5" setup is both wrong & unhelpful.

Keep flying 5" if that's what you enjoy. But for pity's sake stop spreading misinformation about subjects you know nothing about while adamantly refusing to listen to whose who actually have a clue.

[Anonymous No.1468875]

>>1468625
Don't get the Phoenix 2000, the fuse is shit plastic.
Get a Multiplex Solius at least, or a 3m wingspan from a proper model shop.

These are the ones I'd suggest, look for similar ones:
https://www.lindinger.at/en/airplanes/models/gliders/robbe-monsun-arf-styro-gfk-abachi-flaeche
https://www.lindinger.at/en/airplanes/models/gliders/topmodel-gracia-maxi-arf-3-5m-rot-orange-thermik-elektro-f5j-modell
https://www.lindinger.at/en/airplanes/models/gliders/topmodel-pegasus-v-arf-mit-gfk-rumpf-und-rippentragflaechen
https://www.lindinger.at/en/airplanes/models/gliders/topmodel-marabu-k-arf-2-75m-mit-k-leitwerk
https://www.lindinger.at/en/airplanes/models/gliders/topmodel-samsara-f5j-arf-transparent
https://www.lindinger.at/en/airplanes/models/gliders/topmodel-element-3-5m-arf-high-performance-f5j-electromodel

I know the Topmodels fly well and the F5J gliders are competition grade in both build and flight.

About the semi-autonomous thing, solar cells are heavy, you will need an extra light build with a lot of wing surface. Also keeping in the air for a long time is only doable with thermals and it is not doable with autonomous flight.
I'd suggest just keep to normal flying, maybe FPV and leave the autonomous flight to the agro drone companies.

[Anonymous No.1468877]

>>1468770
It won't fly longer with a bigger battery, the extra load destroys the flight envelope.
If you want long flight times just buy a Mavic.

[Anonymous No.1468890]

Anyone experiment with a 3d printed shell for fpv? I figure a 1mm thick shell would add better aerodynamics but barely any weight. If it breaks, it's super cheap and easy to just print another one.

[Anonymous No.1468905]

>>1468877

Its been tested by people and when you put a huge battery on it it hovers just fine about mid throttle and gets 20+ mins flight time. Its a 5 inch endurance quad.

With smaller battery like an 850 mah its 1/4 throttle hover and with 1300mah its 1/3rd


When you say it destroys the flight envelope that is misleading. You put a small battery on it when you want to freestyle and you put a big battery on it when you want to Cruise.

You dont put a small battery on it for cruising and a big battery for freestyle.

You can get 20+ flight times like a Mavic on a 5 inch endurance quad.

[Anonymous No.1468907]

>>1468890

You can prototype frames with it but you dont use them to fly because they break and who wants to waste time rebuilding.

[Anonymous No.1468931]

>>1468890
>>1468907

So called 'pod' builds are quite popular for racers, but require frames where all of the rigidity is built into the base & doesn't rely upon a top plate for rigidity (because you're going to eschew the top plate in favour of the pod).

The QAV-X was probably the first frame where pod builds really took off, then more recently you have things like the Floss 2.1 Team Edition. A lot of the guys I used to fly in an old factory with rocked QAV-X/Realac X210 pod builds.

You either want to print out of a very strong material like Taulman Alloy 910 (which can also help with rigidity if your base plate/arm setup isn't ideal for being used without a top plate) or you want to print out of a flexible material (TPU/TPE/flexi PLA/whatever) so it just flexes rather than breaking.

[Anonymous No.1468977]

>>1468905
Why are you still trying to win this argument?

Ive watched a youtube video of some dude strapping a gold cart battery to the bottom of a Hubsan and hovering it for 4 hours. You seem to be the only one here stuck on 5 inch props.

Personally Ive flown a 6 inch props on one of my 700+g Martian quads and got 12 minutes, of flying in mostly just a line but you can get 1-2 punch outs in. Im sure I could get more with lighter motors and a lighter frame. I admit I didnt bother to read more of the argument but can you explain why you insist on denying the 3 or 4 images of pure evidence you were given?

[Anonymous No.1468996]

>>1468931

Yea the pod frames for racers. Ive seen the pods printed in TPU or a squishy material.

They also print them in a much harder nylon material that adds structure bracing to the frame. Like for example the Floss 2.0 you can find the harder nylon canopy.

IDK if they are lighter then just the carbon top plate but they look cool.

[Anonymous No.1469013]

Speaking of printing squishy materials, fuck me sideways flexible PLA is a million times better than TPU. I spent ages & wasted so much filament trying to find an even half reliable way to print Flexfill 98A, then today I load up some flex PLA for the first time & blindly bang in some settings & I've been putting out great prints all day with zero issues or failures.

[Anonymous No.1469056]

>>1469013
Do you wear lipstick with that pink PLA?

[Anonymous No.1469064]

>>1469056
Gotta feel pretty while flying.

[Anonymous No.1469067]

>>1469064
Ugh
I bet you wear a skirt

[Anonymous No.1469068]

>>1469067
Whatever I can to get closer to Bardwell.

[Anonymous No.1469097]

>>1468793
Decided to replace both antennas with ~31mm piece of servo wire, according to google it should work.

Wish me luck.

[Anonymous No.1469123]

>>1466003
I now realize why people say its difficult.

My VTX is a little bit too big and Im now having to result to 3D printed parts in order to fit the VTX and RX in a reasonable spot.

Also why in the fuck did they decide to use M3 screws on everything but M2 on the top plate. Need longer screws and I dont have any, gotta hit up the damn hardware store tomorrow.

[Anonymous No.1469146]

Would there be any consequence to mounting a receiver like the R9 Mini directly on top of a flight controller with double sided tape? Ive seen stacks where the VTX or RX is mounted like that before.

[Anonymous No.1469150]

>>1469146

Its probably ok. I mounted my a 20x20 fc with foam tape before.

[Anonymous No.1469252]

>>1469146
I would use a bit of shielding between the Rx and the FC

[Anonymous No.1469276]

>>1469252
Put some heat shrink over the RX and stuck it to the FC with an oversized piece of mounting tape.

[Anonymous No.1469278]

>>1469276
Just be careful when removing it, 3M VHB can literally pull SMD chips off of boards.

[Anonymous No.1469589]

Is there a "best type" of antenna to use on your goggles/VTX?

I have a cloverleaf and direction patch on my goggles and have the choice of putting a cloverleaf or a pagoda on the quad. Is there an advantage/disadvantage to either design, and does the quad need to have the same type of omnidirectional as the goggles?

[Anonymous No.1469612]

>>1469589
>Is there an advantage/disadvantage to either design

People can argue at length about which circular polarized antenna design is better, but honestly I don't think the differences are enough to care too much about. I've used $5 cloverleafs & $30 Triumphs (lindenblad) & honestly I wouldn't be surprised if I couldn't distinguish them in a double blind test.

These days I tend to slap Lumenier AXII on most stuff, because they perform fine & are never going to get broken. I have a bunch of pagodas on some older models, which anecdotally seem to perform better than lindenblads. Cheap pagodas aren't necessarily that durable, but a cheap cloverleaf dipped in PlastiDip is almost invincible.

>does the quad need to have the same type of omnidirectional as the goggles?

No, they just need to match in their polarization (eg both should be right hand polarized, or both should be left hand polarized).

[Anonymous No.1469638]

>>1469612
Actually in the process of just 3D printing some spacers so I can hopefully make a pagoda a little more durable. The only cloverleaf I have left lost its plastic shell in a crash so Id bet without it the durability would be even worse than a regular pagoda.

[Anonymous No.1469668]

How does FrSky like to be oriented? V shape or L shape?

[Anonymous No.1469733]

Well, if I've learned absolutely nothing else in this hobby I've gotten CAD down pretty well.

Ive had to design 3 or 4 parts for 3 frames to accommodate the short ass antennas on my receivers.

[Anonymous No.1469881]

>>1469668
2.4GHz diversity antennas should generally be placed at 90 degree angles to each other, so yes V or L. Try to keep them away from carbon, don't tape them along the bottom of your arms for example. The ziptie + heatshrink method works great.

[Anonymous No.1469978]

>>1469589

Its better to use a Circular Polarized clover leaf type of antenna on the quad with a low 3 dbi which gives it a more circular pattern and best coverage.

For the goggles you should use a Pagoda which will have a higher 5 dbi which stretches out the radiation pattern giving you more pickup range.

Stretching out the radiation pattern is ok because you wont be flying above yourself where the deadspot is.

You dont want a Pagoda on a quad for that reason. They have a bigger deadband at the top or the bottom.

That is the reason you use something like a Triumph or Foxeer for best video. Because they have a more circular pattern than a Pagoda. The dont have as bad of a dead spot at the top and bottom.

So when you are rolling and flipping around you are not facing the deadspots of the pagoda at you.

[Anonymous No.1470072]

>>1469978
>You dont want a Pagoda on a quad for that reason. They have a bigger deadband at the top or the bottom.
>That is the reason you use something like a Triumph or Foxeer for best video.

I definitely noticed an overall improvement after replacing Triumphs on my quads with Pagodas. Maybe I do less flippy floppies than you though.

What sort of antenna do you mean by Foxeer? They make a bunch of difference designs, don't they?

[Anonymous No.1470075]

>>1470072
Probably the 3dbi cloverleaf if I had to guess.

Id have to buy more antennas to give it a full test. As of right now my options are an unprotected cloverleaf, a pagoda, or a protected cloverleaf that gets dangerously close to my back props.

I think Ill give the pagoda a try for awhile, I dont usually buy FPV stuff until I need enough to justify the 3 week shipping from Banggood.

[Anonymous No.1470081]

>>1469978
Would putting a pagoda on your goggles and a cloverleaf on the quad not have the same results as the other way around?

Makes sense in my head but that doesnt mean alot.

[Anonymous No.1470084]

>>1470072

This Foxeer was tested against the TBS triumph and its very similar.

Its just made at a reasonable price unlike TBS gear.

[Anonymous No.1470086]

>>1470072
>Maybe I do less flippy floppies than you though.

Its all situational. If you are looking to get more range over coverage you can put on something with a higher DBI because when you are flying you can orient the deadspot to the Sky and not back at you.

[Anonymous No.1470101]

>>1470084
Those ones are just generic 4-lobe cloverleafs inside.

The only thing the Triumph had going for it was durability, but now it doesn't even have that because a sensible mounted AXII (eg >>1460443
) is essentially invincible.

[Anonymous No.1470115]

>>1469589
My goto setup is a Lumenier AXII on the VTX and a normal Spironet on the goggles with a patch antenna for diversity on my True-D.
If you are wondering why I use the old spironet on my goggles, it's because I got them for free with the fatshark goggles. I have a handful of them and they work great.
I use the AXII because small profile and beefy strong build. Had mine through a number of hairy crashes and it still works fine and holds still.

[Anonymous No.1470363]

Can someone explain what the bill about 336 in the US would do to people who fly on their own property?

[Anonymous No.1470406]

>>1459397
test

[Anonymous No.1470435]

>>1470363
In all reality, none of the new regs will be enforceable just like the current ones. You'd have to really do something stupid to get caught, if you're over your own property, then no one is going to come looking for you. The big change is not what's specifically in the bill, but the fact that it gives the FAA the ability to make additional regulations for model aircraft. It does officially state a 400ft limit which was interpreted as a guideline (ignored) before. Also it appears to legalize FPV with the aid of a spotter.

I'm going back to the RCGroups Model Aircraft and Drone Advocacy forum to watch the old men yell at each other and bemoan the death of the hobby.
>FPV is the devil
>shut up old man
>AMA shilling
>Drones should be banned
>I *need* to fly my glider at 5000ft
>Amazon is coming for our airspace
>AMA hate
>my 75lb turbine powered 200+mph jet is perfectly safe

[Anonymous No.1470651]

>>1470435
And meanwhile I get harassed when I have my foamie Tucano and a balsa glider in my car and constantly get called a pervert in traffic by people who have to move their mouth when rading simple signs on the street.
I say the major culprit here is facebook, giving power and confidence to illiterate retards and cretins.
I just want to fly my planes at a quiet and secluded place

[Anonymous No.1470778]

>>1470435
That section of the site is such a shitshow.

> If you fly anything other than a balsa cub in slow circles at a club field, you're destroying the hobby.

[Anonymous No.1470779]

>>1470435
Thanks, I'm out in the country, so I guess I'll be fine.

[Anonymous No.1470813]

>>1459397
Just posting to say I got into this hobby partially because of you guys! Having a lot of fun just flying a small beginner fpv drone.

Going to start building my own high-quality drone soon if I keep enjoying it.

[Anonymous No.1470954]

Does a GPS need to be center mass like the FC?

[Anonymous No.1470967]

>>1470954

FC's dont need to be center of mass. You could strap the FC to an arm and it would still work.

They make frames now where the FC goes in the back. ESC in the middle. Its not a stack its front and back.

For the GPS you want it to be on top of the quad for best reception.

[Anonymous No.1470988]

>>1470967
Hm, I thought the FC needed to he relatively center of the motors.

Answers a question and raises a concern I guess. I was going to put the GPS in the middle of a flamewheel build, PDB and FC on the top later. Does it matter considering the space the GPS will be is wide open it does it need to be on top of everything else?

[Anonymous No.1470997]

>>1470988

GPS must be on the top and have no obstructions to the sky.

You have to connect to many satellite. It wont work right inside the quad.

[Anonymous No.1471008]

>>1470997
Guess Ill just take the GPS out of the plastic case and put it on top of the stack.

Forgive me if Im just repeating the question but can absolutely anything be over the GPS? I was going to 3D print a hood sort of thing to go over the stack, the lid of which I designed to work with a coffee can lid. Would that thin plastic be a problem or should I just forgo anything other than side protection for the stack?

[Anonymous No.1471054]

>>1471008
Another consideration is that many GPS pucks also contain a magnetometer (compass). If that is the case & you actually want to use that magnetometer, you need to keep it as far away from other electronics as possible. This is why the traditional Flamewheel build often has the GPS puck mounted on a stalk.

[Anonymous No.1471245]

>>1471054
Didn't know that either, happy I decided to ask about the damn thing.

I guess I'll just mount the PDB and FC upside down on the inside of the frame and 3D print some sort of riser to space the GPS from that stack so I can still use the same mounting points on top of the frame.

Either that or design some sort if tower for it.

[Anonymous No.1471267]

Vote No on the FAA Reauthorization

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2_nxc349xA

[Anonymous No.1471282]

>>1471245
Don’t mount the FC upside down.

[Anonymous No.1471289]

>>1471282
Wasnt going to per say.

I was going to mount it the right way up but suspended from the top of the frame, so it would be between the top and bottom plates, using the same standoff holes.

[Anonymous No.1471300]

>>1471282
>>1471289
There's no reason why you can't mount a FC upside down.

[Anonymous No.1471301]

>>1471300
Would you have to tell Betaflight its upside down or just it only matter that its facing forward?

Doesnt really matter, like I said it wont be upside down, just mounted on the bottom of a plate instead of on top like it usually is.

[Anonymous No.1471312]

>>1471301
Yeah, you just tell betaflight what orientation it is. Makes no difference otherwise.

Just remembered, I actually have a build where the FC is upside down.

[Anonymous No.1471315]

>>1471312
Yep, exactly how I was going to do it.

Ill just put the standoffs in weird so I can have a pair up top for the GPS as well.

[Anonymous No.1471429]

How do I eliminate propwash on turns and sudden throttle punches?

[Anonymous No.1471432]

>>1471429

Propwash is the hardest to tune out.

If you are on betaflight 3.5 you do it with the Feedforward.

[Anonymous No.1471433]

>>1471432
Not gonna lie, quad is currently on 3.1.7 I think.

It flies perfectly save for the prop wash, so I just havent felt like going through the process of updating it.

[Anonymous No.1471457]

>>1471433

On older versions of betaflight you do the same kind of thing with D setpoint weight and transition.

Watch this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rw3BjfaH564

[Anonymous No.1471496]

So I have a pixfalcon, think I'm gonna try my luck at printing something to hold it, reinforce the arms with some carbon fiber shims, if that fails I have a 6 inch frame I can use instead.

I have a question about this thing though. It comes with this cable to connect the motor signal wires. Can I just plug the servo lead from the ESC directly into these connectors, or do i need to use the PPM encoder board that came with it?

[Anonymous No.1471513]

Trappy said one time that you can mount the 900mhz wire antenna in an L shape and you will get the best coverage.

But ive been thinking and that does not make any sense to me. I am talking about the Antenna that come with the R9 Mini receivers. Its a Dipole 900mhz antenna. So it needs to be in a straight line to work the best.

I know that 2.4 ghz RX's often have diversity and two wire antenna on them and Yea its good to mount them in an L shape because you do get the best coverage. But the R9 Mini RX are not diversity. And if you mount the antenna in an L shape then are you not messing with the wavelength of the antenna? Basically cutting it in half.

The R9 Mini RX antenna has a Clear plastic end and a black plastic end. So I am thinking that I will get the best reception if I keep that in a straight line and mount it horizontal to an arm of my quad instead of an L shape out the back.

[Anonymous No.1471611]

>>1471429
Theottle management and try to point the thrust off axis so you don’t plow right in the middle of the turbulance.
Hard single axis deceleration/acceleration and hard turns are the least efficient way to fly. Look for different angles where you can start turning earlier and have a smoother track.

[Anonymous No.1471638]

>>1471513
I saw somebody on RC Groups say the same thing about V-mounted dipoles, apparently the reasoning is that you get better coverage (in terms of received radiation pattern) but worse range. Still not sure if I believe it.

[Anonymous No.1471828]

When I get my R9M I plan on mounting it in a straight line off the back of the quad using its standoffs.

They dont have the Dipole T antenna for sale yet for Frsky mini RX so I will use the wire antenna for now.

[Anonymous No.1471829]

Ive seen some people do it like this but I think the carbon blocks too much.

[Anonymous No.1471830]

This could also work. But seems like it could have a chance to get into props.

[Anonymous No.1471833]

>>1471829
That's how I do it, but it's not like I'm going for crazy long range. Even in the worst case scenario with the rest of the quad & battery between it & the tx, it will probably still perform better than 2.4GHz.

You can also 3D print a little T shape & combine with two lengths of antenna tube to turn the R9 wire antennas into TBS style semi-rigid T shapes.

[Anonymous No.1471849]

>>1459698
The better quality heat sinks comes in black painted copper, also aluminium since i read somewhere that it help i don't know how and i don't have the link right now but i will look again on that, but in this case red color i don't know if has some noticeable effect and pure belief.

[Anonymous No.1471898]

New thread

>>1471896
>>1471896
>>1471896