[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 192 KB, 2048x1365, DJI-Phantom-2-Vision.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10070656 No.10070656 [Reply] [Original]

Is there any reason why these small drones couldn`t be upscaled and used instead of helicopters in some cases?
With software control and four smaller jet engines these could fly without too much input from a pilot.
So, what's stopping these from being built and used commercially or militarily?

>> No.10070678

>>10070656
Helicopter is just better at being helicopter then this. Also they have self navigating headshoting explosives carried by this in millitary.

>> No.10070687
File: 61 KB, 300x400, 1280875977287.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10070687

The stability achieved by varying the speed of the four (or more) rotors in a small-scale design would have a highly detrimental effect on the reaction time and efficiency (and therefore, the fuel supply) of a larger version:

https://oscarliang.com/quadcopter-helicopter-compare-cons-pro/

>> No.10070763

>>10070687
Well, what a bummer.
Thanks.

>> No.10071066

>>10070678
This.
I don't understand why the drone meme took off, helicopters are better in every way

>> No.10071213

>>10071066
>helicopters are better in every way
I don't think they have the same mission profile.
I imagine a small drone would be better at close recon than a helicopter that you can now hold back for close air support to avoid spoiling the surprise.

>> No.10072094

>>10071066
its because the drone doesn't have to take people sitting in the drone in account thus it can move in all directions kinda. Helicopters can't fly backwards. Helicopters are probably more fragile aswell and more difficult to control.

>> No.10073170

>>10072094
Helicopter can rotate in a place and go forward again. They are not harder to control, control system for quadcopter is not easy at all.

>> No.10073631

>>10073170
maybe its the weight/lift - propellor size ratio? Drones are maybe light enough that the quadrotor prop 'area' makes more more instantanious lift. I'm the person you replied to and I have no authority on this matter whatsover but this almost has to be it. Perhaps its just the shape of the quadrocopter that makes it safer to use in low level flight e.g. bumping into stuff/getting slashed by rotors? I hope someone can tell us for real.

>> No.10073672

>>10073631
Imagine moving that little wing which balances helicopter precisely at small scale, that's it imho. Also not expert in this area, but somehow it's obvious.

>> No.10073676

>>10070656
Quads won't be human rated for a long time because they aren't as failsafe as helicopters.

If the engine dies the helo can just cut collective and windmill the rotor until the last few feet of descent before landing it by using the stored angular momentum. Quadrotors are much smaller and are thus way worse at autorotation. Furthermore, there are no possible direct mechanical linkages to use in an emergency, though modern aircraft are increasingly reliant on pure FBW too so that's not as much of a factor.

>> No.10073680

>>10072094
>Helicopters are more difficult to control.
A human can control a helicopter physically without any electronical signal processing. A human cannot control a quadrocopter without a controller.

>> No.10073689
File: 2.94 MB, 640x360, Stanford Autonomous Helicopter.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10073689

>>10070656
>upscaled and used instead of helicopters

Just use helicopters for fuck sake.

>> No.10073694
File: 2.94 MB, 1920x1080, Alan Szabo Jr ALIGN Trex 800E DFC 850MX Dominator 2 5 2014.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10073694

Standard helicopters > quadcopters

>> No.10073700

>>10073689
>complete thrust reversal
real.... real helicopters can't do that, anon

>> No.10073706

>>10073694
Quads make more sense for small scale unmanned applications because they are mechanically far simpler. Helicopters make sense for manned applications because they are far safer and mechanically more practical.

>> No.10073714

is there any advantage to having 4 blades because even the stability advantage is no longer a factor at expert levels

>> No.10073716

>>10073714
More blades lets you use shorter blades.

It doesn't give you any stability.

>> No.10073738

>>10070656
Like these?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alKb0p3KN8E

they exist, but aircraft regulations have to be updated and government works at snail speed (as usual)

>> No.10073741

>>10073738
Sorry, I'm bussy watching top 10 humans for drones on droneTube.

Yes, that is still small application, can't fly long distances etc... Helicopter can race the shit out of this thing really well. Any of it. Like Apache helicopter is decades old compares to this shit and this really sucks compared to Apache helicopter. If I would have to choose my daily driver, I would for sure choose Apache helicopter.

>> No.10073784
File: 2.79 MB, 450x360, Mosquito XE.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10073784

>>10073700
They can, but only if designed to do so. Those rotor blades oscillate. There are some quadcopters with similar oscillating rotor blades that can do similar things. But, the standard helicopter rotor design is far more efficient than quadcopters. If you put such oscillating rotor blades on a copter such as the one in this video and gave it a pilot with balls you'd see the same acrobatics. The tech term is, "reverse pitch," which pretty much all stunt remote controlled helicopters are capable of doing.

The main reason we don't have large scale helicopters with reverse pitch isn't because it can't be done. It is because it is extremely expensive and very high maintenance.

>>10073706
Quadcopters are not mechanically simpler.

>> No.10073792
File: 2.86 MB, 640x480, VTOL Autogyroes on their way to fuck your bitch.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10073792

>>10073784
>in this video

It'd help if the link was posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93zy3OqXMPw

>> No.10073807

>>10073784
>Quadcopters are not mechanically simpler.
Yes they are. A typical quadrocopter consists of 4 rotors driven directly by variable speed motors, no? Whereas a helicopter requires a collective and cyclic control which is a finnicky thing, as well as a tail rotor (or a second, counter-rotating one).

When you are building something man-sized the costs of dealing with intricate mechanical control can be justified but for building a cheap tiny drone it's easier to just go with the 4 motors.