[ 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: 1.94 MB, 326x252, 1274675140804.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4316363 No.4316363 [Reply] [Original]

Good evening /sci/.

I am developing my own "stealth" RC aircraft. My goals are low RCS, IR, and visual signatures. I plan on mounting a small 5mp still image camera onto the bottom of the fuselage to secretly take aerial photographs of my home and the surrounding areas.

The aircraft will either be remotely controlled by an FPV camera or by open source UAV hardware, such as Ardupilot.

In order to get the plane and its components aloft, I will need to devise the most beneficial airframe design for the goal of efficient flight and "stealthyness"

1. Low Profile. I can achieve this by experimenting with popular airfoils for this scale (KF airfoils, etc) in order to maintain as small of a wing area as possible while promoting stable and long flight.

2. Durable and Stealth Materials. Commonly found in scale flyers of this type is EPP or Depron foam. This is fine in usually all cases, however the radar absorption is likely to be minimal. I will need to research this.

3. Dependable Electronics. Popular UAV software/hardware combos are easily found online, and are fully customizable. Getting the full potential of these systems should be of high priority. Although more attention intensive, an FPV setup will allow for a more immerse flight experience than the automated option. The practicality of FPV in an "innawoods" situation is likely low.

>> No.4316367

4. Power Systems. These systems will need to be impervious to the electronic warfare it will likely be subjected to during its flights. A sturdy battery composition will also need to be research. LiFe batteries are currently the best candidate, because they are safer than their pouch-cell brethren. They also have longer lives.

It is imperative for this plane to be as "stealthy" as possible as to avoid detection by FAA (there is a 400 foot ceiling in residential areas). In times of societal unrest I plan on utilizing the craft's low visibility and self-sufficiency to scout out areas before exploration.

Thank you.

(I'm using this trip now by the way)

>> No.4316377

I am also interested in these materials available to consumers.

>> No.4316382

>>4316377
Yes, so am I.

>> No.4316387

>>4316382
Found this.

http://www.cfoam.com/radar.htm

>> No.4316394

>>4316387
I noticed there was not option to purchase the material nor were there any specifications on the frequency bands it absorbs. I will give them a ringaling tomorrow morning.

>> No.4316403

>>4316394
http://www.ramayes.com/Flat_Foam_Microwave_Absorber.htm

Here you go pal. I do not see a price but they seem easy to contact.

>> No.4316411

>>4316403
Hey, thanks.

>>4316408
You have a mighty future ahead of you son.

>> No.4316408
File: 43 KB, 1350x1800, Untitled.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4316408

here i drew u a design lel

>> No.4316413

>>4316367
>These systems will need to be impervious to the electronic warfare it will likely be subjected to during its flights
>dat paranoia

>> No.4316415

why do you need to photograph your home and surrounding areas above 400 feet?

>> No.4316418

>>4316363
what the fuck? Why are you making a stealth drone? Who are you spying on? Are you trying to enter restricted airspace? What use do you have for a drone with that sort of technology.

Its like Iran is posting on /sci/!

>> No.4316424

>>4316413
>>4316413
You can never be too safe.

>>4316415
For... posterity.

>> No.4316434

>Why are you making a stealth drone
For science friend.

>Who are you spying on
Why do you think I am spying on anyone, pal?

>Are you trying to enter restricted airspace
Nowhere than above my own home :)

>What use do you have for a drone with that sort of technology
For the pure enjoyment buddy

>> No.4316445

All worries aside, how feasible is a small scale stealthy aircraft?

>> No.4316449

You have a noble goal son. Great thinking.

>> No.4316457

bump i will buy this shit from you

>> No.4316467

Hmm... Perhaps some small munitions could be added as well...

>> No.4316471

>>4316467
Yes... smart...

>> No.4316477

Does /sci/ have experience in discreet explosives?

>> No.4316479

>>4316477
A "dropping" contraption will need to be created as well.

>> No.4316491

I am unsure of the structural integrity of the stealth material. I will need to test its abilities to absorb radar when laminated onto popular aircraft foams such as EPP and Depron.

>> No.4316497

>>4316491
Significant weight gain will need to be avoided as well. From the photos, the material appears very lightweight.

>> No.4316504

Budget may also be a factor. Mine is roughly $500 which will easily fund the construction of the plane and it's electronics. I am hoping the absorbent material is reasonably priced.

>> No.4316516

I will sketch up some 3d plans tomorrow for you /sci/.

Do you have any input?

>> No.4316522

OP: Stop making a UCAV, you are going to have the nice FBI people visit you and arrest you man. This is pretty bad and I'll advise you for your own safety to please be trolling and not serious.

>> No.4316525

Most interesting thread on /sci/

>> No.4316527

sage for terrorist

>> No.4316530

>>4316522
>UCAV
but it only takes pictures?

>> No.4316543

>>4316530 see

>>4316497
>>4316467
>>4316477
>>4316479

>> No.4316544

>>4316527
>>4316522
Woah woah woah. I have altruistic motivations in this project. I plan on using it to track wildlife in my area.

>> No.4316546

>>4316543
...in order to ensure the safety of the wildlife I track.

>> No.4316552

>>4316543
I was being facetious in response to the allegations of terrorism, by the way.

>> No.4316562

>>4316543
Anyways, stealth doesn't imply combative motives.

>> No.4316566

>>4316562
>>4316552
>>4316546
Sure is defensive, guy.

>> No.4316585

>>4316566
Anyways stealth has many practical civilian applications, such as protection from pesky birds who prowl on RC planes. Now bats and other airborne ilk will never be able to see it and therefore will never be able to attack it.

>> No.4316592

>>4316585
This guy knows whats up.

>> No.4316597

>>4316585
Also, don't forget the vigilante aspect of this aircraft. You got your house robbed? Well let me check my database of photos -- oh, look, is that the robber taking your TV? Let me enhance that really fast. Voila. The robber is Pedro from the laundrymat down town. You're welcome.

>> No.4316604

>>4316597
but why do you need stealth?

>> No.4316612

>>4316592
>stealth
>bats cant see
>full retard

>> No.4316619

>>4316604
Well you see, radar detection in the case of the robbery is not quite as important as other forms of stealth that this vehicle offers. Visual and sonic stealth mean they can't see nor can they hear the craft, even at lower altitudes.

Which brings me to my next subject of research: Which method of propulsion is both silent and efficient?

Model Jet Engine? When comparing the price and sound generated by them, model jet engines pale in comparison to other options, especially at this sale.

EDF? Still quite loud and usually low torque, implying decreased battery life.

Your typical prop? Most likely. I will need to research further the different types of props.

>> No.4316628

>>4316612
Ah, you are right, but bats can indeed see via sonar. A plane that doesn't reverberate sonar to the bat is a plane that will still be flying another day. Don't underestimate the effect birds have on craft of this scale.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBd-Wlsic9E

>> No.4316641

>>4316628
>animals
>detection via radar
>fuller retarder

>> No.4316643

>>4316641
Bats use something like radar friend. It is called sonar. Sound waves.

>> No.4316646

>>4316628
Best thing I've seen all day.

>> No.4316659

>>4316628
dear god, that bird is crazy. OP, i think stealth is a good idea

>> No.4316667

>>4316643
>something like radar
>thinks radar absorbent material will absorb it
hahahahha
oh god

>> No.4316665

I like it.

>> No.4316675

>>4316667
>Material absorbancy: 600 MHz - 40 GHz
>Bat sonar: 40–100 kHz

>> No.4316678

>>4316667
He would need some form of sound dampening material. I don't know of any such materials that would be suitable for covering an aircraft though.

>> No.4316681

>>4316675
Neglecting the fact that bat sonar doesn't even fall in that frequency range, bat sonar is sound waves whereas radar is electromagnetic. How stupid are you?

bat. hatheal

>> No.4316684

>>4316681
What should I use to protect the plane from birds then?

>> No.4316685

>>4316683
not if the antenna is mounted on the outside

>> No.4316683

>>4316675
wouldn't that block the 2.4ghz radio frequency used to control the plane?

>> No.4316690

>>4316684
razor blades on the wings

>> No.4316692

>>4316684
the only things I can think of is optical stealth or some way of deterring the bird. No good ideas on how to do either.

>> No.4316699

>>4316692
Well first we must understand how birds determine what is prey and what is predator. For that I'll leave it up to /sci/s resident biologists.

>> No.4316701

>>4316684
small caliber handgun mounted on wings

>> No.4316712

>>4316701
Backwards mounted .22lr zip-guns perhaps?
With tail fins/ailerons made out of or covered with razor blades?

>> No.4316718

>>4316712
bad ass

>> No.4316736

>>4316363
First off, why?

And how big is this thing? Is it the size of cessna?

If it's made primarily out of foam and the size of your typical RC plane, it's going to be very hard to find on radar.

>>4316367
>>electronic warfare
Why?
>>4316619
>>model jet engine
If you want a large thermal and noise signature....

Electric propulsion is fairly silent and efficient. So no acoustic signature, no thermal signature

Also, have you built a UAV before? If not, you might want to start small, then move up.

>> No.4316759

>>4316736
>First off, why?
For the experience.

>And how big is this thing? Is it the size of cessna?
As large as will be required to support a several ounce camera and promote stable flight.

>electronic warfare
You never know.

>you want a large thermal and noise signature....
Which is why it was ruled out.

>Electric propulsion is fairly silent and efficient. So no acoustic signature, no thermal signature
Indeed.

>Also, have you built a UAV before? If not, you might want to start small, then move up.
Good idea, and no I have not.