Peter - great work. As a recently retired engineer, it is very gratifying to see you young engineers/students creating new things. You are the future. I've been messing around with VTOL RC aircraft with mixed results over the last couple of years. I've been thinking about this design for a while. There is a commercial product out now (the swan K1 is one of the names) that uses this design in a larger form factor (very expensive). They achieve a reasonable airplane roll rate by tilting the motors inward as well as slightly out to the wing tips for extra roll authority. As such, I wouldn't add elevons to this design. Also if you upgrade the controller to a 405 or 765/743 based controller, you can move from Betaflight to Arduplane. Version 4.1 supports this design (brand new capabilities). It supports up to 6 of many flight modes and handles stuff like transition and autolevel, return to home (with GPS), etc.. You won't need all this radio programming if you use Arduplane. The one issue is most of these controllers are 30x30mm mounts. Still looking for a 20X20 stack that will work. One question, is center of gravity correct for plane mode? In other words does it fly without differential thrust from the motors to allow it to fly? My biggest problem has been building VTOL aircraft that weren't so heavy that they get don't get obliterated on a crash or take tons of battery to fly. I think I'll give your parts/design a try. Thanks for your efforts.
Mark, thank you, very gratifying to hear from a fellow engineer. Yes, the Mini Qbit also has motor cant angle to improve roll authority in forward flight. I agree that a more sophisticated controller such as arduplane/pixhawk would be great to explore. Unfortunately the current design only supports up to 20x20mm flight controllers, but a future version might be larger to allow for a greater variety of flight controllers. The center of gravity is placed just behind the leading edge of the wing and it maintains control with the variable rpm rotors. This VTOL is quite durable and won't break immediately in a crash. In fact, the least likely component to break are the wings, the frame or nose cone are more likely to fail. Good luck and let me know if you end up building one!
Very interesting idea! I was super curious to see Joshua’s review, but unfortunately it’s not available (UA-cam says it’s private). Does anyone know how to get access to it?
@@peterryseck yeah you would need to change the fc to let you control with 2 motors. Is there a way you could think of getting this platform to fly in plane mode for about 20 minutes while keeping it under 250. I'm look for vtol platform that's under 250g and with dji hd fpv.
Great video. Keep up the good work. I love the concept.
Peter - great work. As a recently retired engineer, it is very gratifying to see you young engineers/students creating new things. You are the future. I've been messing around with VTOL RC aircraft with mixed results over the last couple of years. I've been thinking about this design for a while. There is a commercial product out now (the swan K1 is one of the names) that uses this design in a larger form factor (very expensive). They achieve a reasonable airplane roll rate by tilting the motors inward as well as slightly out to the wing tips for extra roll authority. As such, I wouldn't add elevons to this design. Also if you upgrade the controller to a 405 or 765/743 based controller, you can move from Betaflight to Arduplane. Version 4.1 supports this design (brand new capabilities). It supports up to 6 of many flight modes and handles stuff like transition and autolevel, return to home (with GPS), etc.. You won't need all this radio programming if you use Arduplane. The one issue is most of these controllers are 30x30mm mounts. Still looking for a 20X20 stack that will work. One question, is center of gravity correct for plane mode? In other words does it fly without differential thrust from the motors to allow it to fly? My biggest problem has been building VTOL aircraft that weren't so heavy that they get don't get obliterated on a crash or take tons of battery to fly. I think I'll give your parts/design a try. Thanks for your efforts.
Mark, thank you, very gratifying to hear from a fellow engineer. Yes, the Mini Qbit also has motor cant angle to improve roll authority in forward flight. I agree that a more sophisticated controller such as arduplane/pixhawk would be great to explore. Unfortunately the current design only supports up to 20x20mm flight controllers, but a future version might be larger to allow for a greater variety of flight controllers. The center of gravity is placed just behind the leading edge of the wing and it maintains control with the variable rpm rotors. This VTOL is quite durable and won't break immediately in a crash. In fact, the least likely component to break are the wings, the frame or nose cone are more likely to fail. Good luck and let me know if you end up building one!
Very interesting idea! I was super curious to see Joshua’s review, but unfortunately it’s not available (UA-cam says it’s private). Does anyone know how to get access to it?
Yeah I'm not sure what happened, I guess he removed it.
How bout using the "bone drone" and only one wing
Would turning off 2 motors when in forward flight increase its endurance?
If so is it something you would consider making?
Probably not due to increased drag from the rotor. It also needs all 4 rotors spinning for control.
@@peterryseck yeah you would need to change the fc to let you control with 2 motors.
Is there a way you could think of getting this platform to fly in plane mode for about 20 minutes while keeping it under 250.
I'm look for vtol platform that's under 250g and with dji hd fpv.
@@engizmo potentially! Still looking into it.