Besides re-thinking whether carbon is necessary, make sure that the video TX antenna is parallel to the RX antenna. I have seen many people trying to fly high altitude close to them selves with linear antennas pointing straight up/down. That obviously don't work. Also.. Don't be shy to take a step back if you have issues instead of forcing a launch. A landing would have made less damage than a failed attempt. Add skegs to the carrier plane so you can land it with the payload attached. Looking forward to Version 3! Keep up the good work. 🙂
The carbon fiber is highly likely to have blocked the RF signal as you suspect - some people over in the high power rocketry space have had similar problems with telemetry radios when using carbon fiber. The carbon fiber effectively will behave as a 'faraday cage' or 'shielding' (depending on construction) and totally mess up the signal. Love the project though, hopefully attempt three will work out!
The lifter looks like a prop version of the stratolaunch, and works great too! Can't tell if it's brown readiboard or cardboard but either way, it's a great idea for a cheap b52.
I don't understand why it was necessary to mount the rocket plane upside down. Since the plane was dropped before firing the rocket, there wouldn't be a problem with the vertical tail fins hitting the carrier plane upon release, and you wouldn't have to worry about an upside down video feed, nor interference between the antenna and the wings.
We wanted the two CG's to line up to keep the carrier's handling consistent. Right-side-up, the Funjet's tails intersect the carrier's wing when the CG's are matched.
@@FPVTeamLegitThanks for your reply. That makes sense, but I keep thinking there must have been an easier way that wouldn't have resulted in carbon fiber interference. Ah, well, you guys are the ones making it.
Antenna signal can't really penetrate through carbon fiber, however in fiberglass it can penetrate no problem as if its not even there. Make a window for the antenna or place it outside if its going to be Carbon fiber again.
It mixes as a standard V-Tail aircraft. There are some handling quirks where rapid roll causes the booms to wiggle from inertia, but generally it's a docile floaty motor-glider. No doubt performance would be improved by a base material other than foam board ;)
great work, good stuff, reminds me of the virgin galactic design, I am amazed at how good the carrier airplane was performing, well done indeed next time the rocket plane will work, too, I am sure. now that you know another detail to watch out for, you can test for it before the flight, even. great attitude ❤, keep it up
It might make sense to setup your FPV aircraft on the ground and do a walkout video test. Every 50 ft, check your video signal with a clear line of sight to your VTX. If the carbon fibre blocks or interferes with RF as the folks here in the comments claim, it would have immediately popped up as being an issue to address. External antenna, higher gain, etc.
I've flown my 40 sized R/C aerobatic well past the point of visual orientation many times just for testing new antennas, receivers or just for fun to test my ability to determine it's orientation. As I got better at it, I'd climb until I couldn't see it or I ran out of fuel, just to glide it in. A max altitude recording altimeter showed me at over 1500ft one flight which was the point of loosing sight altogether of the A/C. Most of these altitude tests were 1200-1300ft in altitude. You could always see if the wings were level and to determine if it was upright, just push the elevator, if it dives, you're upright, if it climbs, you're inverted. You could see the wings disappear, then reappear as you rolled over to level flight. The fun part was to kill the motor and glide back to the field. You could stretch that to ten minutes if you wanted, but a last-minute dive from around 500ft and energy management to a landing at my feet was my "show off" signature move. All this was practiced on a relatively inexpensive model, giving much more confidence for flying my large scale A/C. If I were doing what you're attempting w/ a dropped Rocket powered A/C, I'd practice some high altitude flying on something less expensive first.
I'm new here, but I wonder about adding a deployable parachute for moments like this when there's no hope of recovery. Seems like it might prevent total loss?
The lifter plane is awesome! That would make a great long range platform. I really need to get my planes back in the air. I see you to suffer from the blurry altitude symptom 😊
@FPVTeamLegit I seem to have the same issue with my sweepwings behemoth! Can't seem to figure out what is going on. Any chance to get a picture or plans for the lift plane?
I can atest to carbon fiber blocking radio signals. have a CF skinned glider that would loose control at about 300 ft from the radio, till I drilled holes and moved the antennas hanging well outside the hull. now there is no range problems. The experts claim CF will not do this but I have an airplane that has this problem with it blocking the signal at range.
Carbon fiber is conductive. It will absorb and block all RF from HF to X-band. The carbon fiber body completely detuned your antenna. This is just basic stuff, but I guess many people are not aware of this.
I can see something like a hotspot on the carrier (big antenna and payload) linked to the FPV rocket plane to get a better signal at the most critical point when you are lining up and hitting power.
if you are using a fun jet you already know they fly well, so it something you are doing which is causing the crashes if it is unpowered. get rid of the carbon a strengthen it with a stronger spar if you need to, these have been tested way above 150 mph so speed wont be an issue, keep it closer it was way to far away to see what its doing.
Very cool, subscribed to Team Legit! On much larger scale things I've worked on we used a fiberglass nose cone since the rest of the structure was carbon fiber and this gave us the largest signal view through the fiberglass. I know you mentioned the previous rocket jet was fiberglass and this one was carbon fiber and you're aware of the issues with CF, though maybe I missed where you mounted the antennas or if you blended between fibers to try and help signal clarity. Additionally I'd suspect if your antennas are mounted on the bottom and away from the nose then you'd get interference from the vertical stabilizers.
Carbon fiber isn't just conductive (not copper conductive though) which has a shielding effect (like a poor faraday cage). It's behavior at different frequencies is very interesting as well. It has a decently high permittivity at the frequency of your video transmitter, leading to an absorbing effect. Some of your video feed wireless power is absorbed in the airframe and turned into heat, meaning less signal. CF in an airframe like this will continue to be trouble for your control/video signals. You should have less interference at lower frequencies if you stick with it, so you could go to 433MHz
Maybe use Arduplane? Launch and put it in loiter, then manual if everything checks out. If it's FUBAR, throw it into RTL. At the very least it'll save the aircraft and you can land it LOS once it comes down.
Regarding video quality, my first though with the carbon fiber is that you are heating it up! (it's absorbing the EM radiation to/from the radios). That's because carbon fiber is fairly conductive. Then I thought, "It's fairly conductive... why not just use it as the antenna?". Then I though, "oooooooor, you could just route some antenna wire over the wings/body". I don't know enough about fluid dynamics or antenna design to speak to how well that would work XD
_"made of laid-up carbon fiber"_ Could this have anything to do with the video problem? Gold star to the mother ship, she was solid as a rock the whole flight! Maybe double-up the number of rubber bands, but other than that I didn't see any issues - Nice!
Thank you for the interest! Based on community interest, we're considering how to offer a kit. At the least we will have video showing the launch vehicle's creation.
Awesome project, would be amazing to see it succeed. Did you consider using RHCP antennas on the carrier setup and LHCP for the payload feed so that you can crank up the vtx power with less risk of interference? Linear antennas could also be worth looking into for the rocket plane as they would be easier to mount for aerodynamic reasons, but they are sensitive to alignment between the transmitting and receiving ends.
Considered it but honestly without "special circumstance" problems, multiple high powered VTXs can coexist without talking over each other. Next time we'll proof-read our homework :)
I have made an aircraft similar to this one to launch things and rocket planes and so on. I have invented a system to couple the two aircrafts, with a 9g servo it can hold more than 2 kg and it doesn't move a millimeter. I have the file to print in 3d, if you want I can give it to you. It is very useful for these projects.
Have you thought of putting the rocket payload on top of the carrier aircraft. Basically do the 747/Shuttle style launch. This might let you see the control surfaces and video feed before launch, remove the roll maneuver upon launch, and recover both while attached. The only issue is that you would have to have positive lift from the payload wing at the launch speed. Anyway, just a thought.
Indeed! So far we've gone underslung because of the large disparity in wing loading between the two aircraft. The carrier floats with a low VNE speed (unverified ;) ) and the payload drops like a brick with a high stall speed. Top-mounting the payload may be possible if it were dramatically reduced in weight. Even though the shuttles were famously poor gliders, the speed envelopes of Enterprise and the SCA 747 overlapped enough that they had no trouble separating top-mounted. Something we're considering...thanks for the input!
Very poor antenna placement and orientation, especially with the decision to use carbon fiber, since it attenuates RF signals. Antennas were oriented such that the nulls were pointing toward your base station at higher altitudes pre separation. The only way to have gotten a strong signal out of the setup is if you were flying directly toward or away from the base station, which at the drop altitude and location would have meant flying straight up or straight down. Google "radiation pattern dipole" to get an idea of where the signal will be strongest and weakest, but my recommendation would be to go back to fiberglass and orient the antennas 90 degrees from each other with one pointing straight up (assuming you are going to drop from directly above the base station again). And as someone else mentioned, ensure that the TX and RX antennas have close to the same polarization. You want to point the broad side of the receiver antenna toward the craft and as close to parallel to the TX antenna as you can for the strongest signal. Hope this helps. Cool project and good luck on the next attempt.
I mean.. Twin boomed V-tail looks fucking amazing, ngl, but why not A? I wouldn't have even attempted this design because I don't trust myself to make it rigid enough. My A-tailed glider is going on its maiden this week, hope it's going to fly well
carbon fiber and RF do not get along. the rf will couple with the carbon. maybe better antenna placement and a circular polarized antenna might work better
Rookie mistake not testing RF before launch. I wish I could say its never happened to me but alas, I've lost a good plane or two (or five) to misplaced, untested antennas... Here's hoping V3 has a bit better luck! If it were me I would put dipoles in the wings, colinear with the span, but that's just my 2 cents carbon fiber does wonders for absorbing RF so a fiberglass RF window for them may be the way to go.
Nice project collaboration. Wonder if having dual antennas (top/bottom) would aid in video quality with carbon fibre? BTW: did notice the rocket-jets elevons in an inverted down position. Having a bit of down (ie: up) on release might have resulted in a more horizontal glide at separation. Good luck to test flight #3!
Looks like the payload had an autopilot, was it just not used? I mean when you have zero video, what's the harm in trying... The carrier looks slow enough to catch by hand. Those funjets are good for high speed out of the box, even glass seems unnecessary let alone carbon. Just fly it stock, don't fix what ain't broke and the video would probably have been fine.
rocket jet comon man make up yer mind is it a rocket or a jet? or doesit have two types o f engines? I see propellers and what looks like a rocket tube! Looks like you just dropped a BOMB!
Wonder if you guys could help me. I was thinking of trying an airborne relay for fpv. Something like a 5.8ghz tx on the fpv and a 5.8ghz rx on the wingtip of the relay aircraft connected to a 2.4ghz tx on the other wingtip and a 2.4ghz rx on the ground
Pretty cool that you used Paul Allen’s aircraft design of the carrier aircraft. Too bad about the rocket jet aircraft. Can tell about the title “first and last” that it either got lost or was destroyed due to the video malfunction.
I love the look of the carrier aircraft. I'd be delighted to see a video showing how it was built.
But, it _has_ to be done in Sir Richard Branson cosplay!
To whom do I send the foamboard?!
Besides re-thinking whether carbon is necessary, make sure that the video TX antenna is parallel to the RX antenna. I have seen many people trying to fly high altitude close to them selves with linear antennas pointing straight up/down. That obviously don't work. Also.. Don't be shy to take a step back if you have issues instead of forcing a launch. A landing would have made less damage than a failed attempt. Add skegs to the carrier plane so you can land it with the payload attached. Looking forward to Version 3! Keep up the good work. 🙂
The carbon fiber is highly likely to have blocked the RF signal as you suspect - some people over in the high power rocketry space have had similar problems with telemetry radios when using carbon fiber. The carbon fiber effectively will behave as a 'faraday cage' or 'shielding' (depending on construction) and totally mess up the signal.
Love the project though, hopefully attempt three will work out!
the big lifter plane is awesome, i like the design and inspiration
well done
The lifter looks like a prop version of the stratolaunch, and works great too! Can't tell if it's brown readiboard or cardboard but either way, it's a great idea for a cheap b52.
Brown Readiboard FTW!
You just know there’s got to be a guy in Ukraine whose only job is to watch UA-cam videos in order to get new ideas for weapon systems.
Hallo))
And in several other locations as well 😊
Exactly. They themselves do not know how to do anything ))
Not in Saudi cause they get all the secret plans from King of Moron LardO
Air power, control the air, control the ground.
I don't understand why it was necessary to mount the rocket plane upside down. Since the plane was dropped before firing the rocket, there wouldn't be a problem with the vertical tail fins hitting the carrier plane upon release, and you wouldn't have to worry about an upside down video feed, nor interference between the antenna and the wings.
We wanted the two CG's to line up to keep the carrier's handling consistent. Right-side-up, the Funjet's tails intersect the carrier's wing when the CG's are matched.
@@FPVTeamLegitThanks for your reply. That makes sense, but I keep thinking there must have been an easier way that wouldn't have resulted in carbon fiber interference. Ah, well, you guys are the ones making it.
Thank you for adding colour to our world. I love a dose of competent absurdity in this mindless TikTok age. Good luck going forward!
Have a try the new fimi manta, you will love it.
Great to see y'all still out there flying!
The carrier airplane looks amazing. Definitely would like to see more of it.
Great recap. I'm getting started on v3 ASAP. No carbon fiber laminate this time ...
We'll design a cautious test campaign to ease the next one into service!
Antenna signal can't really penetrate through carbon fiber, however in fiberglass it can penetrate no problem as if its not even there. Make a window for the antenna or place it outside if its going to be Carbon fiber again.
A detailed look at the build wold be great.
Sorry if you posted that already.
can you discuss the mixing and handling properties of the split V tail mother ship? yea, the carbon will kill signals unfortunately.
It mixes as a standard V-Tail aircraft. There are some handling quirks where rapid roll causes the booms to wiggle from inertia, but generally it's a docile floaty motor-glider. No doubt performance would be improved by a base material other than foam board ;)
great work, good stuff, reminds me of the virgin galactic design, I am amazed at how good the carrier airplane was performing, well done indeed
next time the rocket plane will work, too, I am sure. now that you know another detail to watch out for, you can test for it before the flight, even.
great attitude ❤, keep it up
It might make sense to setup your FPV aircraft on the ground and do a walkout video test.
Every 50 ft, check your video signal with a clear line of sight to your VTX.
If the carbon fibre blocks or interferes with RF as the folks here in the comments claim, it would have immediately popped up as being an issue to address. External antenna, higher gain, etc.
Next time!
Great and adventurous video! Reminds me on David Windestals FPV to space and back ;)
I've flown my 40 sized R/C aerobatic well past the point of visual orientation many times just for testing new antennas, receivers or just for fun to test my ability to determine it's orientation. As I got better at it, I'd climb until I couldn't see it or I ran out of fuel, just to glide it in. A max altitude recording altimeter showed me at over 1500ft one flight which was the point of loosing sight altogether of the A/C. Most of these altitude tests were 1200-1300ft in altitude. You could always see if the wings were level and to determine if it was upright, just push the elevator, if it dives, you're upright, if it climbs, you're inverted.
You could see the wings disappear, then reappear as you rolled over to level flight. The fun part was to kill the motor and glide back to the field. You could stretch that to ten minutes if you wanted, but a last-minute dive from around 500ft and energy management to a landing at my feet was my "show off" signature move. All this was practiced on a relatively inexpensive model, giving much more confidence for flying my large scale A/C.
If I were doing what you're attempting w/ a dropped Rocket powered A/C, I'd practice some high altitude flying on something less expensive first.
I'm new here, but I wonder about adding a deployable parachute for moments like this when there's no hope of recovery. Seems like it might prevent total loss?
The lifter plane is awesome! That would make a great long range platform. I really need to get my planes back in the air. I see you to suffer from the blurry altitude symptom 😊
Darnedest thing we just can't figure out the focus on that one
@FPVTeamLegit I seem to have the same issue with my sweepwings behemoth! Can't seem to figure out what is going on. Any chance to get a picture or plans for the lift plane?
Have a signal repeater on the mother ship.
As someone who has done rocket-planes in the past, I feel your pain.
Yep, you dropped it, good job.
You could buy my carbon Ultrissimo funjet for a further test! :D
I can atest to carbon fiber blocking radio signals. have a CF skinned glider that would loose control at about 300 ft from the radio, till I drilled holes and moved the antennas hanging well outside the hull. now there is no range problems. The experts claim CF will not do this but I have an airplane that has this problem with it blocking the signal at range.
CF is very conducive so proper antenna and placement are very important.
Carbon fiber is conductive. It will absorb and block all RF from HF to X-band. The carbon fiber body completely detuned your antenna. This is just basic stuff, but I guess many people are not aware of this.
I can see something like a hotspot on the carrier (big antenna and payload) linked to the FPV rocket plane to get a better signal at the most critical point when you are lining up and hitting power.
if you are using a fun jet you already know they fly well, so it something you are doing which is causing the crashes if it is unpowered.
get rid of the carbon a strengthen it with a stronger spar if you need to, these have been tested way above 150 mph so speed wont be an issue, keep it closer it was way to far away to see what its doing.
Just curious, the rus airfield strike was done by your plane😊
"Split" V-tail.... nice adaptation! :-)
Very nice design whatb flight controller do you use ?
I like the split V-Tail! Never seen anything like this before!
nice design! FPV to Space, when?
Very cool, subscribed to Team Legit! On much larger scale things I've worked on we used a fiberglass nose cone since the rest of the structure was carbon fiber and this gave us the largest signal view through the fiberglass. I know you mentioned the previous rocket jet was fiberglass and this one was carbon fiber and you're aware of the issues with CF, though maybe I missed where you mounted the antennas or if you blended between fibers to try and help signal clarity. Additionally I'd suspect if your antennas are mounted on the bottom and away from the nose then you'd get interference from the vertical stabilizers.
Carbon fiber isn't just conductive (not copper conductive though) which has a shielding effect (like a poor faraday cage). It's behavior at different frequencies is very interesting as well. It has a decently high permittivity at the frequency of your video transmitter, leading to an absorbing effect. Some of your video feed wireless power is absorbed in the airframe and turned into heat, meaning less signal. CF in an airframe like this will continue to be trouble for your control/video signals. You should have less interference at lower frequencies if you stick with it, so you could go to 433MHz
I think that since the video gradually disappears, it is rather an excess of heat for the VTX, it must not have had enough air flow..
Nice work guys...
keep working, the world is watching.
Carrier plane a very cool design... and poetry in flight. Am sorry the rocket jet camera failed. Would have been cool to see!
Nice video! Why not launce the rocket plane upright rather then upside down?
To bad but always a pleasure to see your videos looking forward to next one
Take Care
Maybe use Arduplane? Launch and put it in loiter, then manual if everything checks out. If it's FUBAR, throw it into RTL. At the very least it'll save the aircraft and you can land it LOS once it comes down.
Very cool! Just wondering why is some of the HUD footage blured out? Altitude laws being broken?
awesome project, that plane looks really cool 🔥
this is so cool, excited to see more
Regarding video quality, my first though with the carbon fiber is that you are heating it up! (it's absorbing the EM radiation to/from the radios). That's because carbon fiber is fairly conductive. Then I thought, "It's fairly conductive... why not just use it as the antenna?". Then I though, "oooooooor, you could just route some antenna wire over the wings/body". I don't know enough about fluid dynamics or antenna design to speak to how well that would work XD
Why not use an antenna wire that wraps all the way around the wing to ensure a signal at any orientation?
_"made of laid-up carbon fiber"_
Could this have anything to do with the video problem?
Gold star to the mother ship, she was solid as a rock the whole flight! Maybe double-up the number of rubber bands, but other than that I didn't see any issues - Nice!
Your launch vehicle is a proven commodity. Where can I buy one?
The whole kit.
Thank you for the interest! Based on community interest, we're considering how to offer a kit. At the least we will have video showing the launch vehicle's creation.
good luck guys.
Loved this video, liked and subscribed 👍👍
Ian are you kidding me I can’t believe you guys did this wow
Not gonna let you miss the next one ;)
Pretty cool! People see a Stratolaunch, but i see a strategic bomber with a cruise missile like a Tu-95 with an AS-4, lol
Awesome project, would be amazing to see it succeed. Did you consider using RHCP antennas on the carrier setup and LHCP for the payload feed so that you can crank up the vtx power with less risk of interference? Linear antennas could also be worth looking into for the rocket plane as they would be easier to mount for aerodynamic reasons, but they are sensitive to alignment between the transmitting and receiving ends.
Considered it but honestly without "special circumstance" problems, multiple high powered VTXs can coexist without talking over each other. Next time we'll proof-read our homework :)
@@FPVTeamLegitgo TBS Unify or digital for good separation...or just dual freq (1.3 w/dipole on payload, 5.8 on launch)
Thanks Rutan
I have made an aircraft similar to this one to launch things and rocket planes and so on. I have invented a system to couple the two aircrafts, with a 9g servo it can hold more than 2 kg and it doesn't move a millimeter. I have the file to print in 3d, if you want I can give it to you. It is very useful for these projects.
The drop system seems to introduce a roll. Don't know if this will be a problem or not. Cool project!
Just a pitch-up. Suddenly there's a whole lot of excess lift!
Have you thought of putting the rocket payload on top of the carrier aircraft. Basically do the 747/Shuttle style launch. This might let you see the control surfaces and video feed before launch, remove the roll maneuver upon launch, and recover both while attached. The only issue is that you would have to have positive lift from the payload wing at the launch speed. Anyway, just a thought.
Indeed! So far we've gone underslung because of the large disparity in wing loading between the two aircraft. The carrier floats with a low VNE speed (unverified ;) ) and the payload drops like a brick with a high stall speed. Top-mounting the payload may be possible if it were dramatically reduced in weight. Even though the shuttles were famously poor gliders, the speed envelopes of Enterprise and the SCA 747 overlapped enough that they had no trouble separating top-mounted. Something we're considering...thanks for the input!
@@FPVTeamLegit Why not just drop the payload in a dive?
Range test. Video feed included.
How come you guys aren’t using iNav or ardupilot? 😢 for the 2nd run, hope you get back in the air soon !
They have come on quite a bite since the only Ritewing Drak launch... changed so much since I remember!
Can we get the specs on the plane? Power length. Wing cord and motors/props? Also why are the motors mounted on wings and not in fuselages?
Also weight?
Weight is about 2200g without payload. The pylons have FPV in them, so motors go on the wings. That said, motors on the noses could work too!
Any chance of a quick overview at least of the carrier construction?
Based on the comments thus far, a good chance yes :)
@@FPVTeamLegit Based on your response I subbed.
we used to do this in middle school. im not sure how things keep going wrong
Great project. Probably just need to make a fibreglass body instead of the carbon fibre
Very cool can’t wait
Beautiful project! What about a launch ramp?
A slingshot launch catapult? That launch in the video looked pretty sketch.
The advantage of a launching mothership is that it guarantees a minimum starting Potential Energy from altitude. We consider all options though :)
@@FPVTeamLegit sorry I wasn’t explicit enough: I was talking of a launch ramp for the mothership itself
does this plane use the motors off of the carbonZ Cessna 150 because this sounds exactly like my old plane
This video proves the point earth is Spherical 🎉
Very poor antenna placement and orientation, especially with the decision to use carbon fiber, since it attenuates RF signals. Antennas were oriented such that the nulls were pointing toward your base station at higher altitudes pre separation. The only way to have gotten a strong signal out of the setup is if you were flying directly toward or away from the base station, which at the drop altitude and location would have meant flying straight up or straight down. Google "radiation pattern dipole" to get an idea of where the signal will be strongest and weakest, but my recommendation would be to go back to fiberglass and orient the antennas 90 degrees from each other with one pointing straight up (assuming you are going to drop from directly above the base station again). And as someone else mentioned, ensure that the TX and RX antennas have close to the same polarization. You want to point the broad side of the receiver antenna toward the craft and as close to parallel to the TX antenna as you can for the strongest signal. Hope this helps. Cool project and good luck on the next attempt.
Thanks! #3 is returning to Fiberglass.
Liking that lifter plane design!
I mean.. Twin boomed V-tail looks fucking amazing, ngl, but why not A? I wouldn't have even attempted this design because I don't trust myself to make it rigid enough. My A-tailed glider is going on its maiden this week, hope it's going to fly well
carbon fiber and RF do not get along. the rf will couple with the carbon. maybe better antenna placement and a circular polarized antenna might work better
Not sure I understand when and why an FPV drone would require short burst, over powered rocket power?
To bring joy to the World :)
Do an RF range check next time
Great video! Can you explain how you went about getting FAA authorization to fly that high? Can't wait to see you guys try this again!
Rookie mistake not testing RF before launch. I wish I could say its never happened to me but alas, I've lost a good plane or two (or five) to misplaced, untested antennas...
Here's hoping V3 has a bit better luck! If it were me I would put dipoles in the wings, colinear with the span, but that's just my 2 cents carbon fiber does wonders for absorbing RF so a fiberglass RF window for them may be the way to go.
that lifter is really beautiful
What do pilots do before taking off ... may be next time, follow a checklist.
Nice project collaboration. Wonder if having dual antennas (top/bottom) would aid in video quality with carbon fibre?
BTW: did notice the rocket-jets elevons in an inverted down position. Having a bit of down (ie: up) on release might have resulted in a more horizontal glide at separation.
Good luck to test flight #3!
Looks like the payload had an autopilot, was it just not used? I mean when you have zero video, what's the harm in trying...
The carrier looks slow enough to catch by hand. Those funjets are good for high speed out of the box, even glass seems unnecessary let alone carbon. Just fly it stock, don't fix what ain't broke and the video would probably have been fine.
rocket jet comon man make up yer mind is it a rocket or a jet? or doesit have two types o f engines? I see propellers and what looks like a rocket tube! Looks like you just dropped a BOMB!
Why didn’t you just use digital fpv?
very cool!
Wawwwww so no bar linking the tail and the angle elevator and it's still pretty rigid no flex
Very interesting
Maybe a bear Aerospace--future star next for drop?
Wonder if you guys could help me.
I was thinking of trying an airborne relay for fpv.
Something like a 5.8ghz tx on the fpv and a 5.8ghz rx on the wingtip of the relay aircraft connected to a 2.4ghz tx on the other wingtip and a 2.4ghz rx on the ground
Should be possible!
We also falsely assumed the upside-down omni was causing video issues.
So you’re telling me the rocket jet does not have ardupilot? Who made this decision? Lol
Literally $60 of flight controller + gps and it could have gliding back to home for signal to come back...
What size rocket motor?
Yep, you can do it, BUT you need to turn that payload rightside up! 😱😁😝🤪🤣👍👍🇺🇲
"Need" is such a strong word :)
Excelente
Should use Kevlar next time.
Pretty cool that you used Paul Allen’s aircraft design of the carrier aircraft. Too bad about the rocket jet aircraft. Can tell about the title “first and last” that it either got lost or was destroyed due to the video malfunction.
mothership plans ?
We may do a break-down of this aircraft in the future :) No plans available at this time.
the carrier yeah, the payload - seriously? why?
everyone hand launches into a stalling angle of attack and wonders why it dives for the ground.