Thanks Val! It'll acquire some throttle to loop that 2kg. It likes to stall quick on these maneuvers. Yeah... That one in particular really contemplated its afterlife 😂⚰
The KFC joke really got me. Good on you for using Li-Ion pack. using ailerons and flap surfaces (not sure if flaps actuate or not but no matter) which are in line with the bottom surface of the wing will redirect some of the air that you already directed downward, decreasing the CL and losing efficiency. better to maintain the airfoil all the way back, and taper at a small TE. making a dual tapered nose will help, in top and bottom as well as the sides. the Pusher nose is a consequence of the blades intersecting with the pressure differential from the wing. the further away from the wing the better, like you said. APC props are stiffer than Gemfan and more efficient.
Yeah Li-Ions are the Go-To since I started doing endurance flights instead of Long Range. I'm aware of the decreased CL, reason being the center wing control surfaces (glued on the fuselage pod) are glued to the booms as well, strengthening the overal structure to reduce flexing & fatigue. The boom-joint of the predecessor started to fatigue to the point of aiming 8-10 degrees negative in relation to the profile of the wings & fuselage (seen from the lateral axis) > Requiring elevator trim to counter the negative-pitch caused by the stabilizer's 8-10 degree negative flex > Reducing it's overal efficiency & performance. With the bigger chord of this design & the additional flap, I managed to strengthen the fuselage/boom joint a lot better.
@@AeroStuffFPV maybe consider some 3d printed mounts to help spread the load of the CF booms to the foam wing? I've abandoned thing boom a long time ago due to the extra weight associated with cantilever of two separate structures instead of one larger one. one larger rear fuselage is more rigid for the mass than two separate ones. it does not work well for pushers, but I've also abandoned any pusher designs due to the disrupted airflow into the prop arc. more efficient and quiet to keep air going into the prop clean. twins offer higher static thrust for no loss, and most likely gains in efficiency IMO. Love your designs though, great for experimenting and learning. have you considered a larger format plane? larger flies much better overall.
The range is dependant on the antennas. 600mW can do +20km with the right ones. With my standard antennas on my Ground Station & Aircraft, I'd cover about 3.5-4.5km before total video breakup
Nice inverted v tail, can I ask what are the benefits of the inversion as compared to a normal v tail? Does this handle heavy winds as well as a typical design? Thanks
Typically, when comparing normal or inverted v-tails the benefit lies in the adverse roll (rolling away from a turn) of the normal v-tail being mitigated by the inverted v-tail (which rolls into the turn, therefore often negating the need for aileron input). However, this is because the comparison often assumes the tails are mounted from the same origin point on the fuselage. Thus, the forces of the normal v-tail are usually above the fuselage's center of mass (c.g.), which results in the moments experienced. The benefit of the inverted v-tail only occurs because it generates the same forces below the c.g, switching the direction of the rolling. But from what I can see, this particular FPV model has the inverted v-tail mounted (seemingly) above the c.g., which would result in this design having the same adverse roll as a normal v-tail. When a crosswind hits a normal v-tail, the wind is deflected downwards, which means the tail generates an upward force (and a downward pitching of the aircraft as a whole). The opposite occurs with an inverted v-tail, which causes an upward pitching tendency of the aircraft. In a crosswind, this makes the inverted v-tail more sensitive to upward-pitching commands, and makes it somewhat less stable (it could increase the possibility of stall). The reason I see him reaching this compromise is to leave a clear volume behind the pusher propeller, though even then I do wonder how it stacks up against some other designs of his... Maybe @AeroStuff FPV can correct me with some empirical data. e.g.: th-cam.com/video/0y0epalfKE0/w-d-xo.html
@@blazer9136 Huge thanks for taking that time & effort to explain! I'm planning to make a comparison video on the two Twin Booms in the future so I'll be adressing the A-Tail structure in more depth too. But additional yaw-control & clearance of accelerated air from the motor are the main reasons for the A-Tail over the previous H-Tail.
Dude. I love your work. But please, please, land when you are being followed or dive bombed by birds. One FPV flight isn't worth a bird with no legs or one wing. You have a much bigger brain than those birds. Use it appropriately and fly responsibly. And keep up the great work.
"That bird better wach out to not turn into KFC" got me rolling on the flor
I gotta build me some of these! 😱😁😝🤪🤣👍👍🇺🇸
Those birds weren't chasing you, they were an honor guard escort! :-p
dude... I love your UAV builds... I have a medical condition that makes me shake to much to actually do my own builds. Keep up the good work!
Cool inverted v-tail dude!
The KFC part was hilarious, In the worst case you´d call home to preheat the oven LOL 😂 Great flight, congrats! 😊 2 Kilos looping very nice tho!
Thanks Val! It'll acquire some throttle to loop that 2kg. It likes to stall quick on these maneuvers.
Yeah... That one in particular really contemplated its afterlife 😂⚰
Retracts. You need retracts. Reduce the AUW by 1/3 (adjust accordingly). That's your allotted weight to incorporate retracts.
Nice job bro, looks excellent!
Excellent Work.
คุณมากครับกับสาระดีๆ❤❤❤
Beautiful flight, beautiful plane!
nice one
keep going
3:36 🤣🤣🤣🤣
I actually laughed about that too 😂😂
Pretty cool.
The KFC joke really got me.
Good on you for using Li-Ion pack.
using ailerons and flap surfaces (not sure if flaps actuate or not but no matter) which are in line with the bottom surface of the wing will redirect some of the air that you already directed downward, decreasing the CL and losing efficiency. better to maintain the airfoil all the way back, and taper at a small TE. making a dual tapered nose will help, in top and bottom as well as the sides.
the Pusher nose is a consequence of the blades intersecting with the pressure differential from the wing. the further away from the wing the better, like you said. APC props are stiffer than Gemfan and more efficient.
Yeah Li-Ions are the Go-To since I started doing endurance flights instead of Long Range. I'm aware of the decreased CL, reason being the center wing control surfaces (glued on the fuselage pod) are glued to the booms as well, strengthening the overal structure to reduce flexing & fatigue.
The boom-joint of the predecessor started to fatigue to the point of aiming 8-10 degrees negative in relation to the profile of the wings & fuselage (seen from the lateral axis) > Requiring elevator trim to counter the negative-pitch caused by the stabilizer's 8-10 degree negative flex > Reducing it's overal efficiency & performance.
With the bigger chord of this design & the additional flap, I managed to strengthen the fuselage/boom joint a lot better.
@@AeroStuffFPV maybe consider some 3d printed mounts to help spread the load of the CF booms to the foam wing? I've abandoned thing boom a long time ago due to the extra weight associated with cantilever of two separate structures instead of one larger one. one larger rear fuselage is more rigid for the mass than two separate ones. it does not work well for pushers, but I've also abandoned any pusher designs due to the disrupted airflow into the prop arc. more efficient and quiet to keep air going into the prop clean. twins offer higher static thrust for no loss, and most likely gains in efficiency IMO. Love your designs though, great for experimenting and learning. have you considered a larger format plane? larger flies much better overall.
so cool
nice
That's wonderful, may I know you have any video to guide step by step setting up the software for the drone?
Pop-up link at 5:40
Beautiful!! 🤩 question, what is the range with that VTX?
The range is dependant on the antennas. 600mW can do +20km with the right ones. With my standard antennas on my Ground Station & Aircraft, I'd cover about 3.5-4.5km before total video breakup
@@AeroStuffFPV with what kind of antenna you can get 20km? I'm really interested in expanding my range
Can we use F405 OSD flight controller instead of F405 WING V2 flight controller?
What’s the difference?
And how to choose the correct BLDC motor?
Nice inverted v tail, can I ask what are the benefits of the inversion as compared to a normal v tail? Does this handle heavy winds as well as a typical design? Thanks
Typically, when comparing normal or inverted v-tails the benefit lies in the adverse roll (rolling away from a turn) of the normal v-tail being mitigated by the inverted v-tail (which rolls into the turn, therefore often negating the need for aileron input). However, this is because the comparison often assumes the tails are mounted from the same origin point on the fuselage. Thus, the forces of the normal v-tail are usually above the fuselage's center of mass (c.g.), which results in the moments experienced. The benefit of the inverted v-tail only occurs because it generates the same forces below the c.g, switching the direction of the rolling. But from what I can see, this particular FPV model has the inverted v-tail mounted (seemingly) above the c.g., which would result in this design having the same adverse roll as a normal v-tail.
When a crosswind hits a normal v-tail, the wind is deflected downwards, which means the tail generates an upward force (and a downward pitching of the aircraft as a whole). The opposite occurs with an inverted v-tail, which causes an upward pitching tendency of the aircraft. In a crosswind, this makes the inverted v-tail more sensitive to upward-pitching commands, and makes it somewhat less stable (it could increase the possibility of stall).
The reason I see him reaching this compromise is to leave a clear volume behind the pusher propeller, though even then I do wonder how it stacks up against some other designs of his... Maybe @AeroStuff FPV can correct me with some empirical data.
e.g.: th-cam.com/video/0y0epalfKE0/w-d-xo.html
@@blazer9136 thank you for that detailed response, I truly appreciate it! 🙏
@@blazer9136 Huge thanks for taking that time & effort to explain!
I'm planning to make a comparison video on the two Twin Booms in the future so I'll be adressing the A-Tail structure in more depth too. But additional yaw-control & clearance of accelerated air from the motor are the main reasons for the A-Tail over the previous H-Tail.
@@AeroStuffFPV No problem!
I'll be looking forward to that comparison video, I'm curious to see the difference in practice.
How much weight can it carry ? Roughly..
Dude. I love your work. But please, please, land when you are being followed or dive bombed by birds. One FPV flight isn't worth a bird with no legs or one wing. You have a much bigger brain than those birds. Use it appropriately and fly responsibly. And keep up the great work.
How you made that battery pack......???