Discussion in 'Rotorcraft' started by radfordc, Apr 17, 2019.
What could possibly go wrong?
With 18 motors, and 3 or 4 redundant control systems ...probably not very much.
...for a forum that's focused on experimental aviation, we seem to be scared s#itless of new technology.
I think that most here think in terms of aerodynamics, but have trouble seeing any aerodynamics in multicopters (or even helicopters for that matter). All we see are spinning blades used to hang from.
I wrote that to get a reaction. I actually like what I see. They are coming to Kansas City and I'm thinking hard about signing up for a flight. There approach seems to solve many issues with multi-rotor flight....semi-autonomous controls, redundant motor/batteries, over-head rotors for both safety and stability, ballistic parachute, crumple zone cushioning below the pilot. All good ideas I think. They do say that it's operated under Part 103....but then state a weight of 432 lbs. I wonder it they mean gross weight? They say a max pilot weight of 250, but anything over 220 reduces flight time significantly. This should be interesting.
Ah, now I see what they did to claim the 432 lb empty weight as Part 103 legal. They said, "The FAA provides weight allowances for safety equipment like floats and parachutes - specifically 30 lbs per float and 28 lbs for BRS systems. So, 5 floats is 150 lbs allowance? I'm not so sure....I think the intent is that the main float gets a 30 lb allowance and then two tip floats are allowed 10 lbs each for a total allowance of 50 lbs. But, I'm not a lawyer! Anyway, more power to them if they can make it work.
A whole lot can go wrong. Bad enough with the regular stuff. Bet the range and usefulness is lacking.
This thing is promising, but nine (9) motors short.
I don't know if any USA public demonstration is likely. None flew at Oshkosh 2018.
I talked to Ehang at Oshkosh. Apparently the first public demonstration was April 4 in Vienna.
The mission profile for this aircraft is "recreation only"....designed for 8-15 flight time within a geofenced area.
Just got into "Droning" last weekend with a Build-your-own. Was a good experience, and I got to take it with me!
PIREP. I attempted flight on the Monday after class (15 April this). I used the City of Sopchoppy tennis
court. It is surrounded by a chain link fence that would keep the drone confined at low
altitude. Keeping it low until I was sure of control. My only lessons were what I picked up watching the
helicopters fly on Ft. Rucker.
I had to get used to the delays in the commands. I practiced turn on and off; transmitter
first, then Multicopter. Motor #4 did not spin up, though the others ran and seemed to be in
the correct direction, and responded to control inputs.
UPSHOT. This may or may not be the "wave of the future." I invite speculative thinkers to consider what the FAA would do if Harry Potter's brooms became available, cheap, and Every Teenager had to have one!
We could possibly imprison them all more economically with a contract with Mexico.
Here is a homebuilt version of the manned multi-rotor flying machine.
How many motors does it have? Hard to count `em. Looks like fun, though.
PIREP continued. Flew a "store bought" drone this week and it was a lot easier to land it.
I can't even land mine manually (Bebop 2). If I go 'full down' on the controller it'll just go into a hover about 18" off the ground. It'll stay there until I hit the 'Take off/Land' button then it lands itself.
Obviously the designer was either an Airbus or Boeing software developer.
I think he said 76 motors.
It would be interesting to compare the cost/efficiency/reliability/etc. between 76 little motors and 38 bigger motors. Or 4, 8, 12, ... 128 motors
Based on exhaustive, in-depth research (I spent about 30 seconds on the Hobbyking website)
It looks like the size of the motors doesn't correlate to the cost. You can get twice the motor size for about 20% more cost. Props are the opposite, twice the prop costs 3 times as much.
Watching that guy buzz around during the last few minutes of the video sure looked like fun.
This looks promising
Separate names with a comma.