HardOCP News
[H] News
- Joined
- Dec 31, 1969
- Messages
- 0
While I like this idea, it seemed to lack any real excitement. Even the kid looked bored. Maybe a bigger drone is needed?
I don't understand this drone craze either. Helicopters have been doing the same thing for decades and are a much simpler design. Am I missing the mark here?
I've had similar questions. The quad-copter design appears to work very well though. One thing I don't understand is, why aren't there any full-size quad-copters yet?
Maybe he is bored with this whole "drone" thing. I don't understand this drone craze either. Helicopters have been doing the same thing for decades and are a much simpler design. Am I missing the mark here?
One thing I don't understand is, why aren't there any full-size quad-copters yet?
Maybe he is bored with this whole "drone" thing. I don't understand this drone craze either. Helicopters have been doing the same thing for decades and are a much simpler design. Am I missing the mark here?
I've had similar questions. The quad-copter design appears to work very well though. One thing I don't understand is, why aren't there any full-size quad-copters yet?
Main reason i moved to quads is the ease of use. Do you realize how much work goes into the maintenance of an RC helicopter? The hours you spend just hovering hunting down the vibrations so it flies smooth on the field? Checking the belts, gears, blades, slop in the linkages, periodically adjusting the links as they wear out. If you skimp on the maintenance, it'll vibrate itself to pieces.
On a quad copter, i pick it up, go to the flying field, fly, go home throw it in the corner for the next flight out.
If a quad crashes, you don't have to re-tune anything as there are almost no moving parts and most of the time you only have to replace the props and you're ready to fly again five minutes later.
If a helicopter crashes, you spend a several days dismantling every part of the helicopter to check each component for damage and which part to replace, then reassembling it back together and retuning everything.
BTW, i fly FPV and manual. GPS mode on multirotors makes me feel similar to being carsick (airsick?)
The crash rate from component failures is horrendous. With a helicopter, if there's a malfunction, there's a very good chance you can still land it. With a multirotor, if anything fails, you're going down like a rock.
I don't know how the human carrying quadcopter compares to a personal helicopter, but on an RC helicopter, the only time i've had a major crash was back when i was a newbie and i dumb thumbed it into the ground. Since then, i've had a motor failure, a cyclic servo failure, a battery failure, a gear failure, each time i was able to autorotate it to the ground. As long as i had authority on the tail rotor, i can land it. A multirotor has less parts than a helicopter, but they're all critical and you're far less likely to survive.
There's also the matter of the power source, flight time is measured in minutes, you will always just barely have enough to make a trip. If you have to make a detour or get delayed while in the air, you'll be landing in the street.
On the other hand, a helicopter can fly for 2 hours on one tank of gas.
There's also the matter of the power source, flight time is measured in minutes, you will always just barely have enough to make a trip. If you have to make a detour or get delayed while in the air, you'll be landing in the street.
On the other hand, a helicopter can fly for 2 hours on one tank of gas.
Thank you, I appreciate your informative reply. The section that I quoted, does that imply that a full-sized multi-rotor would also be battery powered like the smaller versions? Couldn't you have a multi-rotor powered by gas engines just like a traditional helicopter?