[Canberrauav] Tflightech hybrid hex

Remy Dehaan remyldehaan at gmail.com
Sun May 3 16:54:48 AEST 2015


http://www.nasa.gov/langley/ten-engine-electric-plane-completes-successful-flight-test


On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 2:05 PM, James Pattison <james at auturgy.com.au> wrote:

> Or NASA, with this in the works:
>
> http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_GL-10_Greased_Lightning
>
> Regards,
>
> James
>
> On 3 May 2015, at 11:29, Peter Morris <peter.morris at greenpeace.org> wrote:
>
> um,
>
> I dunno if you guys have looked at it, but these ex-MIT chaps  claim to
> have a 1500mm hex with 2 hour endurance carrying a 10kg payload, run by
> their  4kg  petrol generator putting out 1800 or 5000 watts.
>
> http://www.tflighttech.com/products.html
>
> cheers
>
> p
>
> On 2/05/2015 10:08 PM, Jack Pittar wrote:
>
> Scaling down to 60 size means the aircraft can barely lift itself. If it
> was successful, what would this prove?
> Duplicating the drivetrain? We know an all electric drivetrain will not
> make the distance. A petrol only drivetrain means helicopter mechanics
> which is what we already doing, so this is no longer an alternative.
>
>  -----Original Message-----
> *From:* James Pattison [mailto:james at auturgy.com.au <james at auturgy.com.au>
> ]
> *Sent:* Saturday, 2 May 2015 4:11 PM
> *To:* Grant Morphett
> *Cc:* Jack Pittar; canberrauav
> *Subject:* Re: [Canberrauav] Hybrid Hex cleanup
>
>   I think we should start with a smaller proof of concept.
> I'm not sold on this idea at all, and need some convincing that adding so
> much dead weight/drag by duplicating the drivetrain has advantages over a
> tilt rotor or tilt wing.
> A concept demonstrator may provide some confidence.
>
> Regards,
>
>  James
>
> On 2 May 2015, at 12:26, Grant Morphett <grant at gmorph.com> wrote:
>
>   Are we thinking of doing a smaller prototype first with a bixler or
> something or just jump right into the big one?
>
>  Thanks, Grant.
>
> On 1 May 2015 at 18:03, Jack Pittar <jpittar at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
>>
>> Ah ..yes. I forgot the speed controllers. That makes it $510.
>> This pricing is just a quick add up of the basic parts without any close
>> study of them.
>> Built in spares were not considered, but would be in any purchase because
>> you can not always get repeats of the same item a few weeks later.
>> The receiver, telemetry, pixhawk, battery, switches, wiring and
>> connectors,
>> etc etc are all considered to be part of the plane.
>> Also not included are the carbon fibre tubes or hardware to mount the
>> motors
>> etc.
>> Jack.
>>
>>
>> The list:
>> 4 off Red Brick speed controllers, OPTO, 125 Amp, 2~7S - $37.48 each.
>> 4 24X8" props - $26.59 each.
>> 4 off G46-420 motors - $63.56
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: James Pattison [mailto:james at auturgy.com.au]
>> Sent: Friday, 1 May 2015 12:58 PM
>> To: Jack Pittar
>> Cc: canberrauav
>> Subject: Re: [Canberrauav] Hybrid Hex cleanup
>>
>>
>> Are you sure on the costs?
>> What motors/esc's have you picked (a giant quad for under $400 would be
>> awesome!).
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> James
>>
>> > On 1 May 2015, at 12:03, Jack Pittar <jpittar at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>> >
>> > The following is to clean up the discussions on the Hybrid Hex.
>> > Thanks to all for your interesting discussions.
>> > After lots of fiddling around with different physical formats, I have
>> settled on the following for the prototype:
>> > A 2.2 metre wingspan ARF model - the MaxiLift or Porter - will have a
>> fore
>> and aft boom fitted to each wing. Each boom will have motor and 25"
>> horizontal propeller mounted on each end, making a traditional quad.
>> > The horizontal stabilizer will be moved to the top of the vertical
>> stabilizer for clearnce of the quad propellers.
>> > The motor will be a standard tractor mounted 40cc petrol twin (because I
>> already have it).
>> > A tricycle undercarriage will be fitted to allow normal aircraft
>> takeoffs
>> and landings.
>> > The intention for the prototype is to experiment with the aircraft
>> handling in vertical and horizontal flight and in transitioning, beginning
>> at the minimum weight of 13Kg.
>> > The cost and size of the quadcopter parts, to make the aircraft operate
>> as
>> calculated for in eCalc, were a significant roadblock. This was cleared
>> when
>> Stephen pointed out that the quadcopter components only have to lift and
>> maneuver. The Hobby King cost of these parts will be $360 without
>> batteries.
>> One 5Ah 6 cell battery ($105,0.85 Kg) is eCalc'd to bring a hovering and
>> maneuvering time of 2 minutes or so. 5 batteries, 8 minutes.
>> > The requrement to have all propellers stopping will be dealt with later.
>> > With thanks particularly to Ben and Daniel, the generator concept sounds
>> quite feasible. It would save on making a mechanical clutch mechanism at
>> the
>> expense of making a synchronous rectifier and power controller. Depending
>> on
>> conversion efficiencies, a bigger engine would probably be required if it
>> is
>> to allow for continuous hovering and maneuvering.
>> > Rather than a "Hybrid Hex" I suppose it should be described as a
>> "Quad-plane Hybrid".
>> > A good name for it would be the "Vampire", although that name should be
>> reserverd for whichever aicraft we take to the OBC.
>> > Jack.
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Thanks
>
> Grant
>
>
> --
> currently in Australia
> phone: +61 (0)401909069
> skype: peter.morris  (GP and MSF)
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://canberrauav.org.au/pipermail/canberrauav/attachments/20150503/fc47d94a/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Canberrauav mailing list