If you have the fpv gear, build with it in, to get cg perfect. Remove, then add pennies, washers, lead... whatever, to get cg right for maiden

Yeah, I didn't have fpv gear at the time of my maiden, but my Gopro3 was on and rolling for the first flight... of course it was in the case, and on the mount, I just taped it to the top of the front of the wing

I think pennies are right around 3g per. To help you for reference

Awesome . Thanks guys

FPV Flying - Flown with Dragonlink (2 min 56 sec)

Third day out flying. Tried to get up high then attempt some proximity flying. Love how this wing flies.

Oh, man, I need to get my fpv up and running again. Anyone in Utah happen to have a low pass filter for 1.2 ghz laying around?

Originally Posted by E1Allen

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=At4QK...e_gdata_player

Third day out flying. Tried to get up high then attempt some proximity flying. Love how this wing flies.

So, I keep hearing about poor performance with omni antennas. I went out almost two miles the other day and I didn't have much loss of signal that far out and I was still doing some hard maneuvers which cut the signal out a little but but not enough to really bother my flying. I do have my antennas spaced fairly far apart on the wings, one extended on the fin and the other fairly close. My ground station has a good 25' of separation from UHF and VRX since I extended my UHF cable on my TX. Probably going to see how it goes further out one of these days, but I have plans on getting a CP set at some point. Using a RMRC 800mw 1.3g vtx. I don't think any of my equipment is filtered either. Not sure what gives, I will take the good video feed however

Eric

Lee, have a look at this, youre not charging enough


http://pulse.me/s/hYb9W

Originally Posted by Xmod

Lee, have a look at this, youre not charging enough
http://pulse.me/s/hYb9W

This seems like a big crock of s**t, and it would be if it were just the plane. The specs however are claiming autonomous flight with automatic RTL. It kind-of implies that it lands as well, but it doesn't say so directly and I doubt it. So basically it looks like an Assassin with an APM-type autopilot included.

We're seeing it now, but it will grow immensely soon... UAV's being sold to certain markets and RC planes with auto pilots sold to hobbyist - virtually the same technology and gadgets but vastly different support services and guarantees. The later is why the huge price differences.

It all depends on what you are putting on the plane. I like the flight time of 5 minutes round flight.

Take a look at this set up.

www.airsdrones.com

That 30k drone is cheap compared to military ones.. and the other one isn't that bad really either considering some people are selling their zephs or other wings built for around there. Foam is only part of the wing, it's the stuff you fill it with that makes the price go up. I suppose some r&d as well.

Lee, am I going to split apart my wing if it's going 90mph?

Are you planning on wrecking it???

The Reaper can take a lot of abuse. If you watch the combat videos on the web site and the number of Reapers that hit hard and have no damage I would say the odds are that you will be able to crash and get away with it. There are always variables like you hit a cattle grate or a barb wire fence or a ninja with a samurai sword or something.

Take a look at this video. This Herc weighs 2.5-3X more than the Reaper and it is flying again in 15 minutes. This Herc has the same number of spars and the same tape design as the Reaper.

Hercules 72 inch crash and unequal thrust 7-21-11 (5 min 20 sec)

Yeah, I laughed when I saw that video a while ago. I was referring to in flight. At what speed would the wings theoretically create enough lift to essentially bend it in half? Or will I probably not see that...

Originally Posted by E1Allen

Yeah, I laughed when I saw that video a while ago. I was referring to in flight. At what speed would the wings theoretically create enough lift to essentially bend it in half? Or will I probably not see that...

I have only seen a couple of flying wings break up in flight. They usually had linkage problems or were not built strong enough for the speeds that they were flying and started to flutter. I suppose that a wing has the potential to be supersonic but you would have to build accordingly to get those kinds of speeds to not have the plane turn into a shower of parts and foam.

Our planes have evolved to take more and more abuse. I think for their weight they do an amazing job. They would need more spars and possibly a fiberglass shell to be super fast but the weight would make them fly like a rock at slower speeds.

The six spar system we use on the wings has proven to be incredibly strong. The four elevon system that I have on some of the Hercs also would decrease the chance of flutter in a super high speed plane. Spreading out the weight of the batteries and radio also helps along with leaving no empty space in the wing.

Part of the reason flying wings are so tough is that they have lift the entire length of the wing. They don't have the center weight of the fuselage and the controls are the length of the wing not focused in the center. I agree that the weight of the batteries and radio is in the middle of the plane and that there are cut outs that weaken the structure but they are like a unibody and quite strong.

That makes real good sense. Granted I still have my cameras in the center section it's still an airfoil. Plus I have a surprise I'm working on installing when I pull the wing apart to put the new motor on.