Yes with old DJI naza v2 FC and KK boards you could setup PLUS config like this. Very cool betaflight allows now, wonder how you tune or if there is option for T config.
If you damage a prop but are still flying an X-copter the flight controller can compensate for the damaged prop by throttling down the opposite prop, and two motors are used to turn on each axis.
If you increase the camera angle the motor will be at the bottom of your view. If you took it racing the roll authority might give you an edge in cornering, even if the yaw is squirrelly.
Having a prop on each axis might help to keep it feeling locked in. Now what would be interesting is doing it so each arm is the same length instead of having the front motor stretched out.
Looks like there would be more rotational inertia in pitch than roll, which would either take some getting used to by the pilot, or a lot of PID tuning to cancel out. I flew one of these for a while, albeit with equal length arms and I didn't really notice any difference in flight characteristics. The biggest drawback is that you're always breaking the same direction prop, so you quickly end up with a stack of CW props you don't need, and not many spare CCW props (or whichever you have on the front). You could change the motor directions occasionally to deal with this I suppose.
OMG been like 8 yrs out of the loop with this channel. and anything radio control. Back in the day when RR first began had the likes of. Charpu. Finalglide_aus. Mr Steele. Ummagawd. Im suprised this channel and FPV is still around.
Been printing and building this style for years. Does have a little different feel, I tend to fly them more like wings where turns end up being more "bank and yank". Can't really say it's better, just feels a bit different
Yes with old DJI naza v2 FC and KK boards you could setup PLUS config like this. Very cool betaflight allows now, wonder how you tune or if there is option for T config.
Shawn, fly it more like a plane where you lean to the side and pull back to take corners. It feels very planted when you do it that way. (Directed to Shawn b/c the other 2 are not giving it a chance lol)
What about a T copter, but the motors mounted on the bottom, so that they are pushing down? Also, what if you rotated the T 90 degrees, so that the long axis are to the sides?
I have a shendrones gordo + (plus) configuration. Its definitely a different feel. More like sitting in a F1 car. I agree the coordinated turns feel different. You can tell the thrust points are different.
Yaw would be really weird because of the two motors spinning up/slowing down, one is a lot shorter than the other so the mechanical advantage from the lever effect would stress one motor more than the other. I doubt there's a betaflight setting for distance from motor to cross center...
If any are interested in PLUS ➕️ frames, my company sells a variant of our race proven HeavyMetal Street League Frame🐧🏁🔥🔥🔥... Aerodynamics becomes much more of a premium for High weight/ Low powered Street League quads... The PLUS will arguably hit faster straight line speed on the track at the cost of technical handling... (Part of the reason for the comeback)... Cheers🐧🏁🔥🔥🔥
Not if you use motor mixer calculator and take measurements of the arm distances in relation to the FC. Old forgotten knowledge but there’s an actual web based calculator out there that outputs the required cli numbers.
make a frame that fits around the lipo. basicly a wider frame body with a hole big enough to slot a lipo in the exact middle so it rests on the bottom plate. that way the weight is not on the top or bottom but in the exact middle of the frame put the FC under the lipo, maybe in a 2nd layer of space like some frames have just curious if it handles better that way or maybe it wil put less stress on the motors
This episode was great, it's always fun when Shawn makes crazy stuff for a video! My only idea for the plus-copter is that the of side arms would make it easier to mount wings on, so it could be a good configuration of a Vtol or something like that!
Nothing new in this configuration To get prop out of view could reverse motor under frame Maybe a good choice for long range fliers due to less amp draw for standard maneuvers due to using only 1 motor to spin up for pitch and roll
@@garyjohn1076 "because your in a world of trouble if you are wrong..." Any being that needs to make terrorist-style threats in order to get people to believe in it is not worthy of worship. I suggest you look up Pascal's Wager and why it's entirely fallacious. "But I'm sure you have researched all the evidence into the possibly of there being a God." As much as humanly possible, yeah. "I'm sure you have left no stone unturned on your quest to disprove the existence of a creator." Well, I was raised in a religious household, believed in it until I was in my mid-20's, engaged in apologetics for several years, did a proselytizing mission for it for 2 years in a foreign country, and spent time in college studying the Near East, ancient Greek and Hebrew, and Biblical archaeology generally. So, while I'm not an expert and will not be writing books, it's still safe to say that I know more about Christianity than about 99% of the Christians out there. This is not a boast on my part, it's actually a scathing condemnation of how little self-professed Christians actually know about their own sacred religion. Furthermore, it has never been my intention to disprove anything. You can't prove a negative. If I tell you there is a Santa Claus, you actually can't disprove that. All you can do is remain unconvinced. Same here. I can't disprove a god, that's a silly notion. There could be any number of fantastical creatures or magic that's real and I have no way of proving there isn't. All I can do is say "that does not sound convincing" and go on with my life. Let's suppose you do not believe in Big Foot. Is that because you have left no stone unturned in your quest to disprove a Big Foot? Or is it simply that you've seen no good evidence that there IS a Big Foot, and therefore you feel comfortable dismissing the claims? This is the way it is for atheists. We aren't trying to disprove anything. We're just saying that there isn't sufficient evidence for your position to be made worthy of serious consideration. And if someone REALLY wants us to believe in Big Foot or whatever, that's not even a tall order. All we require is evidence and a strong argument. But this is exactly what has been missing from theology for the past several thousands of years. Want to change my mind? Make an argument, show some evidence. Otherwise, I remain unconvinced, and that's how it should be. "I mean it's like saying the DRL game Just appeared from out of nowhere with out any one creating it!" No it isn't. Living organisms are extremely messy. We have vestigial organs, for example, such as the appendix. Are you suggesting that God really invented beings with potential time bombs built inside? To what end? How is that considered perfection by any metric at all? On the other hand, human-engineered devices and systems are extremely clean, with only enough parts to make the thing work. There is a MASSIVE difference between the way a clock is constructed and the way a living thing is constructed. They are not even remotely similar. We have mass amounts of benign genetic code in our sequences that do absolutely nothing. We are not designed cleanly -- we are the products of trial and error, and we call that process evolution by natural selection. If you are unclear on how all this works, there are great videos on RUclips that simplify what evolution is, what the mechanisms are, and how we know it's real. Would you like me to find you such a video? It's a fascinating field, you should learn it regardless of the whole religion angle.
The fundamental of invention or modification is to make it better than previous one not to make it worse that quad performance is not even close to the X configuration drone this is a great fpv channel please dont upload trash 🚮🚮
Nothing like having a whole motor in your view.
30 seconds in and I'm thinking this. The reason we fly X copters is because of the camera.
OG's remember ShenDrones made a + config 4 inch back in 2015 or 2016.
Mine still lives!!
Yes with old DJI naza v2 FC and KK boards you could setup PLUS config like this. Very cool betaflight allows now, wonder how you tune or if there is option for T config.
Takes me back!
If you damage a prop but are still flying an X-copter the flight controller can compensate for the damaged prop by throttling down the opposite prop, and two motors are used to turn on each axis.
If you increase the camera angle the motor will be at the bottom of your view. If you took it racing the roll authority might give you an edge in cornering, even if the yaw is squirrelly.
"Let's re-invent the wheel!"
[comes up with ellipse]
Yeah.. The arms weren even equal length from center of gravity. That might be why it handled weird.
Jesus ripped for our sins 😤
Shawn is a better pilot than Bubby, confirmed
Pusher config would help with the motor being in the way at the front.
But razors on the front prop would make it much more useful, and you can use the camera to line up your slices.
9" pusher in the front...
I still fly my 5in and 3in diatone plus frames! Love them to bits lol
Having a prop on each axis might help to keep it feeling locked in. Now what would be interesting is doing it so each arm is the same length instead of having the front motor stretched out.
Looks like there would be more rotational inertia in pitch than roll, which would either take some getting used to by the pilot, or a lot of PID tuning to cancel out. I flew one of these for a while, albeit with equal length arms and I didn't really notice any difference in flight characteristics. The biggest drawback is that you're always breaking the same direction prop, so you quickly end up with a stack of CW props you don't need, and not many spare CCW props (or whichever you have on the front). You could change the motor directions occasionally to deal with this I suppose.
OMG been like 8 yrs out of the loop with this channel. and anything radio control.
Back in the day when RR first began had the likes of.
Charpu.
Finalglide_aus.
Mr Steele.
Ummagawd.
Im suprised this channel and FPV is still around.
As always, thank you guys for the new content! Hope to see more nice locations)
Like having a hood on a car. helps with perspective when moving thru small gaps.
He_Is_Risencopter.
You guys know that's called quad+ rather than quadx, right? At least, that's what Ardupilot's called it since prehistory..
That's what I said.. nothing new
Ah...I see you're a man of culture as well ;-)@@kingdrones1320
Brilliant idea Shawn!
Plus style airframes popular 15 year ago pre fpv and X config won as fpv came in.
I bet the Dzhanibekov Effect is why the drone flips so cleanly.
Trim the grass/weeds with it.....make crop circles
Not sure what to think about a Shawn project that survives the RR episode....
Crucicopter
Listening to Gaps from the liftoff soundtrack makes it feel like flying this weird T thing for real.
now dress it up like a star wars speeder =P
Been printing and building this style for years. Does have a little different feel, I tend to fly them more like wings where turns end up being more "bank and yank". Can't really say it's better, just feels a bit different
Sounds like it could be fun to race that way…not necessarily efficient, just fun.
@Kleinage yeah I like big sweeping lines anyway so it kinda scratched that itch. They do get a little weird trying to do tight stuff though.
Are your stls available somewhere? Really want to rebuild a proper + drone again!
@@Bryanslifebelike not currently, but I'll try and get them all put together and get something up on thingiverse
Nice 1 guys
This thing is almost a bone drone.
We really need another bone drone video.
Resembles the Hunter-killer from Terminator
Lucky dude x2 :)
Should have put a night cam on it to chase Dracula
Finally, HOLYCOPTER
Thought those 200mph rocket config drones used that format?
Yes with old DJI naza v2 FC and KK boards you could setup PLUS config like this. Very cool betaflight allows now, wonder how you tune or if there is option for T config.
Diatone made these years back. Really good drag strip racer
Shawn, fly it more like a plane where you lean to the side and pull back to take corners. It feels very planted when you do it that way. (Directed to Shawn b/c the other 2 are not giving it a chance lol)
I have the iFlight + copper and it’s awesome. There camera angles were a little low
He has risen
That layout will make yaw cause some pitch in one direction, with plus you really want it to be symmetrical.
Fun vid guys
look awesome!
Get ready for the next Banggood special to come out! RIP Bonecopter 😂
Fruit ninja! You can slice fruits with this .... Very precise 😂
What about a T copter, but the motors mounted on the bottom, so that they are pushing down? Also, what if you rotated the T 90 degrees, so that the long axis are to the sides?
Reminds me of 'skateboard flips'
do a 6-engine (front, tail, wheels) :)
I have a shendrones gordo + (plus) configuration. Its definitely a different feel. More like sitting in a F1 car. I agree the coordinated turns feel different. You can tell the thrust points are different.
oh my god, the number of close calls Shawn........
I know, right? Totally on purpose, though. 😂
literally the silhoutte of my old fpv group. lol crux kwad
You make some cool stuff man 😎
Amen
Yaw would be really weird because of the two motors spinning up/slowing down, one is a lot shorter than the other so the mechanical advantage from the lever effect would stress one motor more than the other. I doubt there's a betaflight setting for distance from motor to cross center...
High powered vtail next. 😜
Yes a new banger
How do you guys get that video feed on the phone? is the type of goggles?
Dji o3 system, DJI fly app on iphone (or android) usb c cable from goggles to phone.
The power of christ propells it.
Sorry for the dad joke 😊
Can you have the opposite motors spin backwards for hard roll and pitch maneuvers
I believe you can do 3d mode, in plus configuration, also
Reminds me of the B-Wing from Star Wars.
It kinda looks like a tricopter (except for the arm sticking out the front)
If any are interested in PLUS ➕️ frames, my company sells a variant of our race proven HeavyMetal Street League Frame🐧🏁🔥🔥🔥...
Aerodynamics becomes much more of a premium for High weight/ Low powered Street League quads... The PLUS will arguably hit faster straight line speed on the track at the cost of technical handling... (Part of the reason for the comeback)... Cheers🐧🏁🔥🔥🔥
I think all the arms need to be equal distance from the center so it is a true +.
Not if you use motor mixer calculator and take measurements of the arm distances in relation to the FC. Old forgotten knowledge but there’s an actual web based calculator out there that outputs the required cli numbers.
make a frame that fits around the lipo.
basicly a wider frame body with a hole big enough to slot a lipo in the exact middle so it rests on the bottom plate.
that way the weight is not on the top or bottom but in the exact middle of the frame
put the FC under the lipo, maybe in a 2nd layer of space like some frames have
just curious if it handles better that way or maybe it wil put less stress on the motors
This is really cool. I'd like to see this flown by some professional drone pilots.
😐 they not professional then?
I’ll take one
+ we call it.
Its shows how new you guys are.... lol. Such an old frame design. Lol
I was going to say the same thing. They were decent, but overall x does seem to fly better.
X type Quadcopter have more stability in 3D space
This episode was great, it's always fun when Shawn makes crazy stuff for a video! My only idea for the plus-copter is that the of side arms would make it easier to mount wings on, so it could be a good configuration of a Vtol or something like that!
what stack are you using to control with the dji controller ?
You should try hex copter
Tanq 3.5 when
Soon. ;)
hi, how can you mirror the googles to iphone ? Does it work with fpv googgles v2 too ?
Hi, how do you connect your iPhone to your goggles? And can I do it with the v1 or v2?
DJI o3 Goggles2 and usb c cable with dji fly app
can multiple goggles2 receive the feed like people do with analog? @@LetsFlyRC
maybe the camera need to be in front of the front motor
Wonder how itnis in wind
Nothing new in this configuration
To get prop out of view could reverse motor under frame
Maybe a good choice for long range fliers due to less amp draw for standard maneuvers due to using only 1 motor to spin up for pitch and roll
The name is PLUS, not T - and there was a reason we went from + to x around 10 years ago 🥴
Now we have to wonder Y copter?
Try flying a stretched x instead of all the damn squashed x every frewstyle frame is . Stretched x is sooo much nicer if you can find one
TanQ 2 has a stretched X Racing variant in the Rotor Riot store.
4:49 relax dude. It’s okay to mess up every now and then. Not everything is because of external factors.
Correct, except this time it was 😂
We have been doing this in ardupilot since the conception of ardupilot.. nothing new
somebody put jesus on it PLEASE
jesus died on a T quad for our sins
no he didn't.
amen
@@garyjohn1076 no, I don't think so
But that's okay, to each his own fairy tale.
Hes right .
@@garyjohn1076 "because your in a world of trouble if you are wrong..."
Any being that needs to make terrorist-style threats in order to get people to believe in it is not worthy of worship. I suggest you look up Pascal's Wager and why it's entirely fallacious.
"But I'm sure you have researched all the evidence into the possibly of there being a God."
As much as humanly possible, yeah.
"I'm sure you have left no stone unturned on your quest to disprove the existence of a creator."
Well, I was raised in a religious household, believed in it until I was in my mid-20's, engaged in apologetics for several years, did a proselytizing mission for it for 2 years in a foreign country, and spent time in college studying the Near East, ancient Greek and Hebrew, and Biblical archaeology generally. So, while I'm not an expert and will not be writing books, it's still safe to say that I know more about Christianity than about 99% of the Christians out there. This is not a boast on my part, it's actually a scathing condemnation of how little self-professed Christians actually know about their own sacred religion.
Furthermore, it has never been my intention to disprove anything. You can't prove a negative. If I tell you there is a Santa Claus, you actually can't disprove that. All you can do is remain unconvinced. Same here. I can't disprove a god, that's a silly notion. There could be any number of fantastical creatures or magic that's real and I have no way of proving there isn't. All I can do is say "that does not sound convincing" and go on with my life. Let's suppose you do not believe in Big Foot. Is that because you have left no stone unturned in your quest to disprove a Big Foot? Or is it simply that you've seen no good evidence that there IS a Big Foot, and therefore you feel comfortable dismissing the claims? This is the way it is for atheists. We aren't trying to disprove anything. We're just saying that there isn't sufficient evidence for your position to be made worthy of serious consideration. And if someone REALLY wants us to believe in Big Foot or whatever, that's not even a tall order. All we require is evidence and a strong argument. But this is exactly what has been missing from theology for the past several thousands of years. Want to change my mind? Make an argument, show some evidence. Otherwise, I remain unconvinced, and that's how it should be.
"I mean it's like saying the DRL game Just appeared from out of nowhere with out any one creating it!"
No it isn't. Living organisms are extremely messy. We have vestigial organs, for example, such as the appendix. Are you suggesting that God really invented beings with potential time bombs built inside? To what end? How is that considered perfection by any metric at all? On the other hand, human-engineered devices and systems are extremely clean, with only enough parts to make the thing work. There is a MASSIVE difference between the way a clock is constructed and the way a living thing is constructed. They are not even remotely similar. We have mass amounts of benign genetic code in our sequences that do absolutely nothing. We are not designed cleanly -- we are the products of trial and error, and we call that process evolution by natural selection. If you are unclear on how all this works, there are great videos on RUclips that simplify what evolution is, what the mechanisms are, and how we know it's real. Would you like me to find you such a video? It's a fascinating field, you should learn it regardless of the whole religion angle.
If James didn't matty that I would've unsubscribed 🤣🤣🤣 j/k
Why we bringing back old stuff ?
It’s fun to experiment and play with unusual things. Even if it has been done before. It’s still fun. :)
its unfair test. should use a radio controller of what you are use too
Yaw, yaw, yaw, yaw, yaw.(rsa)
Fpv is a flat circle lol
The fundamental of invention or modification is to make it better than previous one not to make it worse that quad performance is not even close to the X configuration drone this is a great fpv channel please dont upload trash 🚮🚮
Or just to entertain. ;)