MFE Fighter x12 motor VTOL conversion

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 24 дек 2024

Комментарии • 102

  • @qcsupport2594
    @qcsupport2594 Год назад +4

    Amazing that the craft survived the "transition" from VTOL plane to VTOL glider! I can only laugh-cry at the instantaneously too-late realization of why the throttle was limited to 60% though. Glad you're back - Happy New Year!

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад

      Hahahahaha, yeah, I expected it to crash... that is how little faith I had these motors have enough thrust to hold it during the transition... but it made it! Happy New Year to you too! :)

  • @typxxilps
    @typxxilps Год назад +3

    I miss all you longrange flights and this videos about the mapping of a city. Great content.

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад +1

      Thanks! Will get back to some long range flights when I get the MFE Hero flying. :)

  • @mmmasterscross7915
    @mmmasterscross7915 Год назад +4

    Thank you so much for sharing flying experiences and challenges!

  • @jojo42069
    @jojo42069 Год назад

    The legend returns. Awesome video!! I love the Fighter

  • @sarangthemalbert8547
    @sarangthemalbert8547 Год назад

    This evening I was also testing a tailsitter VTOL I designed.
    It's good to have you back.
    Love from Manipur, India. 😄

    • @farkhodkhikmatov4738
      @farkhodkhikmatov4738 Год назад +1

      Would you mind sharing how you did that!

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад +1

      Awesome! Good luck! :)

    • @sarangthemalbert8547
      @sarangthemalbert8547 Год назад

      @@farkhodkhikmatov4738 how can I share it with you

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  11 месяцев назад

      Perhaps share a link to some photos, or a blog spot... or somewhere with information on your project.

  • @AerialWaviator
    @AerialWaviator 11 месяцев назад +1

    Have missed your flying content. Always educational and thought provoking. This one did not disappoint.
    The problem with H-structure VTOLs is they place motor weight and thrust away from the C/G. Once the ill-fated VTOL lost thrust on a motor and started tumbling it had angular momentum that determined the outcome. Ouch, that was hard to watch! Such designs need a V-kill switch to return to fixed-wing glider mode for any luck of saving/lessening damage. Too bad flight controller can't detect if a motor has lost RPM and reduce the opposite motor, or all V-motor thrust. It won't avoid falling, but will help avoid tumbling, so have better than zero chance of recovery. Low-mid level saves will always be higher risk.
    I would think doubling 4 motors to 8 and having a slider, or 3-position switch to alternate, or share lift would offer good redundancy? It avoids going to smaller propellers and taking an efficiency hit. Not to mention all that added height in copper for powering the ESC/motors. If there is ground clearance, could even stack motors/thrust above/below the arms so motor weight and thrust are closer to the C/G, while using longer, more efficient propellers.
    It would be nice feature if could limit the rate of RPM change (above a certain throttle percent) to reduce maximum instantaneous torque, and how quickly thrust is ramped up. Kind of like for flaps to ease abrupt movement. At least you managed to have a good safe landing.
    Wish manufactures would be more upfront sharing/posting when they're aware of, or implement changes for known design defects. I do not expect replacement components as shipping can be costly; but just making info available builds community trust. This is not the only design that has had motor mounting issues. I can think of at least 4 other models.

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  11 месяцев назад +1

      Thanks mate! :) Actually any solution that would require some intricate programming, etc., really won't do for me! I need to figure out something simple! Right now I am thinking of getting a few more of the high C batteries and running only with those! Would lessen the voltage sag considerably, would be lighter, and will definitely have a lot more thrust for hover which is needed for like 10-15 seconds for take off and same for landing, at least the way I plan to use it! MFE did send me the 3D drawings of the Fighter, will see if I can use them to figure out some sort of fix for the nose! But yeah... it took me quite a while to get this one flying, would have been nice to hear from MFE at some point with they saying "Hey... so there are issues, here are possible fixes, just so you know in advance"! Would have made a world of difference now!

  • @FunBitesTV
    @FunBitesTV Год назад

    Good to have you back! Great video

  • @julianhumphrey4843
    @julianhumphrey4843 Год назад

    Great innovative video and good to see you back doing what you do best...happy holidays

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад

      Thanks mate, happy holidays to you too!

  • @wattage2007
    @wattage2007 Год назад

    Excellent to see another video, even if it had such an unfortunate outcome.

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад +1

      Yeah, but it might get a second chance... who knows! :P

  • @JeremyParsons
    @JeremyParsons Год назад +1

    Thanks for sharing - a really good video and story! The vertical take off and landing requires 8 times more power than normal forward flight so it stresses everything: ESC, motor, battery and wiring. I think that the Opener Blackfly approach is lighter and STOL or autogyro use way less power. That was a very heavy set of batteries indeed !

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад +1

      Well yes, it uses more power, but I have taken that into consideration when building and wiring it, plus all of this is for very short time too, literally it is 10-15 seconds for take off and 15-20 seconds for landing, so it doesn't spend a lot of time in this state, at least that's the plan.

  • @sarahdaviscc
    @sarahdaviscc Год назад

    Happy holidays Arx! Thanks for the great video. Love your vids on MFE stuff.

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад

      Thank you! Happy Holidays! :)

  • @jimmytheriot8978
    @jimmytheriot8978 Год назад

    Glad your your back ! Get you the T2 cruza its awesome

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад

      I have the T1, its awesome too! :P

  • @sUASNews
    @sUASNews Год назад

    Epic!

  • @spiroskatsikas
    @spiroskatsikas Год назад +1

    I find using balsa wood with hot glue and but balsa wood plates inside the front nose ,I always do this and can take a small crash well, or carbon fibre the front nose doesn't weigh much maybe 250 grams more, good luck

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад

      Hot glue is very heavy, I have not used that on anything flying in over 10 years, definitely won't start using it now, but I will try to figure out something using carbon tubes and 3D printing perhaps, certainly hope it will not be 250g.

  • @whatsthematter8767
    @whatsthematter8767 5 месяцев назад

    The video being 12:12 minutes long makes it even better! ;)

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  5 месяцев назад

      Seriously?! I haven't even noticed that! 🤣🤣

  • @gauravluckyrauthan4
    @gauravluckyrauthan4 Год назад +1

    nice efforts to make this plane fly in VTOL configuration. I am also planning to build a 4+1 configuration VTOL but a bit nervous about shaking of the plane when giving throttle to lift up the plane. Like in this video at 5:25. How can this vibration be reduced?

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад +1

      Well it pretty much went away as soon as the plane takes off the ground, these oscillations are present only at some lower throttle level and before take off! Once in the air it did not exhibit this behaviour!

  • @user-ou1ym5ts1d
    @user-ou1ym5ts1d 11 месяцев назад

    This is some good inspiration! Oh...and you need MORE motors! 😁

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  11 месяцев назад

      Hahahahaha... more? Where to put them? :P

  • @andsto
    @andsto Год назад

    yay, he's back :) 🎉

  • @pascalfust1035
    @pascalfust1035 Год назад

    Nice to have an update from you. An interesting idea, but I assume, that all that wiring is adding up much weight....

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад +1

      Well... all that wiring will be there regardless of the number of motors, it will just be running to the end of the tubes without having splits to power more motors, plus all of these motors and ESCs are lighter than 4x big motors and ESCs of the size suitable for something this heavy.

    • @pascalfust1035
      @pascalfust1035 Год назад

      @@ArxangelRC I have to admit that you might be right with that point 🙂 .

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад

      @@pascalfust1035 I know I am, I have done the calculations, like mentioned in the video! None of this was "spur of the moment"! :) 4x big motors and ESCs were heavier than these 12x, and were more expensive!

  • @dronepilot260rc
    @dronepilot260rc Год назад

    awesome test! time to use the vtol arms and make a tilt function so you dont need a nose motor

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад

      Thanks! Well... using these motors for forward flight will not result in an efficient one for sure! Plus I have no idea how I would go about doing that!

  • @odilongalvaoscaramuzza746
    @odilongalvaoscaramuzza746 11 месяцев назад

    Another great video! Please try to use the vtol package that mfe provide

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  11 месяцев назад

      Thanks. At this point other things are much higher on the spending priority list than buying the stock VTOL gear, plus I would like to try and see if I can get this VTOL setup working properly. :)

  • @StewardsNotes
    @StewardsNotes 11 месяцев назад

    I've done a similar setup with an Octocopter and found that making sure that I'm maxing out the wire gauge between the battery and the power distribution was critical to avoid sag. Not sure how you're measuring voltage, but you could need to do a bypass.

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  11 месяцев назад

      I am measuring voltage via the Mauch 200A HV voltage sensor, from it I have 10AWG cables running all the way to the middle of the wings, where they split into 12AWG wires for front and back motors.

    • @StewardsNotes
      @StewardsNotes 11 месяцев назад

      @@ArxangelRC cool beans. I have no idea then. Maybe try without a voltage sensor just to double check? Love your videos, keep it up.

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  11 месяцев назад

      @@StewardsNotes OK... but try without the sensor why?! Surely the sensor is not the choke point! I will try with a few batteries in parallel for more amp draw capability and see if that helps with the voltage sag.

  • @JC-tx1pd
    @JC-tx1pd 5 месяцев назад

    Hi, For the VTOL MFE Hero, where can we find a case for it in Europe?

  • @Ainges1
    @Ainges1 Год назад

    Finally! 🎉

  • @rubinhodrone9204
    @rubinhodrone9204 Год назад

    É show Amigo
    Passando pra prestigiar aquele super Like Tmj

  • @putteification
    @putteification Год назад +1

    I don't think you have enough disk area for the weight of the thing

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад

      Well... could be... but in theory it should work, plus the voltage sag is the bigger problem for the lack of thrust, and I think if I address that the results would be much better.

  • @kirillpervushyn4028
    @kirillpervushyn4028 Год назад

    For 5 kilos of battery you could actually have 6s12p battery on 21700-elements - which can yield 120 Amps even on low-current version.
    As for high-current version (e.g. Molicel INR-21700-P42A) you could get 200 Amps with like 6s6p, which weight much less.
    So using single battery would be much great in all aspects - except for the current. Constructing something for 200+ Amps (for puller engine and VTOL-engines in transition mode) would be a challenge, even if you limit puller engine.
    So the solution would be using 2 puller motors, and splitting all batteries between two sets (puller plus left side, puller plus right side).
    But that would require either rework on wings, or on fuselage (pusher+puller configuration), so yeah...

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад

      But that is the issue, including the voltage sag, the current draw for this to hover is more than 120A, so 21700 will not do, be it low current or high current versions. It will not work aslo because of the lower battery voltage when the battery is empty, that is why LiPos are a better option for larger and heaveir VTOLs. Alternative would be to build a 7S LiIon pack, problem is you would need to get HV ESCs for the VTOL motors... and 12x of those cost an arm and a leg, and are heavy!!!! Also, I did not limit the puller motor because of current considerations, since it is running on a separate battery, I limited it becuase it is too strong and I was afraid it will tear the nose out, which is what happened in the end, having forgotten that in the spur of the moment...

    • @pascalfust1035
      @pascalfust1035 Год назад

      ​@@ArxangelRCI agree that Li-Ion are hardly the best choice for such a high-current application. If I understand correctly, the VTOL motors used are the 1300kV Versions, which (according the sellers specs) suck around 10-12A at 1kg thrust, which might be enough for hovering the 12kg plane at wind still. For gaining height, however, they might need to provide 1.5kg each, which would mean 20A each, i.e. 240A in total, or even more.
      Using one T-Motor MN505KV320 with 22 inch prop could bring 3kg thrust on 6S at 15A, as a comparison in terms of efficiency. No redundancy at all, of course...
      How about using two separate Lipos, one for left and one for right?
      I am guessing that the distances of the front motors from the CG is shorter than of the back motors - just a guess though. If so, the back motors would have to provide more than the 1000g of thrust, so non-linearly drawing more than 10A in hover.

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад

      @@pascalfust1035 Yes, specs-wise these should hover at 120A... but check the specs and see at what voltage do they give 1kg thrust... certainly not at 18-19v... or 21v even... these manufacturer specs are at 24v... which is not something I have right now with so much voltage sag! Also, that T-motor is drawing only 15A, but there is no way a 22" prop would fit on the Fighter. May get away with 17" props on it, but 22" just won't do, so not really an apt comparison! The idea here was redundancy, efficiency in the VTOL stage is not really a topic of any concern. :)

  • @emh2017
    @emh2017 Год назад

    It's a pity the crashed aircraft, so much work lost in a moment :( But what an amazing crash it turned out to be, for a second it seemed to me that this was a special effect :)

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад

      Yeah, I don't know who's plane it was, but it was nasty... so much work and money exploded in pieces as it slammed the ground... sucks!

  • @prototype3a
    @prototype3a Год назад +1

    Project Wing runs a similar setup and I don't know why. All those small motors and small props can NOT be efficient.

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад

      They are not meant to be efficient, they are menat to provide redundancy and improve the likelihood of the plane surviving a VTOL motor/ESC failure.

  • @travelrideandfly8355
    @travelrideandfly8355 10 месяцев назад

    Sorry for the Fighter ! :( .... this issue reminded me of me destroying my T2 electronics because of pluging 2x6s in sereies instead of paralel :D ... It's all part of the game! :) . PS: lovely doggy ! :)

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  10 месяцев назад +1

      Well... it is what it is... I hope I will find the will to fix it and try to get it flying again! :)

  • @spiroskatsikas
    @spiroskatsikas Год назад

    Why did the motor fail with first set up, Ur overloading the motor ,any heat anywhere is bad efficiency, use larger motor and only 4 motors

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад

      Only 4 motors does not provide any redundancy in case of a motor/ESC failure, which was the idea behind all of this, as I explained in the video! Could be the motor had some defect in it, it wasn't hot when I touched it after it smoked.

  • @airdroperua
    @airdroperua Год назад

    try tailsitter with gas:

    • @farkhodkhikmatov4738
      @farkhodkhikmatov4738 Год назад

      This, it's the best idea

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад +1

      I've already tried a tailsitter, the Arkbird plane... you mean with a gas engine? A tailsitter?

    • @airdroperua
      @airdroperua Год назад

      @@ArxangelRC we are currently building a gas engine tailsitter (VTOL) plane that has just one engine, we are testing gas engine still hoping in the nearest weeks to finish

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад

      @@airdroperua Interesting... so how is this engine going to work vertical and then horizontal... and the fuel tanks?

    • @airdroperua
      @airdroperua Год назад

      Take a look at vbat 128, quite interesting thing. I will try to show something similar with an engine in the front suitable for hobby though @@ArxangelRC

  • @spiroskatsikas
    @spiroskatsikas Год назад

    I have a picture for you 0:27

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад +1

      Yeah, I know, I was there! 😝🤣

  • @kenhaupt1865
    @kenhaupt1865 Год назад +1

    Great video! But putting out content understandably should take a back seat to life and family. Hope all is well with you and yours!

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад

      Thank you! Yes, all is good here! :)

  • @EnglishTurbines
    @EnglishTurbines Год назад +2

    Has to be the worst idea I've ever seen....🤔😳😳😮🇬🇧

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад +1

      Hahahahahahaha, ever the optimist I see! :D From the standpoint of redundancy, to me it seems like a much better idea than having only 4 motors! :P

    • @EnglishTurbines
      @EnglishTurbines Год назад

      @@ArxangelRC The time spent in hover is small. If you're having motor failures, then you have selected the wrong motor/ prop combination...More motors, more chances of failure....This works fine on three pivot motor setups with smaller, lighter models. It should work at larger scales, but I suspect motor choice is more critical...🤔😳😳🇬🇧

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад

      @@EnglishTurbines Yes, the time is small, but critical, as you saw in that clip with the large VTOL coming crashing down. Whether it would be the power system not being able to handle the swinging of the plane, or losing a motor... the result would be the same! I have seen this happen in person as well, on a large VTOL where the ESC failed right after the transition back to VTOL, just before landing! Not a pretty picture. Also, I am NOT a fan of those pivot systems, I feel like they are a lot less dependable. YES, they work fine for small and lighter planes due to weight considerations/limitations, but for larger craft I would prefer not to use them unless we are talking about some really serious, industrial grade solution, which would be way outside the scrope, and budget, of a hobby project! Also, there are plenty of examples I have heard from people flying VTOLs for work, where the issue was not specifically a motor or ESC failure, but some issue with the wing connectors and the signals getting cut to a motor or ESC. Even a 1/100th of a second power cut from the main connector and that ESC would be reset and the VTOL would be hurdling towards the ground! In a situation where most of these come with the connectors from China and we need to depend on them being thought out right, etc., not to cause issues... this seems like a worthy project to pursue in the name of redundancy and dependability! :) And exactly because it doesn't spend much time in the VTOL stage is why I can afford to have it running inefficient, but on a separate battery! :)

    • @EnglishTurbines
      @EnglishTurbines Год назад

      @@ArxangelRC It's more a case of compromise, like most engineered designs. The classical two pivoting wing mounted motors with just one on the tail makes a lot of sense to me. Let's start with the Aircrafts C of G, also bearing in mind the placement of the heaviest component, the flight battery. You can see straight away weight distribution and motor placement makes more sense. Less motors, less wiring, less weight. As long as the three lift motors can provide enough thrust to overcome weight. The Nacelle pivots and movement of same might need something other than a plain servo at this huge size. Although if overhang is kept short from the pivot point, maybe not. Those wing connectors are a point of failure for sure, not in favour of those, you're right. 🤔😳😳🇬🇧

    • @ArxangelRC
      @ArxangelRC  Год назад

      @@EnglishTurbines But then again, without those you lose the convenience of easy modularity and quick assembly and disassembly! :) As for the wiring, to be honest there isn't much more of it here, because you would need cables running to the ends of the carbon tubes, at least compared to a standard 4x motor VTOL, I just have more motors connected along the way of the same cable that would be running there anyway, and it may be a tad thicker, but not by much!