OTV 9 First outdoor test flight. Variable pitch controlled drone.

[@RigelNV]

How about used power to weight ratio against quadrocopter?

[@amazingdiyprojects]

That is an intriguing topic with many variables. In a dead still hover a windless day, with same swept area and same vehicle weight etc the quad design would win. But a quadcopter designed to fit without disassembly in a shipping container/garage and offers the same failsafe potential, has same flight duration at the same speed, makes the same noise in flight, has equally forceful handling characteristics and has an in-build on road propulsion system, can be re-fueled at the same pace etc etc etc will likely consume significantly more energy than this design per minute and km, if it is at all possible to design. However I just do not know, and that is why Im so motivated building prototypes, both small ones and full size!

[@RigelNV]

@@amazingdiyprojects thx, one more question: why you use 4 control props against 2? (2 carrier props can control 2 dof) Is it because of complexity of the control software, or brings more stable flight, or all together etc?

[@amazingdiyprojects]

@@RigelNV 3-adjustable pitch motor setup in a Y-configuration would do but then no motor is aiming in an optimal direction except for doing yaw-maneuvers. My previous tests with tri-copter like vehicles vs. quadrant layout versions always ends with me sticking to the quad scheme. At the end of the day, you want a very firm grip, a feeling of unchallenged authority, and so far the quad versions, regardless the overall layout, always seams to win that race. Its something about the perpendicular linearity of the forces generated by those designs I imagine.

[@RigelNV]

@@amazingdiyprojects thank you, like I expect you will need full stop for next maneuver in scheme with 2 control props. Or… much much more advanced automatic software. And since you keep answering my brazen questions :D what do you think which more effective - 2 engines or prop with variable angle of attack?

[@tazanteflight8670]

I think the best invention going on here, is how you combined thrust vectoring with the ability to yaw in the same system. Each propeller can influence 2 different axis.

[@Quick-Flash]

On a quad each motor influences 3 axis

[@tazanteflight8670]

@@Quick-Flash The vehicles crown basically is a quad copter of sorts, but the cool part is that it doesnt require a software trick to do the yaw. It gets a true, and powerful yaw.

[@Quick-Flash]

@@tazanteflight8670 the whole stabilization he has is a "software trick". Not saying this isn't a cool idea, or even better yaw than quads, but the software side to support this is almost identical to a quad.

[@tazanteflight8670]

@@Quick-Flash throttling up 2 props, and throttling down 2 props to yaw is fascinating, but it is a trick. A hack. This videos vehicle essentially has 4 tail rotors, so yes it has an absolute advantage when yawing. It has 4 rotors perpendicular to the angle of rotation. It doesnt get any better

[@freddotu]

I continue to be amazed at your creations and the development of each one. Your efforts would make for a great engineering course.

[@Saint_Vincent1735]

One day one of your ideas is going to change the world. Patent everything.

[@Alexander_Sannikov]

i really like it when you make things fly that don't look like they can fly on the first sight. but then upon closer inspection it turns out that they have some interesting properties.

[@JohnJones-oy3md]

This is going to be so epic when scaled up. Can't wait.

[@tonysargent1699]

Stunning display! Thankyou for sharing such brilliance.

[@abundantharmony]

That's complex. Variable pitch props, weird top-heavy CG, and yet, it works! Your flying machines are super thought out and well made.

[@bb4l881]

AMAZING 👏👏👏👍👍👍 Your new creation looks like a flying scorpion and it's quite brilliant. 👍

[@rcote627]

This is one of the most innovative channels on KZbin, you never cease to amaze me with your inventions!

[@mp6756]

I like it I think it is a very unique design using off the shelf controllers that were never designed to work in this way. I can't wait for the full scale. Keep up the amazing work

[@okgo8315]

Absolutely brilliant. I would never have thought that such a weird concept could fly, but its fantastic and so stable. Congrats and well done....i love it. Peace from Rome✌🇬🇧

[@MasterIvo]

Congratulations! great to see you make so much progress

[@victorldunn9638]

Amazing evolution of ideas, and a superb attention to detail, together with a high level of "what if" curiosity... Another great episode in your shared adventure. Thank you!

[@lundebc]

I enjoy watching the development, and your discussion on the engineering.

[@rogerdueck9725]

This thing is amazing! Incredible that it flew that well on the first flight, that tells you right off the bat it's worth improving and scaling up. Question: have you thought of refining the blow up all terrain vehicle? I loved that concept and would like to see more 👍

[@mattiasfagerlund]

The Face Scrambler 2000! Looks very stable - looking forward to what you come up with!

[@jonnafry]

This creation is born to fly - nice work!

[@mikerhodes9198]

Well done. Very impressive. Looking forward to future iterations. I think you are on to something here.

[@kentherapy7022]

Damn...Number 5 is alive.....👀....I knew it...👀.

[@TheRoulette77]

love the rapid proto process

[@cliff_hewitt]

I love this. At 16:30, you are talking about pitch and roll (the third axis being yaw).

[@amazingdiyprojects]

Yaw is actually better than expected given the relative short leverage on those upper "arms"! I guess it helps that all four motors join in the effort and that the mass is mostly concentrated to the center.

[@krit6847]

amazing project

[@johnnyj540]

I'll bet you had an adrenaline buzz for hours after that first flight.

[@lawrenceveinotte]

Is there a reason the lift props are so low, could they be above a pilots head to avoid hitting objects when you land, like tall grass or shrubs? great first flight, looking forward to more.

[@mr2i]

Impressing! Looking forward to full scale version!

[@prmpfbubub]

great flying thing! you could switch to motors with cw/ccw controllers at the top and discard all servos and mechanics and it should also work with only three motors at the top at 120°. that would be 5 channels in total.

[@ghostisblack]

fantastic work sir

[@Lord_Verminaard]

Wow, looks like it flies really nice! Well done!

[@TheScottsawesomeart]

the air scorpion is Awesome! like how yopur sowing us all work ur going thru!

[@bobwinn]

I have to say it is very stable. Are the lift motors syronized? It would be interesting to see how much difference in thrust it can compensate for.

[@SVanHutten]

Indeed an amazing project and a genius concept!

[@ericon.7015]

Looks stable like a rock and sounds like a hornet swarm 😄

[@Jandodev]

Walking around the ungraded props without eyes or anything gives me goosebumps it’s bad even when a 5in bites

[@Alexander_Sannikov]

if you increase levers for the top props you can make them even smaller right? they just need to produce torque, they don't need to produce much force at all.

[@DerKrawallkeks]

I think you should move the speed of the 4 control-props to the transmitter instead of the servo-tester knob. That seems very dangerous if it ever crashes. At least it will burn out a motor or two, that's unneccessary:) Amazing project! Why did you go for pitch controlled propellers vs bidirectional? They work very well in 3D drone flying, and would be less likely to fail than the pitch control.

[@pidginmac]

Truly remarkable innovation sir!!!

[@wagbagsag]

This thing is awesome! I really like that it's got some inherent stability by having the CoP well above the CoM. Have you considered using only three props for stabilization? That should be sufficient, and will save on complexity. It will also reduce the amount of dirty air that the control propellers see

[@amazingdiyprojects]

3-setups in a Y-configuration would do but then no motor is aiming in an optimal direction except for doing yaw-maneuvers. My previous tests with tri-copter like vehicles vs. quadrant layout versions always ends with me sticking to the quad scheme. At the end of the day, you want a very firm grip, a feeling of unchallenged authority, and so far the quad versions, regardless the overall layout, always seams to win that race. Its something about the perpendicular linearity of the forces generated by those designs I imagine.

[@S0K0N0MI]

Have you ever considered doing this inverted? If control props fail as is now, it would tip over and crash violently. If you invert it with the lifting props up top, you would stay upright and can still do a somewhat controlled descent. Its not much, but its an extra bit of safety.

[@gth042]

I wonder if tilting the upper rotors to roughly match the max angle of attack would give more authority. I also wonder if a tilted upper system could be configured to generate auxiliary/emergency lift or buffer the landing. At the very least, the lift might reduce demand on the main rotors during maneuver and allow for slightly less tilt in small translations. ...Nice to see another design. I'm sure the life insurance company is also pleased. :) I hope you don't throw the old one away until you've maxed it out as a test bed for skirts (hovercraft-style). Thank you for sharing, and I hope you enjoy!!

[@birdseyeview1543]

Wow. So much more stable than the previous design and far fewer motors that the folding petals design. This scale version may need a Barbie doll in the pilot seat to inspire full size thoughts...

[@LateralTwitlerLT]

Sykt imponerende! Utrolig å se hvor stabilt det flyr, og hvor perfekt det står oppreist på bare en tynn pinne. Blir spennende å følge med videre i utviklingen/perfeksjoneringen.

[@prof.heinous191]

Genius first flight. "If I scale it up", surely no 'If'! I would like to place an order for one; useful load 150 kg, a shopping bag holder on each boom, please!

[@owntor1]

This is some Ran D St Clair stuff right here.

[@Rafitas_]

Incredible job!! next create a new flyin chair, but using explosion motors for low propelers, an electric for the rest, you can make it jeje

[@senorjp21]

Great design. Looks like a scorpion. Might work as a lawnmower

[@andersson.l.e]

I was going to ask you about that sound from the upper motors. But you explained it with the oscillation in certain rpm. Nice first flight. Well done. one question. Can you fly in circles with it.

[@yv6eda]

Great flight! Congrats!

[@KoenEngelen90]

Nice design! I like that the drone can still balance itself and change its heading when it has landed. Just out of curiosity, have you thought about a solution to make it land and power off without human interference? I was thinking that the pole at the bottom could be used to deploy a tripod (or more legs) if under compression, similar to an umbrella. This would be nice as no actuators are needed. Although this might mean that you would need to provide a little thrust to be able to yaw on the ground.

[@ericon.7015]

So stable that this thing could be used in rescue missions or construction etc..

[@ChongMcBong]

its a graceful machine in the air :) would it work with a pair of coaxial (counter rotating) props at the base, maybe 2 paramotor rigs stacked up?

[@petter5721]

Du är grym, alltid lärorikt att se dina intressanta filmer 🇸🇪👍🏻 Funderar på om man skulle utforma stagen mer som vingar så får man lite lyftkraft när man flyger…

[@anders2342343]

Då lär man lösa problemet med att vrida dessa vingar till rätt vinkel i förhållande till lutning. Annars får man snabbt en oönskad effekt.

[@paranoiia8]

Flying scorpion in action. Nice

[@TheTwistedStone]

I can see your seating position already and now thinking ahead of your head.... Is there any other way to get the thruster type control without using exposed props ? Maybe ducted fans, gyro control I have no solution yet. Fantastic design and how it should be, split control and lift. Control the lift....?

[@zealeigh]

Maybe a table tennis ball on the end of the 'leg' to stop it from sliding down between the stones and lowering the main props into the stones before you're ready haha :D

[@patrickfle9172]

Great project! I wonder if this could be done with wing tip rotors that drive a multi blade helicopter rotor 🤔

[@DavidHanniganJr]

That's probably the strangest one I've seen you come out with yet. I don't know, but I feel like that is saying something.

[@harrismagnum04]

can you double up the lifter rotors to allow some redundancy ?

[@shakdidagalimal]

Has a spooky scifi vibe to it when flying.

[@nightdogggg]

I have come to terms with the fact that on earth we have propellers, a crude and dangerous form of propulsion. I wish someone would explain why we waste time on light aircraft that use propellers. That guy that is working with ion thrust, now there is a worthy project. This is hobby stuff. You need a car that can fly, but not in a human blender. I would say your genius is being wasted. But , I just cannot wait to see your next vid. Thanks for the hard work.

[@Charles-Darwin]

I was going to say the upper setup is a bit over engineered for what it performs...but then you pointed it out

[@Kliir]

Nice project!)))

[@vertigo2893]

You could maybe vary the power to the upper motors with the angle of the craft; when its fully upright, you theoretically dont need any power, at max angle, you may need all of it. Tuning PIDs may get complicated though...

[@jameslamb4573]

The Scorpion flies!

[@wompstopm123]

im here to sling some hate at this thing, what makes this any better than a quad copter? it seems like it is alot harder to build and would use alot more power since there 4 rotors at the top are not producing any lift

[@amazingdiyprojects]

Haha, I totally appreciate your honesty! Well, its just plain impossible to know how theory and new ideas play out in the real world and equally important, what new things you come to think of or invent along the way doing these seemingly dead end projects. In this scale it does not make much sense at all except for trying out the basic handling characteristics of the design at hand, finding structural and dynamic issues and just generally exploring and expanding the world of aviation. How ever this design hold some promise when built bigger. Quad copters in the human carrying scale have many severe short comings, especially in the areas duration/range, failsafe, sound pressure, ground handling and over all versatility.

[@happyvalley808]

Was that on old school kk2 board?

[@locouk]

It must be so much more efficient and quieter with the blade’s bellow the cross spar and not pushing air against it.

[@nelsonturner501]

Looks like a scorpion, feel free to call it that or Scorpio!

[@RCDUDEFPV]

Looking good

[@importon]

Why do you need the servos???

[@mihavuk]

Your creations are always amazing. 👌👍 I have 1 question: what flight control firmware are you running on this one and on Flying Chair? Thanks and good luck and I wish you a lot of days like this. 🙂

[@amazingdiyprojects]

They are the same. KK2.1 FC running 1.6 stock firmware.

[@mihavuk]

@@amazingdiyprojects thanks, wow, that's interesting, old school Hobbyking stuff. Obviously it's not bad. But they are not available anymore, aren't they?

[@nevillecreativitymentor]

Tom Stanton , You and one more I forget ... frikkin genuises

[@toddsfinsdotsurf]

Maybe your base should be a trangle of three support motors.

[@kelleysimonds5945]

You are one smart dude! :-)

[@thecorbies]

Hi. Amazing first flight, so now I have a couple of questions. 1) Given that the top motors are for stability, and that they are variable pitch, why 4 of them? Would 2 not be sufficient? 2) Do you not consider only 2 lift motors to be a potentially catastrophic design failure point? Unless perhaps the craft has a parachute system as I know they do exist. Regards Mark in the UK

[@amazingdiyprojects]

In reality it would be difficult to have good control with 2 variable pitch setups for roll pitch and yaw. 3 setups in a Y-configuration would do better, but then no motor is aiming in an optimal direction except for doing yaw-maneuvers. My previous tests with tri-copter like vehicles vs. quadrant layout versions always ends with me sticking to the quad scheme. At the end of the day, you want a very firm grip, a feeling of unchallenged authority, and so far the quad versions, regardless the overall layout, always seams to win. Its something about the perpendicular linearity of the forces generated by those designs I imagine. And when it comes to quadish-layouts, the awkward + scheme just seems to render better handling than the more attractive x-layout. But I chose the x in the chAIR projects for the looks , just could not stand the + even though it would handle better.... This is just the very first attempt with this technical layout/composition to get a feel for the overall feasibility regarding flight dynamics.. The intention is to feed one interconnecting shaft with three ore four motors via one way bearings.

[@thecorbies]

@@amazingdiyprojects Thank you for such a quick reply. I was going to suggest a 3 rotor system - of course knowing that you would already have though of it; so I didn't suggest it. What about only 2 lift motors though?

[@sideburnie]

very exciting!

[@muddygupps4330]

Excellent!!! 👏👏👏

[@Alex626_]

You're genius!

[@firefly2472]

So what if 1 upper prop fails, or 2 ?

[@artmckay6704]

Success!!!! Way to go! :)

[@neilgillies6943]

Is this the Swedish entry for the NATO competition :-))

[@S0K0N0MI]

thats gonna have some weird torque effects when scaled up.

[@IrenESorius]

It wöööööks. Cool,, ⭐💖😎👍‍‍

[@FroggyFrog9000]

cool

[@kossmonaut]

it was uncanny how stable it seemed

[@darylbrown8834]

Only slightly nerdy here' Would the math on it be sigma × 2 ÷ Rho × 4?

[@RentalFloss]

Are you worried about redundancy with this design? Authority over the aircraft is lost if any single motor gives out, if I'm not mistaken? For human lifting capabilities, I know you usually spend a great deal of effort making your designs reasonably safe.

[@amazingdiyprojects]

I do have at least 1/2 a plan for failsafe! Hope to get to that in later videos. :-D

[@RentalFloss]

@@amazingdiyprojects Looking forward to it :D

[@drhirsch7979]

Nothing new, check the 1blade prop heli models! 😎

[@gshingles]

+1 for Scorpion :)

[@dean_murray]

Very cool. I am quite interested by your ideas around redundancy. You mentioned that you could simply double up the upper stabilisation system which is straight forward. What are your thoughts for the redundant architecture of the main lifting thrust? Would the props be linked and driven via a diff with two engines similar to your last design? Else I see the stabiliser system cannot compensate for one failed lift engine?

[@mortenberg2897]

It looks SO funny 😳🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@prmpfbubub]

great flying thing! you could switch to motors with cw/ccw controllers at the top and discard all servos and mechanics and it should also work with only three motors at the top at 120°. that would be 5 channels in total.

[@tommychook4552]

when do you put a seat in it ?