On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 8:02 AM, Chris
<address@hidden> wrote:
I went the other way :-)
Having constructed 5 airframes from gliders to delta wings but finally i understood that
long flight time is not the same as long range.
After some tests i concluded that foam planes must be excluded as their L/D ratio is horrible.
The foam has some properties that disrupts the air flow as it seems.
Now i have a wing loading of a brick, about 37 oz/sqf but the plane consumes less energy
when flying at 80km/h than the Cularis needed for 50km/h
Here is some real measured data:
Cruise speed is 75-80km/h, current draw is 13,address@hidden (202w to cruise) (it can go up to 15,5A),
stall speed is ~45km/h.
On board the plane carries a 4s3p 15Ah pack weighting ~1400g a nice camera with X10 optical zoom
and 360 degree ratation mechanism, a 3w 2.4 ghz video transmitter, a 350g 2.5m parachute etc.
I have removed the landing gear as i take off using a bungee and land with a parachute just to
lower the drag and use a lighter motor.
Chris
_______________________________________________
Paparazzi-devel mailing list
address@hidden
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel