Thanks guys! It's great that this is happening.
Has much consideration been given to performance requirements?
I think in order for a reference design to gain traction, it must satisfy two broad objectives:
1. Be a suitable development platform, so developers and hackers can progress the project with a known, defined reference. Peter's comments pretty much reflect a lot of what is probably needed there.
2. Be desired by the community. I think some engagement would be useful in defining what that might mean. Should it carry a camera? What camera? A gimbal? What gimbal?
Size? Endurance? Appearance? Configuration (quad? Hex? X? H? Deadcat?)
Ultimately, even if all the devs have a common baseline, if the community doesn't embrace it then a lot of the benefits of having it can't be realized.
For me, a 350 - 550 size quad, GoPro with a 3 axis gimbal, 25 min flight time, companion computer, backpack and air transportable, are things I'd like to see - basically it needs to do a bunch of what Phantom does, plus let me hack / try new things.
In Australia, getting all that whilst remaining under 2kg would be a bonus for a lot of people.
If Phoenix can get the endurance up a bit from Iris+ (Phil - I'm happy to help out with that), it could be a good option (I'm not a fan of the deadcat layout, but compromises have to happen somewhere I guess...).
Jani - is jDrones working with Phil, or is the work you're doing leading to something different?