Marc,
I have seen others mount the tube booms under the wing on the MT and it works fine. Some planes don’t have a strong enough wing to keep the booms from doing a see-saw motion so the recommendation was to mount the booms across the fuselage. On the MT, it doesn’t seem to matter.
I haven’t seen any aerodynamic issues on my MT QP. It seems to fly like it is on rails just like a normal MT.
I made another MT flight video yesterday when I was flying my FX-79 QP. I’ll post it soon…
Thanks. Attached the fuselage is definitely a more rigid configuration. So I will probably just do that. Shorter wires too.
I flew my MT QP at a recent fun fly. It still flies great and I had fun staying airborne while others had to land early. The awesome Yaapu telemetry gives me voice updates on the battery level. Upon landing, I got pushed over to the far side of the field and simply hovered back to my station. I wasn’t using my video downlink, so the camera angle was offset, but added a few clips from a previous flight. Fun stuff!
I just made an order for parts to build one my self. I like the sunny sky motors so I went with the 2216-11 900kv with 9x4.5 3 blade props. I think I will use a li ion pack tho 4s 3p 15000mah about the same weight as his 8ah lipo but a bit more at 828 grams. My other vtol project is a bit bigger lol so I need something to practice with before I fly the big one.
I just started my build on the mini talon vtol and I don’t understand how you guys can place the motors so uneven with the CG. I’m using 9" props and to clear the trailing wing the carbon fiber tube had to be 11 1/2 inches back and forward of the CG . Even still I had to cut the wing to clear the props. If I had placed the arms where you guys did then the arms would not be evenly spaced from the CG and part of the wing would block the thrust of the props in the back. See pictures of how I placed mine. The CG needs to be in the same place for drone mode as well as plane mode and the rear props must clear the trailing edge. So 11 1/2 " from CG forward and back is where they stand. My props are 9x4.5x3 blade and are at the same level as the wing. The arms are 500mm . The front arms are just under the carbon fiber rod stiffeners in the fuselage witch is great for suport. I’m still waiting on the pixhawk to show up but I went ahead and setup the mount for it. I made it out of a carbon fiber plate. I’m still waiting for the pixhawk in the mail it’s taking forever to get here from china.
Hi Dan,
The props don’t need to completely be clear of the plane as there is plenty of thrust. A little overlap is fine.
The Pixhawk link in my first post shows many to choose from on eBay right here in the U.S.A. They typically take only a few days to arrive.
Good luck!
Hello Jeff, late but trying to pic parts to build my MOZZIE 
, wich capacitors size you have on your quad esc? When I advance to build I share my build,
I’ve got a mini-talon on order for a VTOL project. However, I keep wondering about options to reduce the motor count (from 5) to make things lighter.
I’ve thought about extending the rear motor away from the tail and tilting it down for tri-copter mode and then tilting to point back for forward flight. This would take advantage of the larger motor for dual functionality. Unfortunately, at least one of the three motors would also need to tilt port/starboard (a bit) to control yaw.
If I did a quad setup, either the rear motor pair or the both front motor pair or all four motors could rotate from a quad orientation to an orientation that provides forward thrust.
Is there any hope that either of these schemes could compete on efficient with the 5 motor configuration?
RR
Hi Roger,
You have a very good question! I opened a new thread here on the VTOL Plane forum so that we can continue on a more appropriate forum.
Just a small but important point. I am just putting together my Mozzie and have been messaging Ronsand. He had big issues with his 15mm CF flat tubes with torsional twisting at higher speeds. I just twisted my fully assembled 15mm*3mm carbon spars and they twist easily. Of course they do as this is unidirectional fiber! This is a potential problem that seemingly needs remediation. Maybe thin plywood strips bolted and epoxied would help. I am just going to use carbon fiber cloth with epoxy - a bit of a PITA to do now.
Although a lot more expensive I think 4MM cut carbon fiber 3K sheet would be better. You would need to order this cut and at 400mm * 15mm * 4mm it would not be cheap. Just something to consider.
Edit: The quote came in at $29 plus $10 shipping if anyone is interested. CNCMadness.com. That is cheaper than buying flat carbon spars and then getting CF and Expoxy to increase stiffness.
Hi everybody!
I’m a PhD student in eVTOL design and I’m going to test in the wind tunnel the reduction in drag achievable retracting VTOL propellers. I’ve read your discussion and I find your work amazing! I choose to do the tests on the Mini Talon because it fits the wind tunnel and your great work provides experience for the VTOL conversion.
I have a doubt regarding the VTOL conversion. I’ve noticed that you choose different quadcopter motors and propellers. I’ve performed the computations on eCalc and here’s what I found. Greg’s choice is very efficient in hover but it may be less efficient in cruise, Sam’s choice (JeffBlogs) on the other hand seems less efficient in hover but as the propellers are smaller, its drag in cruise is smaller. My doubt is which one should I select? If I follow Greg I will probably find a bigger difference between propellers retracted and propellers out.
Any suggestion is welcome. Thanks!
Hi Alessandro,
You have a very interesting project! Don’t forget to consider the user’s application in your various selections. A hobbyist may have different goals than a professional or a user with a specific application. Compromises in VTOL designs (budget, location, weather, application) may not always be apparent. In other words, one size doesn’t fit all.
I opened a new Mini Talon Conversion thread here on the VTOL Plane forum so that we can continue on a more appropriate forum. Hope to see you there!
Hi Alessandro, Greg, I have same interest with you regarding what to choose between these two. But I think you should do the testing with several combination (mininum 2, but 4 is better) so that you have valid quantitative data about each configuration.
The purpose of testing several configuration is to understand how much or how significant the drag caused by bugger vertical props. Is the drag of 15" props.(just example) is really a significant loss compared with 13" or 12". How about the benefits using bigger Vertical props. ? Is the loss caused by the 15" props. can be accepted considering of its benefits during hover of slow speed (lower speed needs assist from quad motors). If the quadplane need to do hover during flying, then we have to compromise by using bigger quad props for efficiency reason. Therefore we need to really understand how big is the impact of using bigger quad props. If the drag impact is so small then there is no reason to use small props. Please consider how autogyro works. It is interesting that autogyro take benefit of very big prop. for lifting. I know this is different story. But my point is how we can take benefits by using bigger props. for a vtol plane.
I’m only getting 5 minutes in hover on a 5200mah 4s I think this lipo is old too. Amp draw is showing 40A At hover I’m going to try a 10,000mah 4s li ion pack. My mini Talon is heavy to the feel . How much should it weigh? AUW? Max battery weight?
Greg,
My friend and I are building a Mozzie for a class project.
We can’t get the Mozzie.param file to work, we saw your .param file and decided to give it a go. When loading, we get an error that says “STAT_RESET is marked as ReadOnly, and will not be changed”.
We are both new to flying planes/drones and have never used Mission Planner before. Do you have an idea on how to change STAT_RESET so we can load your .param file onto our PX4 2.4.6?
Thank you!!
Dianne and Ashley
A read-only parameter is one that can’t be modified by the user. Read-only params will contain info like bootcount, mission count, etc, and aren’t things that actually matter when setting up a new aircraft.
The Stat_Reset parameter is one such thing. It’s perfectly normal to get messages like that when loading in a parameter file from another user, or even one that you yourself made.
ok, so would a warning:
“All values on this screen are not min/max checked. Plese double check your input. Please use Standard/Advanced Params for the safe settings”
prevent us from writing the params on our PX4?
Like I said, Ashley and I are very new to all of this and we’re doing all the reading we can to figure out what may be happening. Thank you so much for your help and feedback!
You dont need to worry about STAT parameters, they are readonly and generated by your flight controller. Some parameters do need a reboot so best to apply the param file, reboot and apply it again.
You can edit the param file just with any old text editor, notepad++ is good, and pull out the STAT params that wont apply, or any others that you’ve set specifically for your craft.
Hi Dianne,
Welcome to the APM forums! Both James and Shawn posted some great information to keep you going on your project.
I opened a new thread here on the VTOL Plane forum so that we can continue this older thread on a more appropriate forum that isn’t tied to a firmware release. You will likely find some newer .param files there as well.
Cheers!
Hi all,
I’m on converting a XUAV-TALON (not a mini talon) to a quad plane, can anyone help me with the CAD model of the same, All supports are appreciated.
