Hello. Many flight controllers including Kakute H7 wing has a surname ‘wing’ in it for fixed wing planes. So can it be used for Quadcopters/multicopters? Or is it specifically designed for fixed wings?
What these “WING” labelled FCs usually have over other FCs are pin rows to connect (lots of) servos to, which you typically have in a fixed wing aircraft. Also many have built-in voltage- and current meassurement, so you don’t need an extra PDB (in contrast to a multirotor with 4+ motors where you need a PDB anyway).
That said, as long as there is a “copter” labelled firmware available, which it is (at least for Matek and Holybro), they are perfectly good to use in a multirotor type aircraft as well. In essence they are better adapted to be used in fixed wing aircraft, without sacrificing functionality for other aircraft types on the way.
2 Likes
But what I think is that somewhere or other, the manufacturers of fixed wing FCs design it to be basically fixed wing only. Just see that difference in the price of even discontinued Pixhawk 4 180$ and that of Kakute H7 wing 100$.
What do they do in that 80$ difference? Processor, sensors all are nearly latest, but still that 80$ or more difference? What’s that extra which comes in that 80$ difference in multicopter FC which fixed wing H743 Kakute doesn’t has? Somewhere should we compromise with stability in such a case?
They usually have an extra BEC or 2 to run servo’s.
If you don’t want to pay for a wing board then don’t buy one. Kakute H7, Matek H743…
Don’t bother suggesting again they need soldering we know that. The choice is simple. Pay more for one that can be ordered with soldered headers or less for one that doesn’t.
Not much else to say about that.
2 Likes
Can you PLEASE stop judging with double-standards?
When a 100$ 4K camera can be as good as a 400$ camera, why should a 100$ FC be not as good as a 180$ FC?
We did not suggest you use a wing FC because it is worse quality than Pixhawk and we want you to have a bad drone. If that would be the case the APM would have been perfect. We suggested the wing FCs (or even the smaller FCs you have to solder) because they are EXACTLY what you asked for: same performance but cheaper. Also these FCs are usually the ones we buy and use.
So what do these FCs not have that a true Pixhawk has?
- The shiny body (which saves weight btw)
- The “Pixhawk” name (so it doesn’t need to be assessed if it meets the Pixhawk standards,
therefore saving money during developement)
2 Likes
I was not suspecting any FC but as soon as I came across the term fixed wing, I researched and then had a doubt about a normal and fixed wing.
BTW, thanks for solving my doubtnut…
Did you checked the details of Kakute H7 wing and the Pixhawk 4 on the homepage of Holybro?
Didn’t you see one main price effective difference?
Really, I don’t understand you.
You are comparing one device with a solid housing with a pure electronic device.
I saw that. Pixhawk has shock absorbers inside it and a nice casing, Pixhawk name etc. but still I thought, what might be that huge 6500INR difference? But doubt solved!
The Pixhawk name is mostly meaningless with many called that being churned out with no standard. None now follow the original reference design, some have 1 IMU, some 2, different barometers. And some are sold by Radiolink who has been a bad actor with regards to the Ardupilot GPLv3 license so none of their hardware should be considered for an Ardupilot build.
The only Flight Controllers that can legitimately be called PIxhawk today are these:
Real Pixhawks