newbie question probably, but what would be the advantages of such a setup?
Also, how do you balance these? they seem to have moving parts, or am i not looking at it right?
Apparently they alter the whole aerodynamics and stability of the Phantom including increase chance of VRS and more surface area to be affected by winds. I have never heard of any postive reports of them only negative. If DJI thought 3 was better I guess thats what they would have done. I would stay away from them if it was me.
newbie question probably, but what would be the advantages of such a setup?
Also, how do you balance these? they seem to have moving parts, or am i not looking at it right?
Newbie not....over 150 flights with P2V, P2V+, FC40, original Phantom and numerous quads micro and slightly larger. The reason I ask is they are "foldable" & CF much like the S900 that I will be picking up on 9/12 from Intelligent UAS in Maryland. 3 blades are reported to give more lift on the QAV250 at the expense of flight time (currently building one)so I'm always looking at new innovation.
I think that 3 blades are too difficult to balance, the phantom it's a quad made out of the box, so any can fly!!! adding a three blade prop limits "any can fly" to "any aeromodelist can fly".
I think 2 blades are better that one beacuse it's more easy to balance, but my bixler has a 3 blade prop and it's a rocket!!!!! I lose 3 hours balancing the prop.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.