EMCSQUAR said:Rumor has it that DJI is contemplating a "Super Phantom" similar to that size. (you didn't hear that from me)
Larger diameter should give more stable video and allows larger props. Also the addition room inside would allow internal installation of more goodies such as FPV transmitter, GPS locator etc.locoworks said:whats its purpose?? other than allowing bigger batteries to fit inside a P1?. and do the stock length wires fit or is that the purpose of the big green PCB??
Bigger arms means bigger props. And bigger props COULD mean bigger payload. Though not necessarily. Certainly more stable.locoworks said:whats its purpose?? other than allowing bigger batteries to fit inside a P1?. and do the stock length wires fit or is that the purpose of the big green PCB??
ProfessorStein said:Bigger arms means bigger props. And bigger props COULD mean bigger payload. Though not necessarily. Certainly more stable.locoworks said:whats its purpose?? other than allowing bigger batteries to fit inside a P1?. and do the stock length wires fit or is that the purpose of the big green PCB??
But, really, the "purpose" would more likely come down to, simply, "I want a bigger bird".
The green piece looks more like a green piece of plastic (ie - a fake PCB... just to show what you can mount in the shell) rather than anything really useful... but who knows. I would imagine some rewiring would be required, and some leads would need to be lengthened to reach.
locoworks said:so more weight to carry with stock phantom motors then??? same for the bigger prop benefit?? a lighter shell would be an improvement
HarryT said:If I were flying a better camera I'd want a hex, not a quad, for the increased reliability. A hex can lose a motor in flight and land under control; a quad will just fall out of the sky.
BigTulsa said:HarryT said:If I were flying a better camera I'd want a hex, not a quad, for the increased reliability. A hex can lose a motor in flight and land under control; a quad will just fall out of the sky.
Keep in mind however that your flight controller must support that on a hex. Not all do. I know the Pixhawk/Arducopter firmware does now from my reading. Which is why I'm likely to purchase a Pixhawk for the hex build I'm doing now.
That would appear to be the case.ProfessorStein said:BigTulsa said:HarryT said:If I were flying a better camera I'd want a hex, not a quad, for the increased reliability. A hex can lose a motor in flight and land under control; a quad will just fall out of the sky.
Keep in mind however that your flight controller must support that on a hex. Not all do. I know the Pixhawk/Arducopter firmware does now from my reading. Which is why I'm likely to purchase a Pixhawk for the hex build I'm doing now.
Sounds like from OI Photo's experience with an F550, they can handle loss of a motor/prop:
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=24229#p223762
Doesn't than mean the DJI NAZA, in general, "supports" it?
I see that it is available on Ebay from Goodlucksell with free shipping.EMCSQUAR said:It's got a FAT shipping price too...
This is a power distribution board which allows you to fit the Phantom guts into the larger shell without extending the wires going to the ESC's. You would unsolder the ESC power wires from the Phantom main board and solder them to this board. You would also connect the Phantom Plus and Minus wires to this board. Otherwise, you could eliminate this board and just use longer wires on the ECS's.ProfessorStein said:The green piece looks more like a green piece of plastic (ie - a fake PCB... just to show what you can mount in the shell) rather than anything really useful... but who knows. I would imagine some rewiring would be required, and some leads would need to be lengthened to reach.
Anyone actually built one? Wondering what the quality is like and how's the weight compare against the original?