The motors you are planning to use are far to high kv for a winged aeroplane
(Too high, FFS) They have to go very fast to generate power (e.g. 11.1 v x 6500 = 72,000 rpm), you need lower kv with a wider diameter if you are going brushless, so they generate the torque needed to effectively drive some suitably matched props. High kv are for small quadcopters.
( , Mon 27 Sep 2021, 11:03, Share, Reply)
(Too high, FFS) They have to go very fast to generate power (e.g. 11.1 v x 6500 = 72,000 rpm), you need lower kv with a wider diameter if you are going brushless, so they generate the torque needed to effectively drive some suitably matched props. High kv are for small quadcopters.
( , Mon 27 Sep 2021, 11:03, Share, Reply)
I will have to do more research!
and get "more power, make brick fly" out of my head! :)
( , Mon 27 Sep 2021, 13:21, Share, Reply)
and get "more power, make brick fly" out of my head! :)
( , Mon 27 Sep 2021, 13:21, Share, Reply)
I think there used to be a quote related to cars
along the lines of "Power sells, torque wins".
( , Mon 27 Sep 2021, 17:32, Share, Reply)
along the lines of "Power sells, torque wins".
( , Mon 27 Sep 2021, 17:32, Share, Reply)
As long as the power is expressed as thrust and not as twisting the plane to pieces
'more power, make brick fly' is about right. The way I see it you're dragging a plane shaped brick behind your engines. I'm not sure how useful the flaps could be, especially at slow speeds, hence my preference for thrust vectoring.
( , Mon 27 Sep 2021, 19:18, Share, Reply)
'more power, make brick fly' is about right. The way I see it you're dragging a plane shaped brick behind your engines. I'm not sure how useful the flaps could be, especially at slow speeds, hence my preference for thrust vectoring.
( , Mon 27 Sep 2021, 19:18, Share, Reply)