Welcome to FPVDronePilots!
Join our free FPV drone community today!
Sign up

Whats your prediction for next year?

VirtueViolater

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2016
Messages
2,255
Reaction score
2,121
Location
Mobile Alabama
As the title says, i'm gonna make a couple predictions for next year. I'm thinking that HD video transmission is going to gradually get better, cheaper and smaller/lighter mid to late next year. That being said, i also think the fpv goggles everyone is using now are going to get a lot cheaper because of it. We may also see capacitance type batteries start getting a little attention. We're due for a chemical type (lipo) improvement but I really haven't seen much on the subject. Do you guys have any predictions?
 
I predict more aerodynamic racers with more canopies and arm shells. Hopefully this will lead to affordable monocoque frames but that is probably more likely for 2019. Like good ones printed with carbon fiber filament or similar.
Like this?
 
FU RC's Kore frame is $100 i think, there's a clone out also but i'd do some review research on YT before i bought either
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jtrjr
New frames will always be coming out, especially since the cost of development isn't super high. I personally really like motor technology, and would like to see improvements in that, but I really anticipate further developments of VTX and goggle tech. It's the big component that makes FPV racing so unique, and there is a ton of improvement to be had. Radio transmission is something that is inherently very messy, and there is a TON of tuning to be done. In addition, cheap manufacturing of electronics is already something that a lot of development is being put into globally, so it lines up well with that. As somebody who got into FPV for that immersive experience, I can't say I'm not fully behind getting some new improvements in video quality.
 
HD is far from getting lighter, or cheaper, unfortunately Amimon owns teh main patents on the techno,logy required and they are less than motivated to make any real difference in the way its utilized. This is sad because I have run Connex almost exclusively since December 2016 and just recently started swtiching back. Without the manufacturer providign any support, havign any way to debug and repair ourselves, and other issues will stunt its adoption.

4" quads are a black hole of inefficiency. Remember that our aircrafts, quads, are terribly ineffective at energy transfer and efficiency. Its why multirotors in this form factor do not exist in real life. 4" is an area that unless we get wicked development in the 4" prop and motors wont ever come back.

2.5'-3" is much more efficient and less money to build, they are also just as fast if not arguably faster.

Coming down the pipe is the end of miniaturization and more about efficiency. Battery and Props are the main needs here. We are at the mercy of technology with batteries and props cost money to develop, so ultimately we are not left with much.

Prop and Motor combos is an area that needs huge reassesment and this will need repeatable autonomy in duplicating flight characteristics. This is an area to watch, as well as the continuing of consumerizing products and makign products aimed at novice and entry level buyers in ways that get them flying faster.

Digital protocols on ESCs and all that jazz of course.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VirtueViolater
I think 1407 and 1608 motors killing it on 4" props will continue into next year. I still like 2", 2.5" and 3" for next year also. Basically anything under 5" will be big this year IMO. The 20mm stacks are getting to where they can handle the current for powerful 4" builds.

4 > 5 :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: VirtueViolater
HD is far from getting lighter, or cheaper, unfortunately Amimon owns teh main patents on the techno,logy required and they are less than motivated to make any real difference in the way its utilized. This is sad because I have run Connex almost exclusively since December 2016 and just recently started swtiching back. Without the manufacturer providign any support, havign any way to debug and repair ourselves, and other issues will stunt its adoption.

4" quads are a black hole of inefficiency. Remember that our aircrafts, quads, are terribly ineffective at energy transfer and efficiency. Its why multirotors in this form factor do not exist in real life. 4" is an area that unless we get wicked development in the 4" prop and motors wont ever come back.

2.5'-3" is much more efficient and less money to build, they are also just as fast if not arguably faster.

Coming down the pipe is the end of miniaturization and more about efficiency. Battery and Props are the main needs here. We are at the mercy of technology with batteries and props cost money to develop, so ultimately we are not left with much.

Prop and Motor combos is an area that needs huge reassesment and this will need repeatable autonomy in duplicating flight characteristics. This is an area to watch, as well as the continuing of consumerizing products and makign products aimed at novice and entry level buyers in ways that get them flying faster.

Digital protocols on ESCs and all that jazz of course.
Although Dshot and the digital protocol aren't doing much right now next year it'll be pretty big
 
I think 1407 and 1608 motors killing it on 4" props will continue into next year. I still like 2", 2.5" and 3" for next year also. Basically anything under 5" will be big this year IMO. The 20mm stacks are getting to where they can handle the current for powerful 4" builds.

4 > 5 :D
The problem is 4" needs almost 180mm frame size to clear props. 190mm is smallest you can build for 5" builds and that again means 4" is going to be inefficient. Think what you want, but from every frame designer I know and do business with as well as other key movements in the industry show 4" is dead.
 
Maybe you will be right overall, but your numbers are a little off for the frame sizes. My 4" is around 180mm with a design similar to a 210mm qav-r. You save 25.4mm just on prop size, so 10mm difference from 5" to 4" isn't remotely accurate. A 4" can be smaller than 180mm.1006170943a.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: VirtueViolater
Forgot to mention, those motors can give over 3kg of thrust on 4" props and well within the performance envelope of the 25A ESCs. The high current 20mm 4in1 ESCs that have just started coming out are what makes this 4" shift possible. Lumenier even has a 25A 20mm one now. If you can't see that coming with your industry connects... Jeez, I think I need to start a youtube channel :D
 
4" props need approximately 4.5" of clearance between motors, this does not accoutn for a 1.5-2" gap for camera and or removing props from camera view. Due to this, designs would need radical redesign to allow for much less than 180mm design of a frame and then you would have to change geometry of the motor positions and that leads to other issues.

4" motor and prop combos have not been in R&D at all compared to other sizes, this coupled again with many frames in thew 190-210mm range (I have a 5" 190 Bee Rotor Thunderbolt) that run 5" props due to small pod designs and other design attributes, 4" is just not going to be logical when a 190 size 5" can destroy it in every way and a 130-150 3" can make it look silly in half the weight and much less cost as well as small battery.

youre right I could be wrong though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VirtueViolater

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
6,066
Messages
44,516
Members
5,378
Latest member
captadam