Nano QX vs Tiny Whoop - possible hybrid design?


#61

Here is my 46mm prop (paper airplane) version for 6mm motors. Finally got it all sized right to fit the fc and canopy perfectly. This frame weighs about 3.5g


Just waiting on those motors and props now! Happy and hopeful about how this is turning out


#62

@NotFastEnuf: Looks fantastic, and fits perfectly with the canopy! :grinning:

On a related note, I just saw an interesting post on RCG about a variation on Oscar Liang’s “Whoopee” upscaled 8mm Tiny Whoop. Obviously larger than your current project of a 6mm whooped NQX. But it might still offer some useful food for thought.


#63

:0 that looks too damn sexy to be called a whoop. It definitely is going to be a breed of its own. INCREDIBLE concept. Actually looks a hundred thousand times better than a whoop.


#64

@Brainstorm - love Mute’s channel … one of the best on youtube IMHO! I think he may have had better results with durability using something other than pla. I was always intrigued by the big 8.5mm whoops in theory but in practice they are too heavy to fly well (really should say manuver well) indoors … and ducts have no appeal to me for outdoor flight. Just dead weight.
Since most often my winter flying track will be the inside of a 2 car garage … I need it to handle like an f1 race car. I’m really curious why we have 7 and 8 mm “whoops” spinning bigger props but not 6mm. It’s either a genius idea and will shame a whoop in power delivery and performance - or I’m close to learning why this is just not being done.

@quadlifepro - thanks for the kind words bro!! I’m really glad to see you guys excited about it. What do you suggest for a name?


#65

Koopacopter lol the mighty duct, ductzgonewild… it’s too early for me to think of anything good lol haven’t had my morning coffee but I’ll keep thinking through out the day. Looks like a top secret high end classified frame in design though and I’m loving it. Like when Mercedes puts all those lines on their new prototype, that appearance of stealth/confusion is so keeping me on the edge of my seat waiting to see what the final result will look like Keep it up, might need to find a good dms2/dsmx whoop FC to try it out if u end up liking it

Btw ; koopacopter wouldn’t be CR infring I believe because it’s all one word.


#66

@NotFastEnuf: Agree 100 percent on 8.5mm brushed being too heavy for (normal residential) indoor flight. Success of the Tiny Whoop and most activity here on MMC shows clearly that cutting weight to the max offers most satisfying results.

Interesting question! I never had an FPV version of the NQX, so don’t know how the 6mm motors handled the extra weight. My suspicion is that with a heavy AUW, 6mm motors would not have enough torque to spin up larger props fast enough to fly aggressively. So, as you’ve already realized and applied, cutting weight to the max is what will make or break this project.

My hope is that with enough refinement of the frame design and powertrain, you will succeed. Worst case, you may have to abandon 6mm and use 0716 motors from the E011 for more torque and efficiency.


#67

Agreed… 7mm is the fallback. Torque to spin the bigger blades vs auw will be the determining factor.

Figured I’d include a shot of duct flexibility/durability at this point. Earlier in the design process I had a failed print that I stopped resulting in shorter ducts. I was quite surprised that I could collapse them without the layer delaminations that full size ducts suffered on flex. It’s now been incorporated as an intentional design feature. Some of the best discoveries are accidental.


#68

Reflecting on early testing in this experiment, 0716 on cg023 props and the nqx frame hauled 7g ballast with more authority in the air than my 8.5mm flies with. Fingers crossed 6mm can come close. May as well throw together an 8mm ultralight while I’m at it too for out front.


#69

See below,
Tried to edit


#70

That’s it!
The Stealth Whoop !!


#71

Quick sidebar to the project…


I upped the ultralight frame size to 8.5mm motors and 100mm span. Frame came out at 5 grams for a dry build weight of 30 with props. Paired with a 260 mah… it’s pretty sick fast. But no faster than the 7mm setup I originally tested.
I honestly think I beefed it up too much and could trim a gram or 2.
And I like the name suggestions :slight_smile:… hopefully the 6mm deserves a name when done!


#72

It’s crazy how the additional power of 8.5mm motors just isn’t worth the extra weight over 7mm builds. These builds make me want to ask for a printer for Xmas


#73

Flight time was 3 min line of sight pushing it hard. Performance is on par with my 2s micro brushless but I really don’t think it’s much faster than 7mm. Of course i only use hubsan replacement 8.5’s so they are no where near the kv of 7mm e011 motors. Maybe there is a little potential for 8.5 to out perform 7mm but there is no arguing that it is heavier. That can be good or bad depending on how much momentum you want to carry into moves. Back to the intention of this project … that’s why I hope 6mm works out well for best indoor handling


#74

For indoors LOS I think the Nano QX still holds it’s own… except for the price of new props and think HHobbies is losing business charging so much and same for NanoQX3D props. Props should not be on the “profit” list to make a profit IMO as it hinders sales. The problem with the Nano QX for FPV is adding a 3.8g FPV Cam/VTX will take a real toll on performance even without the canopy, and it will take added weight for enclosing the props so I think it’s a great idea but on a smaller planet :wink:


#75

Some good points made. That was my experience trying to fpv the nqx too. But at the time “fast” 6mm motors were only 14000kv. A whoop with the same 14000kv motors also struggles to stay aloft.

I just think we all got caught up on the hype train and forgot about the nqx format now that we have much faster motors. Maybe 6mm in high kv won’t have the grunt to swing the big props… maybe it will cook… but just maybe it will rip balls too. If anything - a stroke of the mouse will change this into a 716 build and I can say with certainty from testing that it kicks the e011 in its battery tray. Lol

Waiting on motors with fingers crossed and high hopes…


#76

Hi…i am a new user here. As per my knowledge I think the OEM Nano QX frame was always onto something. The integrated T-shaped prop protectors are light, prevent fatal crashes when touching walls or furniture, but aren’t heavy and cumbersome like full ducts. IMO, they’re kind of the best of both worlds. And of course, Horizon Hobby/Blade also made an FPV version of the Nano QX, long before the TW craze ruined everything.


#77

@NoellEagan: Welcome!

But… did you intentionally copy word for word what I wrote a week ago without attribution? Or did you have a problem quoting? I’m not sure what to think of this. :wink:


#78

Diplomatically put counselor. Lol


#79

Looks to me like a problem quoting. Being a new user, I had a little bit of a learning curve on this sweet sleek forum.


#80

Fair enough, @quadlifepro. We’ll have to wait and see whether we hear back.

My immediate thought was that combining an introduction with somebody else’s statement was a great way to make a bot sound human. But I may be overly paranoid. Added a smiley, in case I was mistaken and may have offended. :wink: