Note to anyone unafamiliar: There is a thriving "FPV" ecosystem of drones that can be DIYed. Example common setup, you can mix+match:
- Small square PCB with the main flight control MCU (STM32), and some sensors
- Smalls square PCB with motor drivers
- Carbon fiber frame
- Small PCB with a LoRa radio
- Camera and video transmission system. (90s-security-cam style analog, or digital.
- Brushless DC motors, props etc
Uses Betaflight, ArduPilot, iNav, or PX4 firmware. Or, you could write your own.
The PCB-frame in the article is neat and has obvious convenience advantages, but I speculate that it would not be stiff enough for desirable controllable characteristics under high accel situations.
5+ years ago the vast majority of this stuff was proprietary-only and getting into the hobby cost thousands of dollars. Now you could start at ~$500 (big price factor for FPV is the goggles, but cheap analog ones can be had for ~$100).
Haven't fully soldered it together yet so I hope I'm not forgetting something important, but all the parts have arrived, and I've successfully rough-fitted everything together. The Flywoo Goku board supposedly runs both Betaflight or ArduPilot on a whoop form factor. Note also that the biggest expense are one-time items that can be reused across multiple drones: the radio controller, FPV goggles, and battery charger are $200 together. The BOM for a single drone is about $150 these days, so if you're say putting together multiple ones for multiple family members, it's pretty cheap.
Instead of the analogue eachine boxgoggle, you could go full digital for $199.99 with the Walksnail Avatar HD Goggles L.
Of course you will also have to pay extra for the HD camera system, and the system might be slightly on the heavy side for tinywhoops, but the upgrade to digital image is absolutely worth the price. And you might be able to get a bundle discount if you buy the goggles with a camera system.
As a disclaimer, I should add that I have 0 experience with the Walksnail system, but I do fly the other two HD systems on the market.
From my experience, starting with an analogue system was, in hindsight, a waste of money. And a disappointment as the image quality of the low cost analogue systems was particularly poor.
As a second tip, have your kids fly on the computer first, using the radiomaster pocket as a controller. That will help decrease your repair efforts due to unavoidable beginners crashes.
I bought for Black Friday sales so there's already some discount included, but the FC is also more expensive than it needs to be because I wanted something compatible with both ArduPilot and Betaflight, and the motors are more expensive than they need to be because my kids had color preferences. I think you can easily get a FPV whoop BOM well under $100.
With luck the OpenIPC cameras that are starting to come on the market will find traction and the entire hardware stack will run on open source firmware.
That'll be really nice, but I'm worried that DJI has a stranglehold on the camera market. Their stuff just works, gives you video over 20+ km without any tuning, and looks amazing. Open hardware has a long way to go to do that, but let's hope they pull off an ELRS.
This is all true, but just to set expectations: the open source ecosystem seems to be lagging the proprietary world pretty significantly, unless there's some corner where development is really chugging along that's not making it out to the rest of the hobbyist market.
Though there have been incremental improvements in flight control software, and video subsystems have moved (mostly) from analog to 2.4/5.8 GHz and digital, the overall architecture is pretty similar to what it was 5+ years ago. You have a hobby R/C transmitter and receiver driving PWM outputs (through the flight controller, typically an STM32) to hobby-type ESCs which control the motors. The ESCs are microcontroller-driven and can be reflashed, but painstakingly and annoyingly. Telemetry is typically separate from control, which is separate from video. Everything is very short-range and non-IP.
In comparison, a COTS quadcopter from DJI has a single backhaul from the airframe to the controller which does control, video, and and telemetry. And the video is impressively low-latency. (I'm pretty sure they use a WiFi-type chipset and just spew raw vendor frames, and the receiver picks up what it can, best effort. You could do this with an ESP32 in ESP-NOW mode, I suspect?) I've seen some efforts to reverse-engineer the DJI protocol but I'm not aware of a fully compatible implementation or equivalent in the OSS world.
And at the upper end of the commercial/proprietary space you have systems with out-of-the-box autonomy, multiple backhauls over IP -- so they can use LOS/BLOS radio, LTE, SATCOM, whatever you want -- integration with navigation beacon systems to reduce GPS dependence, hybrid motor/generators, redundant power systems, the whole shebang.
There's no real reason aside from developer interest that this situation exists, as far as I can see. The components are mostly all available. A Raspberry Pi running a decent RTOS would have orders of magnitude more processing capacity than an STM32 and could easily do the sort of multi-sensor fusion that the commercial systems do. LTE modems are cheap. A bigger hexacopter or fixed-wing could easily loft one of the small Starlink dishes, if someone wanted to. Stuff like "perching" (landing and recharging from solar panels) is entirely possible.
But from what I can tell, the cutting edge of open source drones is happening behind closed doors in Ukraine and Iran.
Happy to be corrected if there's new stuff that I'm not tracking, but the gap between the "art of the possible" and current practice seems large.
Lots of opportunity though, is the other way to view it.
Everything here is possible, the gap in implementation is that it’s a) expensive and b) non trivial engineering work. There is vanishingly small overlap between the people whom have the capital for parts, the understanding of the engineering needed, free time to do it and desire to do it for free.
The people whom have the true multidisciplinary understanding to do robotics well can usually also consult (with little difficulty finding work) for $$$s per hour and get the same “problem solving satisfaction”.
Open source software shortcuts a couple of these limitations because you can work on it with little investment over than time.
> Everything here is possible, the gap in implementation is that it’s a) expensive and b) non trivial engineering work.
The real issue is that it's just not interesting or worth it.
Why would you want to put LTE or Starlink on a drone? Flight time is around 30 minutes with current battery technology and you're not legally allowed to fly past line of sight anyway. Strapping a bunch of extra gear to a drone would cut flight times and add basically nothing to the experience.
These things aren't popular because they're not interesting to the people who build and fly drones.
Not interesting to the people who build amateur drones for fun.
I bet that stuff like different Linux kernel schedulers, or entirely new subsystems like io_uring are written by not entirely amateurs and not completely for fun. But the ecosystem is such that open-source licensing works for such efforts. For some reasons, the same is not true for the open-source firmware or hardware used in drones.
One could contemplate on the structure of incentives that could produce a viable pool of open technologies for advanced (including non-amateur) drones.
It's possible to use a DJI air unit for control, but most people prefer ExpressLRS to have a separate, longer range backhaul.
You want your control backhaul to have more range than your video feed anyway. If you go so far that the video starts to drop out, you can fly up higher to regain signal or flip the switch to safely drop the drone. You can also get GPS coordinates back to go find it.
This is very inaccurate. The receiver doesn't output PWM, it communicates with the FC over UART. Control and telemetry are one link, open source, with a range of more than 100km on commodity hardware. Ardupilot enables advanced autonomy out of the box, DJI uses LTE for more than 20km range of HD video out of the box.
Sure, you don't have sensor fusion from a bunch of disparate exotic sensors, and the control software could be improved a lot, but it's not as bad as you describe it.
That is consistent with my experience. My highlights:
- Current betaflight devevelopers and leaders are incompetent (They inherited the code base from others), and are slow, and varying degrees of willing, to add higher-level flight-control mechanics (semi-autonomous modes etc).
- The Ardupilot and PX4 configuration systems, and general experience, are user-hostile.
Note that the converses of these hold: Betaflight has a reasonably-good user experience, and Ardupilot and PX4 have extensive higher-level flight control mechanics. If only you could get the pros of both together!
Regarding hardware, frames generally accommodate flight controllers and ESCs elegantly, but other hardware like cameras, radios, and especially batteries, feel clumsy to assemble in a safe and consistent way.
I think to be fair BetaFlight is not aimed at autonomous flight, when I got into this stuff a few years ago I was told "BetaFlight is for FPV (acro mode?)" and "iNAV is for Autonomous" and after giving both a try I can say that my experience on iNAV was much better for what I wanted (autonomous). BetaFlight worked wonders for flying around (very low input delay, etc..) but it was pretty clear it barely had anything related to auto control. Hells, it didn't even have a reasonable return-to-home!!! It would just drift diagonally in the "home" direction and try to land when it felt it was close enough.
iNAV on the other hand REQUIRES a full gps suite for starters (which for me was REALLY expensive) but you can do full waypoint navigation with just that and a barometer.
Of course it's been at least 4 years but hey at least it was pretty good back then already on the iNAV side!
I haven't touched this stuff in 5+ years, but I wonder how iNav stacks up on your list? I was about 50% of the way through a 7" FPV build with a GPS receiver based on iNav when COVID hit, and between the supply shortages and general life shift, I stopped working on it.
I fly iNav on a couple planes. I havent updated to the latest version in a couple years but i find it works great. The electronics like gps modules and sensors are insanely cheap now if you go straight from china (aliexpress) - you can get an hglrc m100 gps for about $12 shipped now.
I'm curious too; of those it's the one I have the least experience with. It is currently not an option for me, as the aircraft I would use with it uses CAN perhipherals, which iNav doesn't support.
Interesting, I wanted to look into building a drone myself next year. Mostly to learn about tinkering with engineering and electronics. What are the issues with the codebases and their development?
This is a tough question to answer in detail: I encourage you to browse yourself. (They are all on Github) but: The BF code base in itself isn't too bad. The AP one is very complicated, and difficult to navigate. The names and organization are confusing. Compiling is finicky and slow due to the tool system they use, and it requires Linux (Note: The compile target is embedded!). I PRed an update to the build instructions, but it was rejected.
For all of these code bases, there is minimal or no documention: Neither guides, nor code comments. The functions, structs, fields, etc have no descriptions of their purpose or use. The modules, where you would expect a description of their purpose and use, instead includes the same license text at the top.
Sorry but the main dev of Inav is a very experienced dev with a lot of knowledge. He has many youtube videos about developing of drone software/hardware.
Depends on what you want. A lot of the interest in FPV is acro flight, not autonomous, so there isn't a lot of interest in improving that (at least for beta flight)
You act as if separate backhauls is a bad thong - I'm not sure that's self evident. Short range just seems wrong to me - RC transmitters outrage all of the current video tx systems, and in open air video tx is long enough that you run into problems with battery before anything else. The best video tx systems currently is proprietary (DJI).
Open source is good enough for what most people care about. An open source high quality video tx would be awesome, but obviously a significant engineering effort relative to everything else.
> In comparison, a COTS quadcopter from DJI has a single backhaul from the airframe to the controller which does control, video, and and telemetry. And the video is impressively low-latency.
Your information is very out of date.
DJI sells their camera and video unit as a standalone part that you can put in your hobby drone. They're on the 3rd generation right now with the 4th coming out soon https://www.dji.com/o3-air-unit
If you want the DJI video feed, you just buy this unit for under $200 and put it in your drone. You get the same video technology as the COTS DJI unit and it integrates with your open-source controller.
> A Raspberry Pi running a decent RTOS would have orders of magnitude more processing capacity than an STM32 and could easily do the sort of multi-sensor fusion that the commercial systems do.
The STM processors have more than enough power to operate the drone.
I think you're missing the point of hobby drones and their controllers. They don't need or even want LTE, Starlink, or any of the other complications you mention. They just need to get up in the air and fly cheaply. The current products work well for that.
People have tried to build drones around Raspberry Pi gear but there's no advantage and a lot of additional cost, size, and weight for something that doesn't help at all.
I don't think people realize how powerful the top STM microcontrollers are these days.
> Happy to be corrected if there's new stuff that I'm not tracking, but the gap between the "art of the possible" and current practice seems large.
Most of what you posted has been tried in open source. It's just not really beneficial or interesting. You can cobble together an LTE drone if you want, but you can't legally fly it past line of sight anyway, so what's the point?
For what it's worth, hobby drones are miles ahead of the COTS drones when it comes to fast flying and control. The gear from DJI is great if you want to safely fly a camera up and hover around, but if you want a fast and challenging drone you basically have to DIY.
Back in the old days (Phantom 1), it was all IP. The "range extender" box that you could buy for the controller was literally a MIPS box running OpenWRT. I took one apart and used a debug interface to jailbreak it, then connected my own RPi to its network and used it for some degree of autonomous control. I assume things have advanced substantially since then.
I was very disappointed that my Mavic Mini 1 could not be controlled through the DJI SDK so I couldn't use any external apps to drive it. I assume that has also improved, but for a minute at least, the cheaper DJI drones were essentially unusable for my use cases.
To some extent, the availability of cheap commercial gimbal camera drones really set the OSS side of the hobby back. Eventually most of that energy moved to FPV acro drones, but definitely something was lost, as nobody really tries to build a DIY DJI competitor anymore. Of course, DJI drones are absurdly performance limited compared to what is possible with similar sized platforms.
What about those of us who really are awful at flying drones? I personally have tried fpv ones and just don't seem to have the skills for it - however I really enjoy my DJI mini. I never can seem to find information on open drones that fly the same way (maybe I just don't know what I'm looking at or for?)
> All-in-one PCB: Doesn’t need any 3D printed parts or such
I actually am fine 3D printing and laser cutting stuff at home but I don't have the stuff to make a PCB and don't have the hand skills to do anything more than through-hole soldering.
The intent is not at-home fabrication: It's sending it to a company in Shenzhen (e.g. JLCPCB) to do both PCB fab, and SMT assembly for you. 10-day time between order and arrival. (USA), and astonishingly low cost.
PCB are sometimes used in these structural scenarios, (Where they are not the right tool for the job) as they're one of few(?) ways to get a custom part fabricated at low cost. If the device has electronics anyway, the added cost of expanding the PCB footprint for structure, as in this case, is small.
> There is a thriving "FPV" ecosystem of drones that can be DIYed.
As someone who has for decades built flying things which could be drone'ified any day of the week, it is sort of also necessary to point out that even before drones became so widespread and commonplace, rcgroups.com has been the ecosystem in which to find oneself.
And indeed, the "model airplane/remote control flight" subject has been prosperous and flourishing as a hobby for decades too .. just feast yourself on the categories here:
A very earnest exploration of the various sub-forums will reveal some extraordinary designs - some which, indeed, break the 'norm' for what a flying thing should look like, in respect to a more casual view. Magnus, aerostat, Fettler are pretty good search terms...
Is this just someone reposting espressif's esp-drone (https://github.com/espressif/esp-drone) and passing it off as their own (and DigiKey posting it on their site)? They talk about making a custom PCB, but it looks pretty much the same.
The repository linked from the article (https://github.com/Circuit-Digest/ESP-Drone) has some issues claiming there's malware in it, and the commit history looks a little suspicious, but I could be wrong.
Since those who filed the issue did not even stated which file is affected this is pure speculation but the virus issue really look like a false positive. The pre-built firmware checked into a repo could easily trigger an anti-virus.
The repo is mostly made of plain text files, the zip and the bin don't look required for anything so if your feeling paranoid delete them before building!
What a great time for this article! The US is having a mass hysteria event and it turns out you can churn out DYI drones for the fat sum of $12-13 each? What a time to be alive!
Edit:
Hmm, considering that people are taking stars for UFOs lately, maybe a cheap drone is an overkill and a 20-pack of Chinese sky lanterns would be more than enough to keep the average US neighbourhood in a state of constant fear / see how long it takes for you to get to the front page of /r/UFOs...
Judging from the posts I’ve seen, others have already started. Someone had a drone with a lit Roman candle going the other day. Or it was FAA compliant aliens. One of the two.
Welcome to hacker News! Yes, we find ignorance funny. I think people adding fuel to the fire are the ones freaking out about aliens or Iranian mother ships. Pointing out that the this is a hysteria event is more akin to pouring water on the flames.
No, it is not "Hacker News" to paint a large swath of people as "ignorant". The proper way would have been to publish a detailed, technical analysis and present your ideas along with your proof to the greater community and facilitate a discussion.
I want to live in this world, where we're all part of a larger collective endeavor to discover the truth, to be more informed, learn continuously, and evolve together. That's the old-school philosophy and mission of science for the betterment of humanity.
My guy, there are government officials that are sharing photos of the Orion constellation stating that it's a drone swarm just standing there over their property...
The interesting/scary part is that its not that hard to weaponise these drones. You can make one drop a home made explosive pretty easily, fully autonomous. and then dump itself into a body of water. All for way less cost than a gun.
I don’t know what drone you’re talking about but you absolutely cannot make a tiny Wi-Fi drone autonomous or drop things for less than a cost of a gun, every part of your statement is wrong. Currently anyone smart enough to build drone with 7 inch propellers and programmable GPS waypoints, improvised explosives … 3d printed release mechanism .. probably has a pretty good paying job and doesn’t see the value proposition of blowing things up
You know what you can easily do drive a truck into a crowd of people or fill your car with explosives in park it under a building and then blow up the entire building, but people aren’t doing that every day but continue whingeing about drones
>Currently anyone smart enough to build drone with 7 inch propellers and programmable GPS waypoints, improvised explosives … 3d printed release mechanism .. probably has a pretty good paying job and doesn’t see the value proposition of blowing things up
This is true, but the thing is, at least in United States, its not a matter of lack of talent to build these things, its mostly a lack of need to destroy stuff. Given how things are going in the world, where an assasin is currently being celebrated, I dunno if this is gonna hold.
In the same way, it can very well be possible to make these things under $300 with mass produced kits. Hook up a gps chip to it, and its easy to make it waypoint navigatable without manual control
The advantage of a drone is that the level of separation between the assailant and the crime goes up so much that it becomes next to impossible for Law Enforcement to assertain a suspect.
Autonomous isn’t a problem, the open source firmwares for drones include fully autonomous mode. I don’t know if this particular one does but it should be easy to port. The size and range, however, doesn’t make this particular drone very scary.
With this a lot of damage can be done even without drone. As for weaponized it's not a future, it's a reality in Ukraine for years now. Defense against them is difficult to impossible. A bodyguard who can sacrifice himself may sometimes work.
I find it funny that the US is so obsessed with infantry firearms and surgical strikes that people think those are the best "ways to go" for certain things. I guess not a bad thing considering we don't need any improved means for those stuffs...
It's not scary when it is just a hypothetical. If this were happening with some frequency it would be concerning. Until then I suspect there is something you are overlooking, oversimplifying.
(EDIT: I'm assuming you are talking about non-military use.)
Its one of those things where once you can buy "kits" for it, you may see its use. Ukraine war videos popularized the idea of using drones to drop explosives.
I could see Cartels using this to take out targets.
"Hard to find a more American article than this." Just wait until they start taking pot-shots at them and then it will be "real" America: BOOM! "Look Ma! I done got one!"
Fun! I built a Crazyflie[1] back in the day which was bespoke 2.4GHz protocols (no ESP32 at the time) so this is a great upgrade to that. Also the use of a single low side MOSFET as the motor controller makes it simpler and cheaper at the expense of some moves that BLDC motors give you. All in all, at $10 - $15 that is a great deal and I'm wondering if one will show up in a Hackerbox[2] as that is exactly the kind of thing they do.
I have had a lot of fun playing with the CF microdrones, I'm definitely going to build one of these too.
Fun. I'm looking into turning my old iPhone into a drone as it has great hardware already to do higher level tasks and use ESP32 for the more real time stuff like actually driving the motors based on sensor input.
If you think about it, an old iPhone 6 comes with GPS, gyro, accelerometer, multiple cameras, pretty powerful processors, bluetooth + wifi + LTE, sound + light, ambient + proximity sensors. Get rid of the case, and you have a great mini computer that can be aware of its surroundings and communicate.
On more modern iPhones, you can even use advanced tech like ARKit to have great spatial understanding of your drone and environment and do autonomous drones. With an iPhone 15, you can even get spatial video. How amazing would that be?
I wish Apple provided a straightforward way to unlock(like remove restrictions on the OS level) old phones and use them for DIY projects.
I got an ESP32 WROOM 32U board that I intent to use it as the flight controller which will keep the drone within its flight envelope and do the maneuvering upon receiving commands from the phone.
I find the phone appealing because I want try to make it somewhat autonomous, like im RTS games where you give a unit a command to go somewhere and it figures the path out by itself and avoids obstacles without direct input. The phone has quite a lot of processing power and sensors and IMHO doing it on board will be more interesting. Also, I'm not sure that the connection will be always stable and high bitrate make the drone a thin client.
True but, IMHO, a lot of the higher level task should be able to handle it. I guess you can have a simple real time IC to handle the flight envelope to provide stable flight and then use the iPhone to do the advanced operations. For example, if you are building a drone that is mapping the environment and follows you through a bike ride, does it really matter if the 3D environment it creates for autonomous navigation is slightly off? You can continuously compensate for it, stick with moving averages and avoid extreme moves.
That real-time controller still needs the IMU sensors, which is maybe what GP was responding to. (Your iPhone could have an additional set of them, but the ones on the phone don't do any good to the real-time subsystem.)
Oh, I got an accelerometer card for that. It's very small and cheap, there are also cards that contain a gyro + barometer. So if the phone ones are not real-time enough cheap options exist.
Hence a microcontroller for flight control. The iPhone can just decide on the higher level tasks and send control signals to the microcontroller, similar to how a microcontroller delegates tasks to the underlying hardware peripherals.
You would want to use quite literally anything except Apple-manufactured hardware for this purpose. Just don't even waste your life-minutes on that kind of thing.
This is amazing. Even the landing gear (struts?) is part of the PCB. I hope the author considers selling kits or outsourcing kits to SeedStudio. I live in a country where digikey order shipping is quite pricey.
The author estimates the BOM to be a little under US$13. At that price it would be fun to try create a swarm for DIY drone lights show.
FWIW, making just 10 might drive that $13 price down quite a bit.
Although, it looks like 1 unit might be closer to $50 (at least for the suppliers I might use), but $150 for 10.
I think costs could be cut somewhat though. The USB->serial chip is nearly $6, but differently packaged it can be $4.40 for 1 or $3.99/ea for 10, and alternative chips that seem like they should be good enough can be cheaper still. The voltage regulator they chose is $1/ea for 500ma, while the one I would normally go to is $0.22/ea for 1000ma (dropping down to $0.13/ea for 10).
The entire BOM is crazy. The USB to UART chip is wholly unnecessary if you simply pick a better (at an equal or lower price) ESP32-S3 module which has a USB interface.
I suspect this was designed based on things the author had in their cupboard as opposed to something that's reasonable for new designs.
Does it need a regulator at all? ESP32 should be able to run on raw battery voltage, assuming the ESP is necessary. RealTek TX2/RX2 + PIC10/ATTiny10/CH32V003 could be even cheaper if user is okay with a dedicated transmitter.
Feels like a poor fit, given the limited number of cores available.
Would be awesome to see rp2350 or some such, where there are very low power io cores available that can do work whether the main core is on or not. Embedded really is one of the best places for many-core, but it's so so rare there are good offload architectures and puny Programmable IO systems.
Should out to folks like Silego/Dialog/Renesas with their GreenPAK; ultra tiny but interesting mixed signal little bits of programmable logic with a healthy dollop of peripherals!
Calling the RP2350's PIO units "low power io cores" is quite an exaggeration. Although they are technically turing-complete with a lot of hacking, they are absolutely awful at any kind of compute. Heck, you probably don't even want to let it handle UART parity calculation!
If anything the ESP32's Ultra-Low-Power Coprocessor would be perfect for such applications - but realistically it isn't worth the effort. Compute power usage is going to be negligible compared to what is needed for wifi and rotors, and running multiple realtime tasks on a single core isn't exactly rocket science either.
I played with €25 foldable wifi drone from Lidl until EU started requiring €30 fee annual for a camera drone.
I cannot think much practical use for drone without a camera. Fly-fishing might be one, but I need to program it so that it drops the line and returns home the moment it feels fish yanking.
i did this with my drone. I just used a small sideways chip clip i glued to the bottom of my drone. Fly fast enough so when the line goes taunt, the line will slip out of the clip and drop.
To answer the question asked by the [dead] commenter: because every other electronic component distributor site (with the exception of Mouser, which is basically DigiKey with a different stylesheet) is much worse.
this is amazing. on similar note, I have spent last few months trying to fit visual inertial odometry into esp32. Combining that with this would be insane (and so cheap!)
love everything here but I'm skeptical of real time control via wifi. for me there's always been a noticeable delay in video streaming and receiving control signal so I'm curious how this works?
if you've ever streamed video on a local network over web sockets you'll notice latency. no matter how fast sending text based control messages may be, latency in the video stream will cause users to send controls with the same latency which makes control impossible as far as I know.
if that's true then that might be helpful as your visual feedback comes directly from your eyes and not latent video plus latency for control signals is probably less. thanks for pointing this out
Yup. About fifteen years ago there was an explosion in small-run PCB services that cater to hobbyists (and cottage-scale professionals). If you don't need them overnight you can get good quality PCBs made at a very reasonable price.
Even if they have components on them, that's only $1-$2 extra per board (depending on the components), JLCPCB will assemble all the common components (resistors, capacitors, some more exotic ones) for very cheap, and you can solder the rest yourself. Their PCB assembly saves so much time, I don't want to waste half an hour soldering 20 0805 resistors to save $0.30 any more.
JLCPCB assembly services are so cheap as long as you don't use components marked as extended!
I don't solder passive components anymore and now mostly use 0402 (that i am not able to solder reliably) instead of the bigger 0805. If you value your time and don't derive pleasure from soldering passive components, try the assembly services!
Agreed. I'm in the market for an imu and thought "ah the MPU 6050, I've heard of this one a lot even recently" and it's obsolete. This is typical of consumer to adafruit/sparkfun/aliexpress levels where they have countless old stock of cheapy proto boards to buy from, but if you're designing a whole new thing from scratch, that's inexcusable.
Does anyone know who at Digikey is responsible for their absurd adblock-blocking efforts?
It's so goddamn tiresome that I'm headed to a site already with a list of things to buy and it blocks me because I've installed an extension that will block them from showing me ads trying to sell me even more stuff.
Meta: This has to be one of the most aggressively blocked pages I've encountered as it refuses to render any content if you have an adblocker on (uBlock at least) and resists several forms of archiving.
uBlock on, pihole on the net - not sure what it dislikes more.
I see a screen (light grey on white) which reads something along to "Press & hold" some button to confirm i'm human. Which does nothing, because of adblocking?
Well, f* you then - let me find something different to read :)
I'm also using firefox/ublock but I'm getting the mentioned agressively-blocked page. I'm also using a VPN, if that makes any difference.
I also see the extremely light "Press & Hold" message to prove I am not a bot. I missed it the first few times I loaded the page because my eyes just don't pick up on things like that very easily (I'm the guy who turns the brightness up in video games with a lot of shadow). Not only does this press & hold action seem to be ineffective, but they made a message that some humans have trouble seem to keep bots out? Smdh.
Which is disappointing, because I've ordered from digikey countless times, both for work and for personal projects. There should be absolutely no reason they clamp down on people using adblockers since they are highly profitable already. Guess I'll be looking for a different parts source.
I just saw the two comments in question and find it to be absolutely hilarious.
A serious answer to your question - no, these are in the "whoop" weight-class. Warhead carrying drones for anti-personnel and anti-armor are usually 10 inch and up, meaning they are using "10 inch" frames and likely 3115 motors, with 6S battery packs. Of course, there's endless variation, but that seems to be a optimum combination
Whoops and 7" drones are pretty far apart (depending on what you consider "far", I guess). Whoops can barely lift their own weight, 7" drones can carry maybe a kilo.
The PCB-frame in the article is neat and has obvious convenience advantages, but I speculate that it would not be stiff enough for desirable controllable characteristics under high accel situations.
reply