edit: at least 70 mph

With this config, the cruise motors and prop are optimally sized for cruise - which gives non trivial gains to both eta for propulsive motor efficiency and prop efficiency.

Vs a tiltrotor/wing/body in which the cruise motor has to do double duty as lifting motors. Given it takes anywhere from ~4-7x more power to hover (depending on disc loading) than to cruise, you can see how the motors are not in an optimal throttle/rpm band in this case. Archer's CTO Munoz has actually said this publicly.

This is also the most the penalty will ever be as electric motors continue increasing in specific power, and quite rapidly this century so far.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wing_Aviation#/media/File:Wing...

Tilt-rotor on all 4 motors with an extra twist: the wing shape adds to the lift in vertical mode, so you can use smaller motors, so they're more efficient even in horizontal mode.

Or I could probably add another ~0.5 lbs or a little more without issue. The lifting motors hover at 45% ish throttle so there is some headroom for more payload without reducing battery mass fraction.

At first, I was like "Nah, just looks like my RC car battery", but then I Googled it...and it's a whopping $1,305 [0].

I looked closer at the specs and they're insane for a battery as small as it is. They have double the energy density as measured by both volume and mass compared to my RC car batteries [1].

[0] https://www.upgradeenergytech.com/product-page/gold-v1-6s2p-...

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Zeee-Connector-Vehicles-Helicopter-Ai...

But my first and only other VTOL build was foamcore Readyboard and that took a 12 ft drop onto asphalt with only a slight compression in the fuselage. Never replaced it.

I would add dovetails or other clips for printed sections if I did another printed build.

Yes avionics and propulsion parts are COTS for speed, the Amprius pack is US manufactured but others are all made in China.

I'm starting to see some more Ardupilot used commercially too but yes the UX is janky and unintuitive.

The big advantage is that you can just print the part again, which almost makes PLA worth it.

ABS would probably be better, as it's much more durable and lighter, but it's still much heavier than foam, and printing ABS isn't great.

What I started with - Had built one VTOL before from foamboard, not 3D printed. - Familiar with Ardupilot from that project and assembling a multicopter and COTS VTOL. - So I had a little experience building a structurally sound airframe for VTOL loads, but 3D printing was a wrinkle. - How I worked it out is a hard question. But it was being focused with design, flight testing and troubleshooting. LLMs, Youtube, forums, etc for help when needed. - Building in public helped paradoxically. It actually saves me time to build in public because of the motivation boost that helps me move faster and to share progress sooner. Even though there's a higher lift to document and share.

https://www.uavmodel.com/products/makeflyeasy-hero-2180mm-ua...

This one has a maximum climb rate of 3 degrees. Which means you'd need to plan a route that's continously climbing, and tacking back and forth to avoid going steeply. So you would probably combine flight planning using Mission Planning: https://ardupilot.org/planner/ and custom json tweaking following MavLink protocol: https://ardupilot.org/dev/docs/mavlink-routing-in-ardupilot....

The open source flight controllers and systems are https://ardupilot.org/copter/docs/common-autopilots.html#ope... a good place to start. There's a few orgs building the full experience, but you'll of course pay for fully integrated, but still open source, hardware+software.

The scenario you describe is exactly what a VTOL or normal play is for; quad copters simply do not cover enough ground.

Also consider the camera. DJI typically ship with really low quality cameras, but https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1785754-REG/sony_ilx_... would get you a much higher pixel density so if you're more interested in the imaging, you can flight higher, near the licensed ceiling, completing more ground faster.

I've also found AI models know how to calculate pixel densities, so it's pretty easy to mock out a flight plan even if you dont have the actual drone available.

Never used one, but either this design or a tri-rotor v-22 style tilt motor are the two designs I've found intriguing. Worth checking out at perhaps?

For your needs, a slow-stick with a KFM wing would suffice - the smallest, lightest, simplest, most capable airframe one can build, and that is a slow-stick[0] with KFM wings[1].

VTOL is cool for those of us raised on a healthy sci-fi diet, but is entirely unnecessary for a slow-stick, which can be hand-launched directly into the air (vertically) and landed at a stall within a meter.

Plus, it is small, light, effective and extremely simple, which means its a lot easier to repair and maintain. Add some ardupilot magic and you've got a really capable platform for surveys and reconnaissance.

tl;dr Consider building a small fleet of slow-stick+KFM planes, attach your camera to it, and do your survey that way ..

[0] - https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?1395335-Begin...

[1] - https://www.flitetest.com/articles/kfm-wings-a-basic-explana...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dd2N_lyO_SQ

And if you're looking for other ground controls, you could try out QGroundControl or Mavproxy (terminal based).

There's ways to use differential thrust for multiple cruise motors to roll if not positioned at spanwise Cg (e.g. wing mounted like in a commercial jet), but again, usually not efficient. Servos are a small mass fraction relative to other components.

This should be "a 3D printed winged VTOL drone"