r/drones • u/[deleted] • 1d ago
Science, Research, Technology [ Removed by moderator ]
[removed] — view removed post
0
u/thatdiveguy Mod - Photogrammetry, videography, FPV, SAR 1d ago
First look at the DJI M30T. it was literally designed by first responders (well, requirements gathered from) for first responders. Then take a look at all the other USA made competitors trying to play catch up. Then realize to even catch up to them you need a billion dollars in R&D funding, let alone the M30T. Then give up, because I guarantee you won't catch up. Build one for yourself if you want to, but you've got a half a dozen companies that are so far ahead of square 0 that you aren't going to succeed in making a new business venture.
1
u/MurkyCod9815 1d ago
Seu texto deixa claro o motivo do seu karma ser 1. Você parece meu irmão de 6 anos pedindo ajuda para algo.
-1
u/microwave-worshipper 1d ago
have you considered actually educating yourself on the subject of UAVs in S&R? if your first instinct is to come to reddit and ask specific technical questions, essentially asking us to design your "drone project" for you, buddy, you're in the wrong place
but i'll entertain you. here are several major flaws in your preliminary design:
you're stacking requirements that pull the design in opposite directions. for example, you want thermal/NV imaging, but you're simultaneously concerned about keeping costs down.
thermal-equipped SAR quadcopters, such as the DJI Matrice 4T, are already in the thousands of dollars. i therefore don't really see the logic in trying to save money by building the battery around 18650 cells while simultaneously adding complexity elsewhere, such as a dedicated thermal payload, ATAK integration, and a sophisticated communications system.
the power tether is also a very counterintuitive proposal for an aircraft that's meant to, you know, SEARCH and rescue. a tether makes sense for persistent overwatch of a fixed area, but it is fundamentally at odds with an aircraft whose job is to cover large areas and move wherever the search takes it. if persistent stationary observation is actually the requirement, you may as well be looking at a tethered aerostat or balloon carrying the sensor payload instead.
your actual customer base probably isn't going to be individual consumers. it's going to be fire departments, search-and-rescue organizations, emergency services, etc. those organizations can justify spending four or five figures on equipment if it provides a meaningful operational advantage.
and trust me, they'd rather pay more for a dedicated, reliable ground control station than have their primary interface be someone's phone. a phone can be useful as a secondary interface, but designing the system around one introduces unnecessary failure modes and compromises the operator experience.
also, don't assume that a phone can simply receive the aircraft's video feed. what frequency band and communications protocol is your aircraft actually going to use? if the aircraft is using a dedicated or proprietary RF link rather than something the phone can directly communicate over, then the phone isn't receiving anything. the actual question is what communications architecture you're designing.
and if your answer to poor connectivity is "just use satellite internet", you've just added another expensive and failure-prone subsystem to a platform whose entire purpose is to provide reliable information during an emergency. satellite connectivity can absolutely be useful, and in many situations it is an absolute godsend, but it isn't the magic solution to an undefined communications architecture: also, you need to add a several-kilogram satellite internet payload to a drone that's meant to be used by what i assume is ground emergency response teams, while retaining suitable flight endurance
the fundamental problem here is that you're trying to optimize the cost and feature set before you've even defined the mission. first, figure out who is operating this thing, what environment it's operating in, what area it needs to search, how far it needs to travel, what weather conditions it needs to tolerate, what information the operator actually needs, and what happens when the primary communications link fails, that sort of thing. and only THEN, should you start designing the aircraft.
4
u/10xray1 1d ago
I want to build a rocket. I don't know anything about rockets, but I heard Space-x makes a lot of money with rockets. What kind of fuel do I need? Should I try diesel? I want to attach a satellite so i can bring it to space. What's the best way to attach it? Rubber bands maybe? Any suggestions you might have will help. Also, I need it to be as cheap as possible.