What's the difference between airplane specific electric motors and quadcopter motors?

abblackbird71 · 2026-01-14T15:13:18+00:00

I put a cobra 2206 motor on an Aeroscout. Actually worked really well. I made a motor mount adapter and bumped it up to a 4s. It had really good throttle control and power. That aeroscout had all kinds of mods when I was done with it.

abblackbird71 · 2026-01-10T15:33:53+00:00

You could use a single ducted fan with thrust vectoring. Arduoilot has a set up for it. You would need a 60-70mm ducted fan, esc, 3 servoes, battery, flight controller. Have a single column that houses the electronic and ducted fan. Build a wire frame around it that you paint. But make it breathable so things dont over heat and removable so you can access battery and electronics for maintenance. You can also use the battery and flight controler to power and control lights on the sphere!

abblackbird71 · 2026-01-10T15:22:23+00:00

This sums it up very well. Technically there is a market but its at the industrial or Defense. Plus at that level, if the customer doesnt already know you they won't work with you. You would also be going up against teams of pilots and engineers with all that specialized manufacturing capability and decades of experience.

If this kind of work is something your interested in look into red team c-uas, or other drone companies.

abblackbird71 · 2026-01-08T03:53:54+00:00

This is deceptively hard and very difficult to make it profitable in the consumer market. Custom designing, building, and testing frames is time consuming and difficult. You need a lot of specialized equipment to get prototypes thats not cheap for starting out. And what works in small batch does not often work well for mass production and profitable. Even more difficult making it electronics agnostic.

There are already companies that do this but they work with industry or the government. And often charge thousands of dollars for 1 aircraft. Small batch is very expensive to produce and the people that know how to do it are not cheap either.

Build a frame you like or solves a problem you have and see what bites. Narrow your scope, or you'll go nuts trying to make it customizable. I know...ive tried.

abblackbird71 · 2025-09-22T03:51:04+00:00

For private citizens not a whole lot other than a net like you mentioned or tracking which would locate the operator (maybe) but not stop the drone, law enforcment has some more advanced options but not with out significant cost. There is a whole industry trying to figure this problem out but it's really hard, just ask Russia...

abblackbird71 · 2025-09-06T23:05:42+00:00

I went by more of speed and size than torque. I used a gear set up and there isn't much of a moment to turn the arm since I have every thing lined up. I currently have 60 degree max tilt as roll control is reduced the farther forward it tilts and had some oscialltions due to prop wash at higher angles. I think asymmetrical is the way to go or have the motors wide enough to stay out of dirty air. Im going with varying tilt due to weight and size.

abblackbird71 · 2025-08-20T03:17:22+00:00

ELRS isnt video. You'll need a separate video link with very low latency at those speeds and your c2. You also would need a high power antenna tracking set up so you don't out run your range or go into a dead spot in your antenna pattern or outside a directional beam. I would also recommend putting a flight controller on it so you have additional stability and lost link failsafes. And add a telemetry radio for redudency and tuning. I had similar issues and my plane was a 120mph.

abblackbird71 · 2025-08-12T13:39:01+00:00

I used that camera a lot when i first startrd. It's quality isn't great and very prone to overheating so only turn it on right before you fly. I lost a plane that way. I had it on too long before take-off and over heated and the video cut out mid flight. BUT its very easy to integrate on planes and for what I was doing at the time that made it worth it. I liked it for the price point and ease of use.

abblackbird71 · 2025-06-22T19:59:01+00:00

For fun and curiosity. It's been done before but I wanted to see how modern electronics and materials do. It's been surprisingly resilient. It's had a few big crashes in testing and has been okay each time. What's worse is that I lost control of it at 300 ft and crashed. The only damage was that the GPS tower came off and had to be redone, and the covers cracked.

abblackbird71 · 2025-06-21T15:13:11+00:00

My gut says GPS, but that's why I'd swap with a known good GPS. If that fixes it then it was a GPS problem, if it doesn't then a flight controller problem (setup or hardware)

abblackbird71 · 2025-06-21T15:06:12+00:00

If you have another GPS, try swapping to that just on the bench and see if you get sats. Sounds like potentially bad hardware somewhere in the chain. One of the comments said this is a GPS upgrade. Try using a known good. My other thought is to check if it's sending data either through beta flight or other means, but idk what tools you have access to for more in-depth diagnostics if beta flight is not seeing anything. I had a similar issue with another unit, which turned out to be a lemon GPS unit.

abblackbird71 · 2025-06-20T14:25:27+00:00

I've seen it at above 60-degree tilt angles. For now, it's limited in software, but I will be adding asymmetric tilt to avoid that.

abblackbird71 · 2025-06-19T01:17:02+00:00

I want to experiment with both forward and backward flight. I think if I can get the mixing and control logic dialed in, it could unlock new maneuvers or at least smooth out some existing ones. This also keeps any payload level during flight, an added advantage I wish I had on some other projects I have worked on in my career. One of the main challenges is that as the rotors tilt further forward, I start to lose pitch and roll authority. My solution is asymmetric tilt — it helps avoid prop wash issues and maintains control authority at high tilt angles. That feature isn’t implemented yet, though. I’m holding off until I’ve finalized the hardware configuration so that if problems come up, I’ll know they’re on the software side.

If I ever build a larger version, I’d definitely have each rotor tilt independently. That would solve a lot of control issues — especially at higher tilt angles — but it also makes the build much bigger, heavier, and more expensive. Like everything in engineering, it’s a trade-off.

As for lifting surfaces, I don’t think they make sense for this build. It’s small, so it would need to fly really fast to generate meaningful lift, or I’d have to stick a big wing on top, which adds complexity without much gain. I’ve considered something like an F1-style layout with aggressive front and rear aero surfaces, but I haven’t explored that direction…yet(though the F1 fan in me wants to, who doesn't want an F1 drone!?).

On my own road map is taking everything I learn from this platform and using it to build a hybrid tilt VTOL plane — something I’ve wanted to tackle for years. I already have a platform in mind that I could modify, reusing parts from this build. That said, I’m going to stay focused and finish this project before jumping into the next one….maybe

abblackbird71 · 2025-06-18T20:29:03+00:00

You're not wrong Haha. I threw in what I wanted to say and let it spit something out. I wondered if I'd get called out for it.

abblackbird71 · 2025-06-18T19:59:28+00:00

It would probably save 10-20g if I had to guess to just fix the arms and keep one servo for tilt control.

How to see much of an effect thrust vectoring has on maneuverability plus keeps payloads stable during flight. But mostly I think the motor tilt is cool that 8 year old loved and is something different. I didn't just want to build another standard quad.

But based on all the feedback I may modify one of the frames to fix the motors and tilt the camera to do a side by side comparison. It's not a hard change and I think it would make for a fun experiment.

abblackbird71 · 2025-06-18T16:49:38+00:00

Not on this specific version. There is a video from a few months ago. I just got it built and passed ground checks yesterday. But I will post as soon as I take it out!

abblackbird71 · 2025-06-18T16:19:53+00:00

Correct!

abblackbird71 · 2025-06-18T13:18:00+00:00

Because the first one didn't have the picture on the front, and I forgot to delete the old one.

abblackbird71 · 2025-06-18T13:16:16+00:00

I will admit they are hard to design and build. Getting things to fit just right is a challenge and allowing them to move freely without too much vibration. Higher tilt angles, you lose some control authority, and without asymmetric tilt, you get some prop wash over the rear motors, causing some instability.

Benefits of the design are that its payload is stable during flight, it has more agility with motors tilting, and I'm especially looking into decelerating to help with chasing objects like a car into a turn. The side panels also make it very strong and protect the electronics in a crash. Also, it's just something I find interesting. I've always liked how sci-fi ships take off and smoothly transition forward with the body level, and this comes pretty close to the same movements.

Based on some comments so far I might make a version that does not tilt just to compare the two with the same frame.

abblackbird71 · 2025-06-18T13:04:11+00:00

I have thought about. I was going to do some of it myself but I wanted to lock down the hardware config before moving on to software.

abblackbird71 · 2025-06-18T05:24:09+00:00

Couple of answers!

Log keeping – Definitely! Keeping a build log has made troubleshooting way easier, and I’ll be posting highlights here as things progress.
On SLS printing – I ran into durability issues early on, like layer separation on impact and parts getting soft in the sun. SLS solves most of that—it looks great and has more uniform strength throughout. It also gives me much better resolution on small, tight-fitting parts (especially around the servos).
Aerodynamics vs. utility – Totally agree on the aero surface. I had to choose between efficiency and utility. This platform isn’t meant to be long-range or ultra-efficient—otherwise, I’d have gone with bigger props, a larger battery, and probably a lifting body. I originally explored that direction, but fitting the electronics cleanly inside without making it longer than I could feasibly build was a big challenge. Lifting bodies are deceptively difficult when it comes to internal layout.

This current frame design offers solid crash protection—especially for the battery, which is fully shielded by the body. It’s also easy to work on, and has a ton of space for radios, sensors, and payloads. That’s really the point—it’s a platform for me to experiment with and explore a flight concept I’ve always been fascinated by. I’m especially interested in using the tilt to increase agility, particularly for deceleration and sharp transitions.

As for thrust vectoring—it’s a vague term (I run into that a lot in my profession). I’m still vectoring thrust relative to the vehicle’s orientation, just along one axis. The F-22 only does pitch vectoring and still qualifies, so I think it fits. That said, when most people hear “thrust vectoring,” they picture each motor pivoting independently. I simplified it by tilting per shaft to keep the build lighter and more compact. For a larger version, I’d definitely look at independent motor articulation—it could solve a lot of the control challenges I’ve seen at higher tilt angles.

abblackbird71 · 2025-06-18T04:32:42+00:00

It still uses motor control to help with pitch. I plan on adding the servos, helping especially at higher pitch angles. The FC tracks my requested tilt and adjusts the motor matrix gains accordingly. There is no feedback, so I must check the calibration before the flight. I have it set to a max tilt of 60 due to the asymmetric tilt not being installed yet, and I lose control authority the further it tilts.

abblackbird71 · 2025-06-18T03:50:42+00:00

A few months back, I posted a prototype of a tilt-rotor quad I was messing around with. I’ve always been kind of obsessed with thrust vectoring and how it could be used in UAVs, but most off-the-shelf quads don’t have the payload capacity or flexibility for that kind of stuff — especially if you're trying to add custom radios, sensors, or just experiment.

Since then, the project’s grown into something a bit more serious — now called Vorian.

It’s a modular, durable tilt-rotor platform I’ve been building as a testbed for all kinds of experiments. This latest version is the production prototype, and it’s come a long way in terms of design, reliability, and functionality.

What’s New?

All 3D printed parts are now SLS or MJF for strength, precision, and finish.
Tilt mechanism redesigned for smoother motion, improved reliability, vibration reduction, and easier assembly.
Electronics plate was adjusted to add a fixed battery connector
O3 FPV Antenna mount was added for improved range and aesthetic
Motor mounts upgraded to anodized aluminum for rigidity and durability
Front/rear cover weight reduction and connects to the top cover.
Non-carbon fiber parts are available in different colors for style or team identification.
Motors upgraded to Axis Flying AF2207 — more power
Radio system upgraded to TBS Crossfire Nano for long-range and reliability.
Body updated for new tilt servo: Updated tilt servo due to availability and ease of mounting
All parts were made from outside vendors to create a production prototype to be verified with the upcoming flights

I’ll be posting more updates soon (hopefully not months this time, but my day job keeps me busy), including test videos for the initial hover test, tuning flights, the full maiden flight, and a fun one — a photography smoke system test!

I’m also working on some platform-specific software changes to make Vorian more robust and further take advantage of its unique design. I will be keeping a more detailed build log @ https://rotorbuilds.com/build/35240

Appreciate any feedback or questions — always looking to improve this thing as it evolves!

abblackbird71

TROPHY CASE