5 ms·

It’s remarkable what energy dense batteries have enabled. Drones and the entire quadcopter scene wouldn’t be possible without them. Some maneuvers made on a 5”

It’s remarkable what energy dense batteries have enabled. Drones and the entire quadcopter scene wouldn’t be possible without them. Some maneuvers made on a 5” quad can pull more than 100 amps on a 6S, 22V battery. That is around 2,200 watts—more than most consumer microwave ovens! The fact that a battery weighing no more than half a kilogram can supply this much power almost instantly is truly remarkable.

cbozeman 6y ago
Zero-Point Energy Modules when?
- jpeter 6y ago
  When we find atlantis
StavrosK 6y ago
Neither would my 300 gram plane that can fly for an hour and 60 kilometers. Technology is great.
- Black101 6y ago
  Do you get live video over cellphone networks at that weight?
  - StavrosK 6y ago
    No, it has an analog transmitter on it that has a range of roughly 5 km. Video over cell isn't very widespread, though it should be.
urthor 6y ago
To be fair, people were doing a LOT with model airplanes ~60 years ago with kerosene engines.
- spookthesunset 6y ago
  I don’t think modern quads would be possible with combustion engines. They aren’t precise and responsive enough. Modern brushless motors paired with some pretty kickass electronic speed controllers and flight controllers create a pretty amazing thing. I mean modern quads can fly in “3D” mode and almost instantly reverse the direction of all the motors so the quad can fly in all orientations, right side up and upside down.
  - gpm 6y ago
    Have the combustion engine drive a generator not the props, it's still more energy dense (but only scales so small).
    - crubier 6y ago
      Keep in mind that there are exactly a grand total of 4 moving parts in a quadrotor drone. This is the core reason for their success, robustness, ease of use and all. If all quadrotors needed oil, gas, vibrated like crazy (bad for IMUs), had 100+ moving parts (engine, servo gears, etc...), weighted at least 1-2kg, ran super hot and noisy... we would not have had the "drone revolution".
    - jpalomaki 6y ago
      I guess it's not just about the energy density, but also about how quickly you can convert the stored energy to kinetic energy. Maybe this is something where the modern batteries are much better and combustion engine/generator combo. Parent comment mentions being able to get 2000W out of those small batteries.
      - jjk166 6y ago
        Combustion engines have much higher power densities than batteries
rahimiali 6y ago
you're extolling energy density (energy per unit volume) but your example is about power delivery (energy per unit time). the former is the real progress. the latter just needs low internal resistance, which is a thing we've had.
Naomarik 6y ago
Those batteries still cost ~$40 USD each from a high end brand. Hoping those can fall in price a bit too. Some goggle DVR, can check out the current amp draw on bottom left. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4V9DMUtTPY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4V9DMUtTPY

cbozeman 6y ago

Zero-Point Energy Modules when?

jpeter 6y ago
When we find atlantis

StavrosK 6y ago

Neither would my 300 gram plane that can fly for an hour and 60 kilometers. Technology is great.

Black101 6y ago
Do you get live video over cellphone networks at that weight?
- StavrosK 6y ago
  No, it has an analog transmitter on it that has a range of roughly 5 km. Video over cell isn't very widespread, though it should be.

urthor 6y ago

To be fair, people were doing a LOT with model airplanes ~60 years ago with kerosene engines.

spookthesunset 6y ago
I don’t think modern quads would be possible with combustion engines. They aren’t precise and responsive enough. Modern brushless motors paired with some pretty kickass electronic speed controllers and flight controllers create a pretty amazing thing. I mean modern quads can fly in “3D” mode and almost instantly reverse the direction of all the motors so the quad can fly in all orientations, right side up and upside down.
- gpm 6y ago
  Have the combustion engine drive a generator not the props, it's still more energy dense (but only scales so small).
  - crubier 6y ago
    Keep in mind that there are exactly a grand total of 4 moving parts in a quadrotor drone. This is the core reason for their success, robustness, ease of use and all. If all quadrotors needed oil, gas, vibrated like crazy (bad for IMUs), had 100+ moving parts (engine, servo gears, etc...), weighted at least 1-2kg, ran super hot and noisy... we would not have had the "drone revolution".
  - jpalomaki 6y ago
    I guess it's not just about the energy density, but also about how quickly you can convert the stored energy to kinetic energy. Maybe this is something where the modern batteries are much better and combustion engine/generator combo. Parent comment mentions being able to get 2000W out of those small batteries.
    - jjk166 6y ago
      Combustion engines have much higher power densities than batteries

rahimiali 6y ago

you're extolling energy density (energy per unit volume) but your example is about power delivery (energy per unit time). the former is the real progress. the latter just needs low internal resistance, which is a thing we've had.

Naomarik 6y ago

Those batteries still cost ~$40 USD each from a high end brand. Hoping those can fall in price a bit too. Some goggle DVR, can check out the current amp draw on bottom left. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4V9DMUtTPY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4V9DMUtTPY