Login to disable ads!

AR Drone Ultraflight High Performance Propellers review vid

Mirumod, Macgyver, hull, cam, propeller, leg, cross, ball bearing mods... etc.
pbody2013
Serious flight time
Posts: 1477
Joined: 30 Dec 2012, 03:24
Drone Type: Bebop
Location: High River Alberta Canada
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: AR Drone Ultraflight High Performance Propellers review

Post by pbody2013 » 21 Sep 2013, 20:45

I guess only POSITIVE review reviews or opinions are ok here. Kyle did a review, an honest one I'm sure, and he gets personally attacked, that's bs! If he was all about the money he'd just sell them anyway as I imagine he sells lost of UF gear sets. He did a review on the same props any of us would buy from UF's site or elsewhere, yet it's assumed and stated he had prototypes. Did I buy prototype clear gears or are they just lower quality which I found out AFTER I bought them. Maybe that should be stated on UF's site, not impressed. I won't be buying any UF products now.
"It seems to be flying alright, but it's making a funny noise"

User avatar
garrock
I've been hit!!
Posts: 2089
Joined: 01 Sep 2012, 16:14
Drone Type: AR.Drone 2
Location: USA - Portsmouth, Ohio
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: AR Drone Ultraflight High Performance Propellers review

Post by garrock » 21 Sep 2013, 22:36

I use Parrot props, gears, and shafts because I still crash a lot (when doing wildman type flying).
A tool and spares bag always accompanies the drone.

Mostly, it's the shaft that goes first.

When using Parrots spares, you can't purchase just the shafts.
When replacing a bent shaft, I always replace the clip, gear, and pinion with new ones.
I throw away the replaced gears even if nothing appears wrong with them.
You'll end up with a bunch of new clips, gears, and pinions anyway, so might as well actively use them instead of looking at them in a spares box.

-----------------------

Colored props and gears give the AR Drone a more substantial appearance to on-lookers. They also give a much better close up visual queue as to the drones proximity to objects (your own body especially).

-----------------------

My effort-time is limited to the drone antenna and a new GPS Mission/Payload device.

It would be interesting to know if third party props, gears, and shafts increase range and/or flight time.
How would one measure and quantify that ?
DroneMod.com --- Worlds first two-drone system: Repeater-Helper and Camera-Worker drones ! --- http://www.REDbirdRF.com

arcangelraider
Just flips over
Posts: 84
Joined: 20 May 2013, 00:10
Drone Type: AR.Drone 2
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: AR Drone Ultraflight High Performance Propellers review

Post by arcangelraider » 21 Sep 2013, 22:59

GO KYLE GO!

AND FOR THE REST OF YOU: "YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!!"


Direct link: http://www.youtube.com/v/5j2F4VcBmeo
Last edited by arcangelraider on 21 Sep 2013, 23:52, edited 1 time in total.
Always innovating

BoggsD
Up and hovering
Posts: 125
Joined: 28 Sep 2012, 23:32
Drone Type: AR.Drone 2
Location: CA
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: AR Drone Ultraflight High Performance Propellers review

Post by BoggsD » 21 Sep 2013, 23:09

The issue I have with the video is the testing method. A paper cup taped to a drone and fishing weights isn't exactly scientific, but more importantly, if the props are not straightened and balanced correctly the results won't be accurate. We all know that proper balancing affects performance. If the video can not eliminate the other variables, then it's not a fair review and the video should be removed from youtube. That's my 2 cents.

pawelsky
Serious flight time
Posts: 1272
Joined: 02 Aug 2012, 22:01
Drone Type: Bebop
Location: Poland
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: AR Drone Ultraflight High Performance Propellers review

Post by pawelsky » 21 Sep 2013, 23:47

Kyle Tarpley wrote:When Parrot switched to the 6-pin main board recently, screwing over all the RC guys, I sent Miru one of the new MB's for free so him and his guys can come out with a new RC mod that's compatible with the new boards.
That's true Kyle was very helpful when we needed to verify the new pinout for the RC Mod (and that will also be useful for other mods that use the serial port)

As to the video itself the test method is explained, if you don't agree with it you can always comment on YT or post a video that shows different result.

User avatar
DBS
I've been hit!!
Posts: 2764
Joined: 15 May 2012, 16:27
Drone Type: DISCO
Location: Treasure Coast, Florida
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: AR Drone Ultraflight High Performance Propellers review

Post by DBS » 22 Sep 2013, 00:16

BoggsD wrote:The issue I have with the video is the testing method. A paper cup taped to a drone and fishing weights isn't exactly scientific, but more importantly, if the props are not straightened and balanced correctly the results won't be accurate. We all know that proper balancing affects performance. If the video can not eliminate the other variables, then it's not a fair review and the video should be removed from youtube. That's my 2 cents.
That's the point I was getting at but got sidetracked by my pissed-offed-ness...

I guess I should point out what I gained from my UF prop flights...

They fly just like they should... battery life is the same as stock props... I didn't do any weight testing but I kind of thought that was irrelevant... the drone fly's like a pig over 480grams anyway so... yeah

Increased performance is a no-go because firmware regulates drone climb rates and speeds etc... so that's out

Jello isn't an issue... perfectly balanced props are gonna eliminate vibration no matter who they're made by so that's another non issue... I noticed the UF props don't flex as much so maybe less jello going thru mid range speeds? I dunno... I fly early in the day and I don't have jello issues with that type of low light anyway.

And nothing was mentioned about the main selling point... how tough these buggers are... that and the chance for future color options has me on board if everything else is an equal in normal flight trim... I ain't going out and flying at 600grams anyway.

I've been going back and forth with Kyle in the PM's and it's been constructive...

He wasn't deliberately trying to badmouth anybody and I feel his video results are skewed... simple as that

I will buy these props in a few different colors when they get there... neon green and neon blue I hope...

I don't stand to gain anything here ... I don't have a drone store... I'm not making or selling props... I don't have a monetized youtube channel or blog... so I hope my views are taken for what they are and not like I have an agenda... when I see something I feel is completely unfair happening because of what I feel are flawed tests or methods, I jump all over it and piss and moan and it works... it makes people talk and test and argue and try again and I hope more accurate results come from crap like that... and I'm old... and bitchy... whatever :ugeek:
WORLD RECORD Phantom 4 flight CLICK HERE
WORLD RECORD Matrice 600 flight CLICK HERE

Gimpdiggity
Just flips over
Posts: 89
Joined: 19 Aug 2013, 09:07
Drone Type: AR.Drone 2
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: AR Drone Ultraflight High Performance Propellers review

Post by Gimpdiggity » 22 Sep 2013, 00:20

BoggsD wrote:The issue I have with the video is the testing method. A paper cup taped to a drone and fishing weights isn't exactly scientific, but more importantly, if the props are not straightened and balanced correctly the results won't be accurate. We all know that proper balancing affects performance. If the video can not eliminate the other variables, then it's not a fair review and the video should be removed from youtube. That's my 2 cents.

It may not be scientific, but as long as it's consistent with both sets of props, the results are accurate.

For instance, if I have a stick of a random length, I can use it to determine if one item is longer than another. It doesn't matter how scientifically accurate the measure of the stick is...if one object is three sticks long, and another is only two sticks long, I can reliably say that one object is longer than the other.

The argument that he's not balancing the props or straightening them correctly in this case doesn't hold much water, as it would stand to reason that his stock props aren't balanced or straightened correctly, either, meaning that both sets of props would have the same margin of error.

User avatar
bhupinho
Up and hovering
Posts: 124
Joined: 10 Jun 2013, 00:25
Drone Type: AR.Drone 2
Location: London, UK
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: AR Drone Ultraflight High Performance Propellers review

Post by bhupinho » 22 Sep 2013, 00:22

I didn't see the props labeled as proto types on the uf website either.

Had I purchased those blades and then watched the video I can assure you I would not be a happy customer, i've been stung a few times on online purchases, the last being new shafts that don't actually fit my hi perf bearings which is why I now buy from preferred suppliers like kyle and idrone because I get to see the kit in use rather then text telling me how great the product is only to find when purchased that its crap.

A note to all producers and suppliers...

As a consumer I rely on accurate info before purchasing, anything less is not acceptable because I won't use suppliers who sell me crap gear because honestly you might as well have robbed me and I don't abide thieves. In these financially tough times if you think misleading customers is OK go ahead I'd be interested to see if you get repeat custom.

User avatar
DBS
I've been hit!!
Posts: 2764
Joined: 15 May 2012, 16:27
Drone Type: DISCO
Location: Treasure Coast, Florida
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: AR Drone Ultraflight High Performance Propellers review

Post by DBS » 22 Sep 2013, 00:40

Gimpdiggity wrote:It may not be scientific, but as long as it's consistent with both sets of props, the results are accurate.

Wrong... he says he had to straighten them and his straightening method ruins the blade's pitch affecting lift... if you watch his prop straitening video he pays no particular attention to where his clips clamp the prop and his text just describes clamping "at the tips"... that doesn't give any consistency... he could have been flying with three good stock props and only one good UF prop... and you can see in the video that at least one UF props tracking was way off.

His testing may have been scientific... but the results weren't accurate

AND they didn't matter... the drone won't fly worth a crap at those weights and if you lighten it to stock weight they both perform equally well...

Shouldn't they be tested in normal flight comditions... climb rate ... speed ... yaw... turns ... stops etc...

It's like loading your volkswagen with bowling balls untill the tires pop and saying "these tires suck because they couldn't hold 600 bowling balls" ... :roll: ... who does that?... is that relevant?... did Boggs claim these props would lift more weight on a drone that can't lift any friggin weight anyway?
WORLD RECORD Phantom 4 flight CLICK HERE
WORLD RECORD Matrice 600 flight CLICK HERE

Schlauncha
Charged up again
Posts: 1102
Joined: 21 Jun 2011, 03:50
Drone Type: AR.Drone 2
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: AR Drone Ultraflight High Performance Propellers review

Post by Schlauncha » 22 Sep 2013, 00:50

EDIT: Yeah I dunno, maybe this is too off topic. I debated just deleting this, but well, I spent the effort to type it, so I'll post this for if anyone does want to read it, otherwise just ignore it if it is in the way.

(post)

Over the last few months, we've seen some rough receptions on the forum here for upgrades brought to the market, some for products that legitimately were bad products, others where good products were met with intense scrutiny. This sort of thing is why I never got around to finishing up that PWM output mod as an "upgrade kit" for sale, and why I probably won't. The limited money I could ever make off those, compared to the drain of dealing with customers and having everything I write on this forum now be viewed as the word of somebody with money to make off these discussions... it's just not worth it. I have a pretty good day job. I got the mod working (NO... I mean, I laid out the groundwork of how the mod needed to work, and PAWELSKY was the one who wrote the program to decode the AR Drone's motor controller data stream) and then I tried to document it for people to do on their own, and this allows me to hide behind the banner of "try at your own risk - your results may vary".

Trying to establish a point to what I'm rambling here, it's that it seems like it'd be real tough trying to bring products to market here, real tough dealing with participating in a forum when people start wondering how much your business interests are the motives behind what you're saying, and that it also can be really tough when you see something one person developed, being touted in another location with what seems like insufficient references and credit to the originators of these things. My initial reaction looking at a few different AR Drone focused YouTube channels is "Hey, this guy's acting like HE came up with these mods... come on, he just found them on here and is reposting them!". I would hate to see the PWM output mod get real famous somewhere and then not have anyone mention its development was from here on the forum.

User avatar
bhupinho
Up and hovering
Posts: 124
Joined: 10 Jun 2013, 00:25
Drone Type: AR.Drone 2
Location: London, UK
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: AR Drone Ultraflight High Performance Propellers review

Post by bhupinho » 22 Sep 2013, 01:08

As a consumer I don't really care who makes the product but I do care about who I purchase from and the info provided.

eg. I don't care who created the iPhone I just care about who I'm buying it from and whether they told me the truth about the iPhone.

if the product isn't ready don't sell it on the open market.

User avatar
DBS
I've been hit!!
Posts: 2764
Joined: 15 May 2012, 16:27
Drone Type: DISCO
Location: Treasure Coast, Florida
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: AR Drone Ultraflight High Performance Propellers review

Post by DBS » 22 Sep 2013, 01:12

It is ready... it just won't fly with 600 bowling balls
WORLD RECORD Phantom 4 flight CLICK HERE
WORLD RECORD Matrice 600 flight CLICK HERE

User avatar
bhupinho
Up and hovering
Posts: 124
Joined: 10 Jun 2013, 00:25
Drone Type: AR.Drone 2
Location: London, UK
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: AR Drone Ultraflight High Performance Propellers review

Post by bhupinho » 22 Sep 2013, 01:21

How well will they cope with an additional 51 grams (the flight recorder) not sure how many bowling bowls that would be though lol

User avatar
bhupinho
Up and hovering
Posts: 124
Joined: 10 Jun 2013, 00:25
Drone Type: AR.Drone 2
Location: London, UK
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: AR Drone Ultraflight High Performance Propellers review

Post by bhupinho » 22 Sep 2013, 01:24

it was stated in the earlier posts that these were specifically prototypes for testing, but it doesn't say that on the uf website so now I'm more then a little confused???

User avatar
DBS
I've been hit!!
Posts: 2764
Joined: 15 May 2012, 16:27
Drone Type: DISCO
Location: Treasure Coast, Florida
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: AR Drone Ultraflight High Performance Propellers review

Post by DBS » 22 Sep 2013, 01:47

I'm not sure about that part... this may be due to us (the testers)

The props have gone through a few mouldings with some problems... one run the shaft holes were too tight and impossible to get off after installing... stuff like that

These were the ones that worked out nicely... they fit really well... they fly really well... and yes they handle 50grams extra (but my drone has hull stickers peeled so that's +50 -19)... half of mine didn't need to be balanced and my first tests without straightening flew fine too... but I'm a stickler for straightening and pitch so I always do that... can't help it. Are there any props out there in this price range that don't need to be balanced and tweaked after shipping? Serious question... I don't fly a lot of different devices... and injection moulding at this level is going to produce varying results I would imagine...

The rest of the website description is up to Boggs but he may have been falling in line with what we we're reporting from the field and didn't think anything needed to be altered as each production run gets better and better... (I'm sorta speculating on that, I don't wanna put words in his mouth)
WORLD RECORD Phantom 4 flight CLICK HERE
WORLD RECORD Matrice 600 flight CLICK HERE

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests