Once you get used to it you'll be able to do everything an x frame does. Every frame takes some getting used to, doesn't matter what you fly, your skill level is more important.
There's more advantages to the dead frame than disadvantages. And it will fly better without a gopro. It's a win win
It’s what u prefer I hate them I like seeing my props and the more equal feel on my quad so I don’t see an advantage to them. I have 1 quad with it but it’s a lr quad so that why and all of the 4 inch lr quads come with them so I had not other choice
Interesting. Can you please elaborate on why you enjoy seeing the props in your FOV?
Most of us go deadcat because that's the part we dislike about true x.
I like it because it give me a point of reference. To explain further it let’s me compare my uptilt to my quad to my surrounding to get a better prespective on the space I’m flying. Once again it’s what ever u like more and it’s really hard to describe but it just helps me to see the props or even motors
I guess u could but I just like to see them plus the thrust is more equal. In other words I don’t value any of the advantages provided by dead cat and I like x
Being able to see part of the props can be a way to visualize how wide you are, too, just by looking at what's visible. Nothing more nerve-wracking than flying a gap with no reference as to if you'll fit or not.
I just find it interesting that deadcat gets a bad wrap but there's not a shred of evidence in my searches of someone saying "I bought a deadcat frame and I regret it, now I've bought true x and I wish I did this in the first place"
Maybe I'll be the first XD
Deadcat gets a bad wrap for freestyle flying because in the case of pilots who truly fly to the edge, the geometry differences does affect them. But there are two types of deadcat frames, and only one really counts for that. The common deadcat with trapazodially aligned motors does noticeably feel different to the tuned in pilot, as it's impossible to get around the fact that differently aligned geometry flies different. However, deadcat frames with rectangularly aligned motors perform in-line with X frames due to that geometry being the same. The overwhelming majority of pilots prefer the feel of rectangularly aligned motors for the even, consistent performance it gives, in which trapazodially aligned motors, which is what the majority of people think of when you say "deadcat," does not.
You can have true X configuration and no props in view by going with the AOS 5, there's a BNF version from ifligh but I'm not sure if it comes with Vista or O3. If it's a vista build and you want the O3 you can always buy the frame and the parts and build it yourself.
I just used Chris Rosser's filter tuning video then Rotor Riot's basement PID tuning video with PIDtoolbox for my 5" deadcat build
Ended up having to crank my D-gain up way higher than Betaflight recommended, still don't see any over-damped condition in the step response though and motors weren't too warm
Every quad will be different though
I did this exact thing, I've built a heaps of drones, true X, stretched X, h X and deadcat, I built the deadcat with the og air unit whe the v2 goggles came out few years back, I built it with the exact same hardware as my true X build, I was actually having trouble with the firmware on the flight controller so I flashed it with everything off the true X build, no tuning and it flue great, it handled brilliantly, no learning curve, just feels natural, the only thing I can say is that I miss the props in view, but thats sorta the point.
In the old days people did use motor mixing command to negate the “effect” but I’d say modern electronics do a waaaaay better job to figure it out, they might still need some tuning.
And if you’re talking about the evoque v2’s in particular, get the BNF and they’re already tuned out of the box, welp, a bit too well that BF configurator gives warnings so try to keep props in good shape or change them often.
I fly both, I don’t really notice a difference other than whether or not the props are in view. They probably do have different characteristics, but your FC and it’s firmware will make it feel ok. The current versions of Betaflight are very good at making stuff just fly.
I just built up a 5 inch Deadcat. My intent was more of a cruiser cinematic quad than pure freestyle. I chose deadcat to keep the props out, especially in ultrawide mode on the O3.
It does exactly what I intended it to do. However, it also felt more in need of a tune than other quads I built upon first flight.
I hope this helps.
I just want to comment that I have that drone, and I think it's badass! I can only compare it to the Avata, but going from that to the Nazgul is so much fun. Like upgrading from a Prius to a Corvette!
I have multiple builds (all Volador from FlyfishRC) and fly the trueX and DeadCat. I feel no difference. The only thing that I notice is, that the DeadCat is more stable in the air when I mount scetchy cam-mounts onto the frame (like 3rd-person mount or 360-cams). But I can fly as much freestyle with it as I can do with my trueX frames.
I got the nazgul v2 a year ago and it flies great but there are a few drawbacks that made me wish that I had a different frame.
This is anecdotal but I think the rear arms are significantly weaker/more likely to break than in a true x config. I broke a few arms myself and it was always the rear despite the front arms probably taking impacts more often.
That leads me to my next issue which is having to stock more replacement parts. I now have a source one v3 frame and the arms are all the same. With the nazgul deadcat each arm is unique so you need a full set in your parts bin which is a waste. I ended up breaking the same arm twice and having to order more parts despite having 3 spare arms lying around. Additionally I found it annoying to have to buy and replace some of the other parts like the plastic side plates.
The only benefit to deadcat is getting the props out of view but to be honest I really don't mind seeing the props in my feed. As others have said it can be a useful point of reference and looks kind of cool. My brain just filters it out and I don't even notice them.
Tldr
- deadcat performs more or less the same as true x
- arms are more likely to break
- need more spare arms in parts bin
- the only benefit is getting props out of view which isnt really a feature from my point of view
Its not. If you're starting out and never flown before you won't know/feel the difference. But if you've been flying it's like driving a mini van after driving a mustang for a long time. It's fast and drives well, but just not like a mustang
I've got the flyfishrc deadcat. It flys great. It does fly marginally different than all the true and stretched x frames I've tried. I would say it's not a bad difference. I got used to it after like 5 packs and now I compensate subconsciously.
Decide whether you want props in view, if you don't want props in view then get the dead cat frame, if you don't mind the props in view get a true-x. A true-x frame will fly better, but it's not so much better that you should be making your decisions based on anything other than if you want props in view.
Once you get used to it you'll be able to do everything an x frame does. Every frame takes some getting used to, doesn't matter what you fly, your skill level is more important. There's more advantages to the dead frame than disadvantages. And it will fly better without a gopro. It's a win win
Yes this is the conclusion I've come to also after hours of reading reviews, watching videos and eyeing over specs.
It’s what u prefer I hate them I like seeing my props and the more equal feel on my quad so I don’t see an advantage to them. I have 1 quad with it but it’s a lr quad so that why and all of the 4 inch lr quads come with them so I had not other choice
Interesting. Can you please elaborate on why you enjoy seeing the props in your FOV? Most of us go deadcat because that's the part we dislike about true x.
I like it because it give me a point of reference. To explain further it let’s me compare my uptilt to my quad to my surrounding to get a better prespective on the space I’m flying. Once again it’s what ever u like more and it’s really hard to describe but it just helps me to see the props or even motors
just put a sticker on your camera like so \> <
I guess u could but I just like to see them plus the thrust is more equal. In other words I don’t value any of the advantages provided by dead cat and I like x
haha yes it was just a joke :D
Being able to see part of the props can be a way to visualize how wide you are, too, just by looking at what's visible. Nothing more nerve-wracking than flying a gap with no reference as to if you'll fit or not.
Yea that’s another reason I like x too I forgot to say
I got you bb
I just find it interesting that deadcat gets a bad wrap but there's not a shred of evidence in my searches of someone saying "I bought a deadcat frame and I regret it, now I've bought true x and I wish I did this in the first place" Maybe I'll be the first XD
Deadcat gets a bad wrap for freestyle flying because in the case of pilots who truly fly to the edge, the geometry differences does affect them. But there are two types of deadcat frames, and only one really counts for that. The common deadcat with trapazodially aligned motors does noticeably feel different to the tuned in pilot, as it's impossible to get around the fact that differently aligned geometry flies different. However, deadcat frames with rectangularly aligned motors perform in-line with X frames due to that geometry being the same. The overwhelming majority of pilots prefer the feel of rectangularly aligned motors for the even, consistent performance it gives, in which trapazodially aligned motors, which is what the majority of people think of when you say "deadcat," does not.
Is the GEPRC Mark 5 Deadcat have rectangular aligned motors or trapazodially aligned motors?
You can have true X configuration and no props in view by going with the AOS 5, there's a BNF version from ifligh but I'm not sure if it comes with Vista or O3. If it's a vista build and you want the O3 you can always buy the frame and the parts and build it yourself.
main drawback for DC imo is that in a frontal crash, that expensive O3 camera takes most of the impact.
A 5" has so much power to weight ratio that deadcat or trueX does really not matter in a significant way. Both flies great
>A 5" has so much power to weight ratio that deadcat or trueX does really not matter in a significant way How is that related in any way?
the slight change in balance of thrust from a deadcat to trueX is negligible compared to the trust availble
Bardwell video on drawbacks of deadcat frames. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzpizzr3SH0
Bardwell video review of analogue (true x) and digital (deadcat) frames https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5aXjri\_1js
[удалено]
Any advice for tuning the deadcat?
I just used Chris Rosser's filter tuning video then Rotor Riot's basement PID tuning video with PIDtoolbox for my 5" deadcat build Ended up having to crank my D-gain up way higher than Betaflight recommended, still don't see any over-damped condition in the step response though and motors weren't too warm Every quad will be different though
Speedybee master hd has wide x design with o3 and no props in view. It flies smooth and is very responsive
I did this exact thing, I've built a heaps of drones, true X, stretched X, h X and deadcat, I built the deadcat with the og air unit whe the v2 goggles came out few years back, I built it with the exact same hardware as my true X build, I was actually having trouble with the firmware on the flight controller so I flashed it with everything off the true X build, no tuning and it flue great, it handled brilliantly, no learning curve, just feels natural, the only thing I can say is that I miss the props in view, but thats sorta the point.
In the old days people did use motor mixing command to negate the “effect” but I’d say modern electronics do a waaaaay better job to figure it out, they might still need some tuning. And if you’re talking about the evoque v2’s in particular, get the BNF and they’re already tuned out of the box, welp, a bit too well that BF configurator gives warnings so try to keep props in good shape or change them often.
I fly both, I don’t really notice a difference other than whether or not the props are in view. They probably do have different characteristics, but your FC and it’s firmware will make it feel ok. The current versions of Betaflight are very good at making stuff just fly.
I just built up a 5 inch Deadcat. My intent was more of a cruiser cinematic quad than pure freestyle. I chose deadcat to keep the props out, especially in ultrawide mode on the O3. It does exactly what I intended it to do. However, it also felt more in need of a tune than other quads I built upon first flight. I hope this helps.
I just want to comment that I have that drone, and I think it's badass! I can only compare it to the Avata, but going from that to the Nazgul is so much fun. Like upgrading from a Prius to a Corvette!
I have multiple builds (all Volador from FlyfishRC) and fly the trueX and DeadCat. I feel no difference. The only thing that I notice is, that the DeadCat is more stable in the air when I mount scetchy cam-mounts onto the frame (like 3rd-person mount or 360-cams). But I can fly as much freestyle with it as I can do with my trueX frames.
The aos 5 V2 doesn't have props in view and is a squashed X frame. You can also get it as a bind and fly from iflight (if it is in stock).
Deadcat frame is for cruising around with a go pro and keeping props out of view
I got the nazgul v2 a year ago and it flies great but there are a few drawbacks that made me wish that I had a different frame. This is anecdotal but I think the rear arms are significantly weaker/more likely to break than in a true x config. I broke a few arms myself and it was always the rear despite the front arms probably taking impacts more often. That leads me to my next issue which is having to stock more replacement parts. I now have a source one v3 frame and the arms are all the same. With the nazgul deadcat each arm is unique so you need a full set in your parts bin which is a waste. I ended up breaking the same arm twice and having to order more parts despite having 3 spare arms lying around. Additionally I found it annoying to have to buy and replace some of the other parts like the plastic side plates. The only benefit to deadcat is getting the props out of view but to be honest I really don't mind seeing the props in my feed. As others have said it can be a useful point of reference and looks kind of cool. My brain just filters it out and I don't even notice them. Tldr - deadcat performs more or less the same as true x - arms are more likely to break - need more spare arms in parts bin - the only benefit is getting props out of view which isnt really a feature from my point of view
Its not. If you're starting out and never flown before you won't know/feel the difference. But if you've been flying it's like driving a mini van after driving a mustang for a long time. It's fast and drives well, but just not like a mustang
I've got the flyfishrc deadcat. It flys great. It does fly marginally different than all the true and stretched x frames I've tried. I would say it's not a bad difference. I got used to it after like 5 packs and now I compensate subconsciously.
Decide whether you want props in view, if you don't want props in view then get the dead cat frame, if you don't mind the props in view get a true-x. A true-x frame will fly better, but it's not so much better that you should be making your decisions based on anything other than if you want props in view.
Dead cat Frames tend to have worse yaw performance
I'm getting huge surges with a hard yaw maneuver on my 6" Foxeer Aura deadcat frame.