1. Executive Summary
In July, Project Quiver transitioned from design and preparation into full-scale assembly and active testing of PT3 prototypes. Two aircraft were successfully built in parallel, one in the United States and one in Germany. It demonstrates that the aircraft can be built using the same procedure anywhere in the world, confirming its open-source nature and ensuring consistent results regardless of location.
Both prototypes underwent multiple successful flights during the month, confirming the structural integrity, avionics integration, and subsystem reliability. Incremental tuning improved handling characteristics, resulting in stable operation in automated mission mode, including waypoint navigation.
Feedback gathered during the build process identified several issues, some of which have already been resolved, with the remaining items currently under review.
2. Project Progress
Team Formation
The Project Quiver team includes the following members:
| Member | Experience Level | Team | Weekly Commitment (hrs) | Areas of Expertise / Championed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 21stCenturyAlex | Level 3 | Core | 15 | Avionics |
| alperenag | Level 4 | Core | 35 | Project Lead |
| Dow Fisher KBM | Level 3 | Core | 15 | FEA, Systems Engineering |
| errrks.eth | Level 4 | Core | 35 | Electrical Design, Harnessing |
| Julius | Level 4 | Core | 35 | PCB Layout, Power Storage, Prototyping, Propulsion System, Electrical Communication |
| kjcerveny | Level 3 | Contributor | 5 | Electrical design, System testing, Product development |
| ZeynepB | Level 4 | Core | 35 | Flight Mechanics, Flight Test |
PT1.5:
Several test flights were conducted at the beginning of the US meetup. Two crashes occurred during this period.
Incident 1 happened while operating with AGL tracking active over downhill terrain. The aircraft failed to maintain the set height above ground level and made a hard landing. Contributing factors included pilot error and a to-be-addressed issue with the AGL tracking system.
Incident 2 resulted from overheating due to a loose bolt on the power distribution board, resulting in a free fall from around 2 meters during landing. The PDB was broken completely.
Since building another PDB would take too much time and the PT3 build was in progress, PT1.5 was decommissioned.
PT2:
A single flight test was conducted in July. PT2 was utilized as a test platform for the PT3 PCBs, successfully verifying their designs.
PT3:
PT3 program advanced significantly, with two aircraft built in parallel, one in the US and one in Germany, using standardized assembly procedures. Both builds were completed successfully, demonstrating that the design can be replicated consistently in different locations. Initial flight tests with both aircraft were successful. Multiple flight tests were conducted to better tune the flight controller. Automated missions were successfully executed, with stable performance and reliable aircraft behavior. A demonstration flight was conducted with a preliminary floodlight attachment, proving the capabilities of the aircraft further.
3. Information Notes
PT3 Flight Test Plan
Defined a modular test plan for PT3 covering stability, control tuning, payload effects, automated missions, failsafes, and Raspberry Pi communications. Provides a structured process for validating new features and comparing results with earlier prototypes.
Link
PT3 Startup Issue Resolution
Identified and resolved a startup power issue caused by limited inrush current in the Battery PCB’s pre-charge circuit. Adjusting resistor values increased current during startup, preventing flight controller resets.
Link
4. Goals for Next Month
- Continue flight testing of both PT3 aircraft and expand mission profiles.
- Perform flight tests and utilize logged data for control tuning and performance optimization.
- Create an incentivization program for decentralized test campaign.
- Revise transport case studies for PT3.
- Revise the overall aircraft design based on user feedback from the builds.
- Revise the structural design for weight reduction and ease of manufacturing.
5. Budget & Resource Allocation
-
Project Expenses:
Reimbursements were submitted and approved for hardware purchases and software fees. In total, $5659.55 is spent on the reimbursements this month. Details can be found here.- Julius was reimbursed for the purchase of several parts for PT3 prototype build, some of which were used to assemble an additional PCB set that was later shipped to the US.
- Cost: $2584.29
- Erick was reimbursed for flight tickets and meetup expenses for the US build meetup.
- Cost: $1077.7
- Thomas was reimbursed for the flight tickets and purchase of Fusion 360 tokens, which is used for CAD modelling.
- Cost: $1388.64
- Alperen was reimbursed for flight tickets for the US build meetup.
- Cost: $608.92
- Julius was reimbursed for the purchase of several parts for PT3 prototype build, some of which were used to assemble an additional PCB set that was later shipped to the US.
-
Team Members Compensation
The project team was compensated for $39,283.2 this month. The breakdown can be found here. -
Total
The total expense of Project Quiver in July is $44,942.75, which is below the monthly maximum spending cap. In addition, the team members received 21120 $ARROW in total as part of their compensations. -
Additional Note
LlamaPay has been used within Arrow for two years to manage team payments. During budget reviews, a discrepancy was observed between expected and actual disbursements. Investigation confirmed that LlamaPay fixes a month at 30 days when calculating per-second rates. This means 31-day months result in ~3.3% higher payouts, while February results in lower payouts. The contract does not adjust automatically to the calendar. This explains the mismatch between the expected and actual stream amounts.