3
$\begingroup$

I have just edited the quadrotor tag, and added suggested text for both the excerpt and full tag wiki, which were lacking. However, I then noticed that there was also a quadcoptor tag (which I must say, already has a very informative description).

Are they not, essentially, one and the same thing? If there is a significant difference, then they should be edited to specify when to use each one. Otherwise, should they not be merged?

Maybe I have actually suggested the incorrect text, and actually made them sound like the same thing, in which case I apologise. If I have not, then maybe a rethink is required, with respect to these two synonymous tags.

Out of interest, at the time of writing, quadrotor is tagged 67 times, and quadcopter 228 times.

| |
$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I'm happy to merge these tags if no-one can come up with a compelling reason to keep them separate. $\endgroup$ – Mark Booth♦ Mar 15 '16 at 1:12
1
$\begingroup$

A quick semantic answer from my research group wiki, we focus on aerial manipulation.

In our group we warmly encourage the use the multi-rotor family of words (quadrotor, hexarotor, octorotor) instead of multi-copter one (quadcopter, hexacotper, octocopter) for the following reasons:

  1. etymologically helico+pter = helikos (twisted) + pteron (wing), so, to be etymologically correct, one should actually say quadpter, hexapter, octopter, but those words are not used
  2. copter is a short name for helicopter, so multi-copter could, in principle, mean a system with multiple helicopters, quadcopter with four helicopters and so on.. but also in this case is not used

This being said, I agree that the two tags should be merged in one, and to enforce quadrotor

| |
$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .