OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Drones Methodology v2.0
Drones Methodology v2.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontumo Drones Methodology v2.0: technical specifications plus grades from 1,110 independent expert reviews and 2,622 video reviews, with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Drones Methodology v2.0

BETAFPV Aquila16 Review | 97 Data compared

Avg. price:~£250Max flight time:8 minVideo resolution:N/AMax transmission distance:0.2 km

BETAFPV Aquila16 Review: Compare 97 technical specifications and 15 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Drones category and whether it is worth buying.

5.3

Overall score

Score
5.3/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the drone's quality, based on technical analyses and grades from independent expert reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best drones on the market.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 82% of models
Score components

75%

4.8

Technical Score

25%

7.0

Review score ( 1 · 14)

Based on 1 expert review and 14 video reviews
Experts count the full 25% of the overall score, because this model has at least 3 full tests. The technical score makes up the other 75%. A video review counts half as much as a written full test.
â–¼Worse than 82% of drones
4.8

Technical Score

Technical score
4.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the drone's technical performance, covering key areas such as flight performance, camera quality, transmission, safety features, battery life, and design.
When it matters
When you want to compare drones based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 88% of models
Score components

26%

3.7

Flight

24%

4.9

Camera

20%

4.3

Safety

16%

5.6

Connectivity

14%

6.3

Battery & Design

â–¼Worse than 88% of drones
7.0

Review score

Review score
7.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves.
Weighting: Big test sites count more, first looks half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Share: The review score is 25% of the overall score with 3+ full tests, less with fewer.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 63% of models
Grades by review (15)
1 reviews: 0 with a printed score, 1 estimated from the review. 14 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Share in this model’s overall score: 25%.
Video reviews 10

6.7%

8.0

Rimzler

6.7%

8.0

Toronto FPV

6.7%

8.0

CAPTAIN DRONE

6.7%

7.0

Create and Kaptivate

6.7%

7.0

954 Films

6.7%

7.0

Jonny Trego

6.7%

7.0

TRONCAT FPV

6.7%

6.0

X-WING FPV & RC

6.7%

6.0

The Drone Geek

3.3%

5.0

FLyzViper

estimated from the review
Shop star ratings are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 63% of drones
  • betafpv-aquila16-fpv-kit
  • betafpv-aquila16-fpv-kit
  • betafpv-aquila16-fpv-kit
  • betafpv-aquila16-fpv-kit
  • betafpv-aquila16-fpv-kit
  • betafpv-aquila16-fpv-kit
  • betafpv-aquila16-fpv-kit
  • betafpv-aquila16-fpv-kit
  • betafpv-aquila16-fpv-kit
betafpv-aquila16-fpv-kit
betafpv-aquila16-fpv-kit
betafpv-aquila16-fpv-kit
betafpv-aquila16-fpv-kit
betafpv-aquila16-fpv-kit
betafpv-aquila16-fpv-kit
betafpv-aquila16-fpv-kit
betafpv-aquila16-fpv-kit
betafpv-aquila16-fpv-kit

Best prices

*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.

Best rankings

Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of drone BETAFPV Aquila16

Technical Score
Technical score
4.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the drone's technical performance, covering key areas such as flight performance, camera quality, transmission, safety features, battery life, and design.
When it matters
When you want to compare drones based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 88% of models
Score components:

26%

3.7

Flight

24%

4.9

Camera

20%

4.3

Safety

16%

5.6

Connectivity

14%

6.3

Battery & Design

4.8
Review score
Review score
7.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves.
Weighting: Big test sites count more, first looks half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Share: The review score is 25% of the overall score with 3+ full tests, less with fewer.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 63% of models
Grades by review (15)
1 reviews: 0 with a printed score, 1 estimated from the review. 14 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Share in this model’s overall score: 25%.
Video reviews 10

6.7%

8.0

Rimzler

6.7%

8.0

Toronto FPV

6.7%

8.0

CAPTAIN DRONE

6.7%

7.0

Create and Kaptivate

6.7%

7.0

954 Films

6.7%

7.0

Jonny Trego

6.7%

7.0

TRONCAT FPV

6.7%

6.0

X-WING FPV & RC

6.7%

6.0

The Drone Geek

3.3%

5.0

FLyzViper

estimated from the review
Shop star ratings are not part of this score.
7.0
Popularity
Popularity
1.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the drone.
When it matters
When you prefer to choose a drone reviewed and selected by many other buyers.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Popularity:
BETAFPV Aquila16 has a popularity score of 1 point, which is lower than that of 74.3% of products in this category.
1.0
Ratio quality/price
Value for money
6.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the drone's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a drone with a good balance between flight quality, camera features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
Score components:

60%

5.3

Overall score

40%

9.2

Price

6.5
Max flight time
8 min
Max flight time
8 min
â–¼ Worse than 89% of models
Market range: <8 min – >40 min
This drone has a max flight time of 8 min, shorter than 88.5% of drones and equal to 2.5% of drones.
Max flight distance
0.2 km
Max flight distance
0.2 km
â–¼ Worse than 72% of models
Market range: <0.05 km – >24 km
This drone has a max flight distance of 0.2 km, shorter-range than 72.4% of drones and equal to 1.1% of drones.
Max flight speed
5 m/s
Max flight speed
5 m/s
â–¼ Worse than 78% of models
Market range: <4 m/s – >21 m/s
This drone has a max flight speed of 5 m/s, slower than 77.9% of drones and equal to 10.1% of drones.
Max wind resistance
?
Max service ceiling (ASL)
?
Show more
Video resolution
N/A
4K camera
no
4K camera
no
â–¼ Worse than 55% of models
This drone does not support 4K video. 54.6% of drones support 4K video.
Sensor size
?
Main camera megapixels
?
Max movie bitrate
?
Show more
Obstacle detection
no
Obstacle detection
no
â–¼ Worse than 31% of models
This drone does not support obstacle detection. 31% of drones support obstacle detection.
Return to Home (RTH)
no
Return to Home (RTH)
no
â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
This drone does not support Return-to-Home (RTH). 67.5% of drones support Return-to-Home (RTH).
GPS
no
GPS
no
â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
This drone does not support GPS. 65.2% of drones support GPS.
GNSS systems supported
none
GNSS systems supported
none
â–¼ Worse than 66% of models
This drone supports none GNSS systems, which are less comprehensive than those of 65.8% and the same as those of 34.2%.
Obstacle sensing directions
N/A
Show more
Max transmission distance
0.2 km
Max transmission distance
0.2 km
â–¼ Worse than 69% of models
Market range: <0.05 km – >15 km
This drone has a max transmission distance of 0.2 km, shorter-range than 69.4% of drones and equal to 1% of drones.
Transmission latency
?
Video transmission system
Analog
Video transmission system
Analog
â–¼ Worse than 92% of models
This drone uses Analog for video transmission, which is less advanced than the system used by 92.3% and the same as that used by 3.1%.
Live view quality
?
Remote control
yes
Remote control
yes
â–² Better than 5% of models
This drone has a handheld remote controller. 5% of drones offer this.
Show more
Battery capacity
1,100 mAh
Battery capacity
1,100 mAh
â–¼ Worse than 77% of models
Market range: <550 mAh – >5k mAh
This drone has a battery capacity of 1,100 mAh, smaller than 76.7% of drones and equal to 1% of drones.
Battery energy
8.36 Wh
Battery energy
8.36 Wh
â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
Market range: <3.7 Wh – >77 Wh
This drone has battery energy of 8.36 Wh, lower than 65.3% of drones and equal to 0.6% of drones.
Charging time
30 min
Charging time
30 min
★ Better than 98% of models
Market range: <55 min – >180 min
This drone charges in 30 min, faster than 98.1% of drones and equal to 1.9% of drones.
Weight
?
Removable battery
yes
Removable battery
yes
â–² Better than 1% of models
This drone has a removable battery. 0.5% of drones have a removable battery.
Show more

BETAFPV Aquila16 vs the average drone

246810TotalFlightCameraSafetyConnectivityBattery & Design
  • 60 min shorter charging time
    Charging time
    30 min
    ★ Better than 98% of models
    Market range: <55 min – >180 min
    This drone charges faster than the average drone (30 min vs 90 min). The average drone charges in 90 min.
    30 min vs 90 min
  • Includes propeller guards
    Propeller guards
    yes
    â–² Better than 67% of models
    This drone has propeller guards, while the average drone does not. 33.3% of drones offer them.
  • 80 ° wider field of view
    Field of view
    170 °
    ★ Better than 96% of models
    Market range: <79 ° – >130 °
    This drone has a wider field of view than the average drone (170 ° vs 90 °). The average drone has a field of view of 90 °.
    170 ° vs 90 °
  • FPV camera
    FPV camera
    yes
    ★ Better than 90% of models
    This drone has an FPV camera, while the average drone does not.
  • More modern charging port
    Charging interface
    proprietary
    â–¼ Worse than 42% of models
    This drone uses proprietary for charging, while the average drone uses micro-USB.
    proprietary vs micro-USB
  • 0.2 m tighter hover accuracy
    Hover accuracy (horizontal)
    0.3 m
    â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
    Market range: <0.3 m – >1.4 m
    This drone has better vertical hover accuracy than the average drone (0.3 m vs 0.5 m). The average drone has vertical hover accuracy of 0.5 m.
    0.3 m vs 0.5 m
  • 80 ° wider field of view
    Field of view
    170 °
    ★ Better than 96% of models
    Market range: <79 ° – >130 °
    This drone has a wider field of view than the average drone (170 ° vs 90 °). The average drone has a field of view of 90 °.
    170 ° vs 90 °
  • FPV camera
    FPV camera
    yes
    ★ Better than 90% of models
    This drone has an FPV camera, while the average drone does not.
  • Includes propeller guards
    Propeller guards
    yes
    â–² Better than 67% of models
    This drone has propeller guards, while the average drone does not. 33.3% of drones offer them.
  • 0.2 m tighter hover accuracy
    Hover accuracy (horizontal)
    0.3 m
    â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
    Market range: <0.3 m – >1.4 m
    This drone has better vertical hover accuracy than the average drone (0.3 m vs 0.5 m). The average drone has vertical hover accuracy of 0.5 m.
    0.3 m vs 0.5 m
  • 60 min shorter charging time
    Charging time
    30 min
    ★ Better than 98% of models
    Market range: <55 min – >180 min
    This drone charges faster than the average drone (30 min vs 90 min). The average drone charges in 90 min.
    30 min vs 90 min
  • More modern charging port
    Charging interface
    proprietary
    â–¼ Worse than 42% of models
    This drone uses proprietary for charging, while the average drone uses micro-USB.
    proprietary vs micro-USB
  • Fewer GNSS systems
    GNSS systems supported
    none
    â–¼ Worse than 66% of models
    This drone supports none GNSS systems, while the average drone supports GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, BeiDou.
    none vs GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, BeiDou
  • More basic transmission system
    Video transmission system
    Analog
    â–¼ Worse than 92% of models
    This drone uses Analog for video transmission, while the average drone uses SkyLink 2.0.
    Analog vs SkyLink 2.0
  • Narrower aperture
    Aperture
    f/2.1
    â–¼ Worse than 98% of models
    This drone has a narrower aperture than the average drone (f/2.1 vs f/2). The average drone uses an aperture of f/2.
    f/2.1 vs f/2
  • 12 min shorter flight time
    Max flight time
    8 min
    â–¼ Worse than 89% of models
    Market range: <8 min – >40 min
    This drone offers shorter max flight time than the average drone (8 min vs 20 min). The average drone offers 20 min of max flight time.
    8 min vs 20 min
  • 10 m/s slower flight speed
    Max flight speed
    5 m/s
    â–¼ Worse than 78% of models
    Market range: <4 m/s – >21 m/s
    This drone reaches a lower max flight speed than the average drone (5 m/s vs 15 m/s). The average drone reaches 15 m/s.
    5 m/s vs 15 m/s
  • No subject tracking
    Subject tracking
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 61% of models
    This drone cannot track subjects, while the average drone can.
  • No return-to-home (RTH)
    Return to Home (RTH)
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
    This drone does not support return-to-home (RTH), while the average drone does.
  • No GPS
    GPS
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
    This drone does not have GPS, while the average drone does.
  • 6.47x less popular
    BETAFPV Aquila16 is less popular than the average drone (1 vs 6.5).
    1 vs 6.47
  • 8.2% worse value for money
    BETAFPV Aquila16 has worse value for money than the average drone (6.5 vs 7).
    6.5 vs 7.03
  • 12 min shorter flight time
    Max flight time
    8 min
    â–¼ Worse than 89% of models
    Market range: <8 min – >40 min
    This drone offers shorter max flight time than the average drone (8 min vs 20 min). The average drone offers 20 min of max flight time.
    8 min vs 20 min
  • 10 m/s slower flight speed
    Max flight speed
    5 m/s
    â–¼ Worse than 78% of models
    Market range: <4 m/s – >21 m/s
    This drone reaches a lower max flight speed than the average drone (5 m/s vs 15 m/s). The average drone reaches 15 m/s.
    5 m/s vs 15 m/s
  • Non-foldable design
    Foldable design
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
    This drone does not have a foldable design, while the average drone does.
  • 0.8 km shorter flight distance
    Max flight distance
    0.2 km
    â–¼ Worse than 72% of models
    Market range: <0.05 km – >24 km
    This drone has a shorter max flight distance than the average drone (0.2 km vs 1 km). The average drone can fly up to 1 km.
    0.2 km vs 1 km
  • Narrower aperture
    Aperture
    f/2.1
    â–¼ Worse than 98% of models
    This drone has a narrower aperture than the average drone (f/2.1 vs f/2). The average drone uses an aperture of f/2.
    f/2.1 vs f/2
  • Fewer photo format options
    Photo formats supported
    none
    â–¼ Worse than 91% of models
    This drone supports none photo formats, while the average drone supports JPEG, DNG (RAW).
    none vs JPEG, DNG (RAW)
  • Narrower tilt range
    Camera tilt range
    manual only °
    â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
    This drone has a narrower tilt range than the average drone (manual only ° vs -90 to 20 °).
    manual only ° vs -90 to 20 °
  • Fewer video codec options
    Video codecs supported
    none
    â–¼ Worse than 90% of models
    This drone supports none video codecs, while the average drone supports H.264/AVC.
    none vs H.264/AVC
  • No memory card slot
    Memory card slot
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
    This drone does not have a memory card slot, while the average drone does.
  • Fewer video format options
    Video formats
    none
    â–¼ Worse than 91% of models
    This drone supports none video formats, while the average drone supports MP4.
    none vs MP4
  • 3 x lower digital zoom
    Digital zoom
    0 x
    â–¼ Worse than 59% of models
    Market range: <0 x – >16 x
    This drone offers less digital zoom than the average drone (0 x vs 3 x). The average drone offers 3 x of digital zoom.
    0 x vs 3 x
  • No 4K video
    4K camera
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 55% of models
    This drone does not support 4K video, while the average drone does.
  • 128 GB lower memory card limit
    Max external memory supported
    0 GB
    â–¼ Worse than 76% of models
    Market range: <0 GB – >512 GB
    This drone supports less external storage than the average drone (0 GB vs 128 GB). The average drone supports up to 128 GB of external storage.
    0 GB vs 128 GB
  • Fewer GNSS systems
    GNSS systems supported
    none
    â–¼ Worse than 66% of models
    This drone supports none GNSS systems, while the average drone supports GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, BeiDou.
    none vs GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, BeiDou
  • No subject tracking
    Subject tracking
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 61% of models
    This drone cannot track subjects, while the average drone can.
  • No return-to-home (RTH)
    Return to Home (RTH)
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
    This drone does not support return-to-home (RTH), while the average drone does.
  • No GPS
    GPS
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
    This drone does not have GPS, while the average drone does.
  • No POI mode
    POI mode
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 66% of models
    This drone does not support POI mode, while the average drone does.
  • 4 fewer flight modes
    N. of intelligent flight modes
    0
    â–¼ Worse than 89% of models
    Market range: <0 – >8
    This drone offers fewer intelligent flight modes than the average drone (0 vs 4). The average drone offers 4 intelligent flight modes.
    0 vs 4
  • 0.2 m worse hover accuracy
    Hover accuracy (horizontal)
    0.5 m
    â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
    Market range: <0.3 m – >1.4 m
    This drone has worse horizontal hover accuracy than the average drone (0.5 m vs 0.3 m). The average drone has horizontal hover accuracy of 0.3 m.
    0.5 m vs 0.3 m
  • No compass
    Compass
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 69% of models
    This drone does not have a compass, while the average drone does.
  • No headless mode
    Headless mode
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 55% of models
    This drone does not support headless mode, while the average drone does.
  • No beginner mode
    Beginner mode
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 56% of models
    This drone does not support beginner mode, while the average drone does.
  • More basic transmission system
    Video transmission system
    Analog
    â–¼ Worse than 92% of models
    This drone uses Analog for video transmission, while the average drone uses SkyLink 2.0.
    Analog vs SkyLink 2.0
  • Basic companion app
    Companion app
    None
    â–¼ Worse than 86% of models
    This drone uses the None companion app, while the average drone uses HS FPV.
    None vs HS FPV
  • No wireless file transfer
    Wireless file transfer
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
    This drone does not support wireless file transfer, while the average drone does.
  • 0.8 km shorter transmission range
    Max transmission distance
    0.2 km
    â–¼ Worse than 69% of models
    Market range: <0.05 km – >15 km
    This drone has a shorter max transmission distance than the average drone (0.2 km vs 1 km). The average drone reaches 1 km of transmission distance.
    0.2 km vs 1 km
  • More basic controller
    Controller model
    LiteRadio 2 SE
    â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
    This drone uses the LiteRadio 2 SE controller, while the average drone uses LiteRadio 4 SE.
    LiteRadio 2 SE vs LiteRadio 4 SE
  • 1,100 mAh less battery capacity
    Battery capacity
    1,100 mAh
    â–¼ Worse than 77% of models
    Market range: <550 mAh – >5k mAh
    This drone has a smaller battery capacity than the average drone (1100 mAh vs 2200 mAh). The average drone battery has a capacity of 2200 mAh.
    1,100 mAh vs 2,200 mAh
  • 8.82 Wh less battery energy
    Battery energy
    8.36 Wh
    â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
    Market range: <3.7 Wh – >77 Wh
    This drone has lower battery energy than the average drone (8.4 Wh vs 17.18 Wh). The average drone battery has 17.18 Wh of energy.
    8.36 Wh vs 17.18 Wh

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

6.0
X-WING FPV & RC
≈ estimated
11/10/2025
Hands-on review · flight mode tests and indoor flying
Verdict
BETAFPV Aquila16 is only a mild pick for total beginners: it lacks power, is noisy and gets outgrown quickly.
7.0
Create and Kaptivate
≈ estimated
02/05/2025
Hands-on review · unboxing and indoor/outdoor flight tests
Verdict
BETAFPV Aquila16 is a good budget FPV kit for beginners, but it struggles in wind and its goggles show a weaker image.
6.0
The Drone Geek
≈ estimated
21/02/2025
Hands-on review · beginner kit and flight modes
Verdict
BETAFPV Aquila16 is a good entry point for pilots ready for unassisted flying, though other drones suit most beginners better.
7.0
954 Films
≈ estimated
27/10/2024
Unboxing and review · indoor and outdoor flights, crash test
Verdict
BETAFPV Aquila16 is a good starting drone for beginners, though it is not suited to tricks or windy outdoor flying.
8.0
Rimzler
≈ estimated
19/10/2024
Hands-on review · beginner kit, flying and camera
Verdict
BETAFPV Aquila16 is one of the best starter kits for learning, though its camera and power fall short as you progress.
7.0
Jonny Trego
≈ estimated
24/08/2024
Hands-on review · beginner kit, cinematic flying and durability
Verdict
BETAFPV Aquila16 suits beginners and cinematic flying well, but it is not the right kit for freestyle.
8.0
Toronto FPV
≈ estimated
28/06/2024
Hands-on review · outdoor flights, modding and beginner use
Verdict
BETAFPV Aquila16 is a strong first FPV drone for anyone, though the controller and drone could be better.
7.0
TRONCAT FPV
≈ estimated
20/11/2023
Hands-on review · durability, flight time and outdoor tests
Verdict
BETAFPV Aquila16 is a good starter pick for complete beginners, but its outdoor tune is poor and it can't use Betaflight.
8.0
CAPTAIN DRONE
≈ estimated
08/11/2023
Hands-on review · beginner kit, flights and value
Verdict
BETAFPV Aquila16 is a very good beginner kit for the money, with one drawback: a fragile charging cable.
5.0
FLyzViper
≈ estimated
22/08/2025
Unboxing · first impressions · short indoor flight
Verdict
BETAFPV Aquila16 works, but it is pricey for what is included, so look for a cheaper bundle.

Third-party reviews

What we like about BETAFPV Aquila16

  • Ready-to-fly kit with the LiteRadio 2 SE controller
  • Altitude hold makes first FPV flights easier
  • Brushless motors for power and durability
  • About eight minutes per 1100 mAh battery
  • Analog video link of around 200 m

What we don't like about BETAFPV Aquila16

  • Does not record video for keeps
  • No GPS or return-to-home
  • Short range of about 200 m
  • Analog video is less sharp than digital

Verdict

The BETAFPV Aquila16 is a ready-to-fly package for people who want to try first-person flying without assembling anything. The kit pairs the small brushless Aquila16 drone with the LiteRadio 2 SE controller, so newcomers get everything matched out of the box. Unlike racing whoops, it offers altitude hold, which makes the first flights in goggles far less stressful. A 1100 mAh battery is rated for about eight minutes per flight, and the analog video link covers around 200 m, enough for parks and large gardens. Brushless motors give it more power and durability than toy drones. It does not record video for keeps, and there is no GPS, so it is a training tool rather than a camera drone. For a guided entry into FPV, it is one of the easiest starting points.

Compare BETAFPV Aquila16 with other drones

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of BETAFPV Aquila16 and other drones

No results found