Sounds great and I am here to help with NETMF/RLP things
Thanks Gus. Back to the original topic of this thread one last time… From what I’ve found there really isn’t a NETMF board out there with more than 6 PWMs. The Panda-II already gives the most bang for the buck but would be even better if it had a couple more PWMs 
Yes but panda has output compare and RLP so you can do software PWM is that is an option.
What about this PWM board?
32 PWM outputs
It’s Arduino, but it may be compatible.
== John ==
I’m interested in the same thing. I’m wondering if a coaxial rotor is the way to go. It would reduce the number of motors required (i.e. a single contra-rotating motor?) for lift. And from what I understand you get stability for free (yes, probably an over simplification).
I’m certainly no aeronautics expert but a coaxial rotor on a quadcopter (or whatever that would be called) seems like over engineering. The built-in stability that a coaxial would be provided is built into a quad by having half the rotors turn one direction and the other have going the other. I would be interested to know how the lift is effected in a coaxial rotor. As far as reducing motors, my goal is to be able to increase motors and therefore payload ability. Regardless, the increased mechanical complexity of a coaxial system is enough to stear me away.
@ ianlee: Adding 4 co-axial motors would give you twice the lift without the complexity of 8 arms? 
@ thirstycrow: you can’t just have just a single contra-rotating motor. Contra-rotating gives you yaw control, nothing else. Then you also need a swashplate to control roll and pitch which will require two servos.
Four motors, with 2 running CCW(counter clock wise) and 2 running CW(Clock wise) will give you:
Yaw(turn left/right): vary the speed ratio between CCW motors and CW motors.
Pitch(forward/backward): vary the speed ratio between the two CCW motors.
Roll(slide left/right): vary the speed ratio between the CW motors.
Vertical(up/down): vary the speed of all motors by same amount.
@ errol: Can you point me to data that shows that a coaxial rotor produces twice the lift? I wonder if we’re talking the same thing. I’m referring to the type of system like you see on these mini helicopters where they have counter rotating blades atop a single motor. I think you may be referring to a similar system I’ve seen where you basically have two motors on top of each other (one facing up & one facing down). I’ll call this a co-motor system.
I can’t see how one motor in a coaxial rotor system could produce twice the lift given the energy that would be lost by the gearing system required to make it work. More importantly, the manufacturing of the parts is beyond what I could accomplish in my garage.
The co-motor system is actually something I’ve been considering in my copter. It definitely has some advantages but again I have my doubts about double the lift. It seems there has to be some energy lost in the turbulence between the blades.
Hmm, all the coaxial helis that i have seen, including the micro helis have two motors, one for each prop.
They use coaxial to get rid of the tail motor. If both prop are driven by the same motor then they can’t vary the speed between the two props and in turn they can’t control yaw(which was the job of the tail rotor:))
You know… I never actually considered that there could be two motors inside that tiny fuselage. Now you’ve got me wanting to tear apart a perfectly working copter. My kids are not going to be happy…
Well, if you can turn the one prop without the other turning then they can’t be connect to the sample motor.
Or if you hold it in your hand, open the throttle till the props just start turning and, on the controller try to steer the heli left/right, then you should see one prop move faster, other slower.
The micro helis generally have two pager type motors for the main rotors and sometimes an even smaller motor in the tail pointing up. I can post photos of the three micro and one mini that i have…