Pixhawk Feedback?

[Old Man]

The next thing to happen will be the Department of State jumping in to label it ITAR controlled technology while Boeing or similar looks for a way to say they had the technology first in order to take it away from the creator. They have a copter that could make good use of that technology if theirs isn't already as good. 3dR has already started export restrictions for some reasons which I suspect were imposed by our government and I expect to see that condition spread across all the U.S. vendors selling automated fight equipment soon.

 

[R_Lefebvre]

I'm sure that the military has larger UAV helicopters that can fly that well. But I've been monitoring specs on the small systems, and most seem limited to 76 km/h. And that's for larger machines than this, 600-800 size. Mine is just a 500 size, not very big at all. And then of course, there's cost. These systems could be churned out for ~$3000 each. They would be disposable. Just bring a crate of them.

 

[SamaraMedia]

$3000 isn't disposable to me

 

[jfro]

Latest testing yesterday with 3.2 rc9 on my helicopter. From what I'm aware of, this is above military grade performance. Nobody has a VTOL UAV that can perform like this. :cocksure:

Nice.

Half way through the video, you say your reloading the flight plan and then you do another autonomous flight. I have only tried 1 autonomous flight so consider me to know very little on waypoint flying. Still trying to understand it better.

I thought that if a flight was finished or you physically switched from mission to some other mode, that the mission was complete or aborted and if you switched back to mission, it would start from the beginning of the mission and fly it.

Question is, what is the reason you reloaded the mission from your computer or tablet?
After powering down, does the last mission still reside in the Pixhawk?

One of my concerns when flying a mission, is what happens later that day or another day if you are in a new location, and you are ust manually flying around, but you mistakenly flip a switch to put in in mission mode, does it grab the last mission loaded and head out? I will probably reprogram my switches when not flying missions, so I can't do that. Just a big fear of mine since I don't know if old missions stay on the Pixhawk. Using 6 flight modes is just prone to more mistakes IMO, so I'm a bit concerned.

 

[R_Lefebvre]

$3000 isn't disposable to me

It is to the military. They spend 100 times that amount on a tiny helicopter that I have heard doesn't really even work very well.

http://www.proxdynamics.com/products/pd-100-black-hornet-prs

 

[R_Lefebvre]

Nice.

Half way through the video, you say your reloading the flight plan and then you do another autonomous flight. I have only tried 1 autonomous flight so consider me to know very little on waypoint flying. Still trying to understand it better.

I thought that if a flight was finished or you physically switched from mission to some other mode, that the mission was complete or aborted and if you switched back to mission, it would start from the beginning of the mission and fly it.

Question is, what is the reason you reloaded the mission from your computer or tablet?
After powering down, does the last mission still reside in the Pixhawk?

One of my concerns when flying a mission, is what happens later that day or another day if you are in a new location, and you are ust manually flying around, but you mistakenly flip a switch to put in in mission mode, does it grab the last mission loaded and head out? I will probably reprogram my switches when not flying missions, so I can't do that. Just a big fear of mine since I don't know if old missions stay on the Pixhawk. Using 6 flight modes is just prone to more mistakes IMO, so I'm a bit concerned.

Ok, two parts. First, I am not 100% sure on what happens when you change modes. Does the mission restart from #1? I don't know. What I do when I want to restart a mission, is disarm, and rearm. That's what I did there. I didn't do anything on the laptop. I just shut down, disarmed in Stabilize mode, rearmed, flipped back to Auto, and go.

Part 2, does if later in the day, maybe at a different location, you flip to Auto, will it go? Absolutely. So you do have to be careful. I also treat the auto mode with a bit of caution. However, Rx failsafe will save you in this case, as long as you have it set up properly. If you have it set to RTL on Rx Failsafe, it will abort the mission and come back. However, if you have it set to "Continue in Auto" on Rx Failsafe, and you accidentally flip to Auto, and it remembers an old mission 50 miles away... you're screwed if you let it get out of range. So "Continue in Auto" needs to be used with EXTREME caution. I've only used it once or twice. I go in, use it, and get out, go back to RTL on Failsafe.

If, you screw up and it gets away from you, you have another option to save it (I believe...) if you still have a telemetry link. You should be able to change the mode to RTL from the ground control station.

You should ALWAYS be using a GCS with Arducopter IMO.

 

[Old Man]

If flying anything with a flight plan use of the GCS, or laptop, is mandatory. Loss of link failsafe comes into play if you make a mistake and get too far out if you set it up.

As for affordability, the military views a Hellfire missile as "disposable" and the cheapest version of that runs $500,000.00. It's disposable enough to be used to take out a single individual. They think nothing of running a $200,000.00 UAV out of gas if they think the product being delivered is important enough to remain on station instead of returning at bingo fuel. They'll spend $10,000.00+ on a single rifle. So the term "affordable" is a very moving target depending on the intended customer.

Rob,

The biggies are scrambling for what their next profitable project undertaking is going to be with battlefields closing down and defense dollars drying up. They are all over the civil airspace situation and very much working to "own" anything sUAS civilian commercial, which includes what we all are doing. They have no qualms about taking something from people that can't fend them off so I'll quite strongly suggest you protect the code you are developing. They have teams of people perusing websites to find new stuff they might be able to use and anything auto pilot in small packages is high visibility for them. I have seen two aerospace design helos up close and personal and what you are flying is quite comparable to one of them. The other is considerably larger. I really don't expect to see 3dR being able to sell on the open market much longer. They are moving hard and fast smack into the middle of what our government restricts and controls. Their new image recognition hardware and software landed them in quicksand but I don't think they've realized that yet.

 

[jdennings]

But remember that 3DR does not own image recognition software, nor Ardupilot, nor Pixhawk or any other hardware, as these are all open source. They may influence directions as sponsors and having some of the key developpers on their payroll, they sometimes go a little overboard by calling Ardupilot "our's", but they still don't own it. And the personality of some of the developpers leads me to believe that they never will. Nor do they probably want to (Their VCs may want otherwise_). And even if they did, others would soon fill the space.

So as mighty as the biggies might be, they are still no match for open source development and developper communities, and 3DR, and they'll never "own" it. (Look also at the Internet itself ). Even if 3DR was to go all closed and private, open drone development would continue, with or without them, and most probably match if not surpass the quality of private endeavors.

 

[jfro]

If flying anything with a flight plan use of the GCS, or laptop, is mandatory. Loss of link failsafe comes into play if you make a mistake and get too far out if you set it up.

As for affordability, the military views a Hellfire missile as "disposable" and the cheapest version of that runs $500,000.00. It's disposable enough to be used to take out a single individual. They think nothing of running a $200,000.00 UAV out of gas if they think the product being delivered is important enough to remain on station instead of returning at bingo fuel. They'll spend $10,000.00+ on a single rifle. So the term "affordable" is a very moving target depending on the intended customer.

Rob,

The biggies are scrambling for what their next profitable project undertaking is going to be with battlefields closing down and defense dollars drying up. They are all over the civil airspace situation and very much working to "own" anything sUAS civilian commercial, which includes what we all are doing. They have no qualms about taking something from people that can't fend them off so I'll quite strongly suggest you protect the code you are developing. They have teams of people perusing websites to find new stuff they might be able to use and anything auto pilot in small packages is high visibility for them. I have seen two aerospace design helos up close and personal and what you are flying is quite comparable to one of them. The other is considerably larger. I really don't expect to see 3dR being able to sell on the open market much longer. They are moving hard and fast smack into the middle of what our government restricts and controls. Their new image recognition hardware and software landed them in quicksand but I don't think they've realized that yet.

Oldman, I could write an opinionated book on just your 2 paragraphs.

It's sad the amount of money the government & defense people have pissed away.

As to the government shutting 3DR down, let's hope not although they may attempt it. However, sometimes common sense can rule out. Recently, a child pornographer was caught because of government survalence by one of the arms forces running a snooping program to check up on their soldiers. They found a computer (a civilians) and turned info to local police who arrested and convicted the dirt bag. A 3 judge appeals court (2-1) overturned the conviction and said the information (snooping) was illegal and therefore the arrest and conviction were thrown out. Hopefully, our courts will protect our rights and the government will have to figure out another way to handle their worries in regards to our small drones. It's sad, because we are talking about 99.9999% of the people using this technology legitimately. It's just he bad guys and the paparazzi that has to be dealt with.

A 2nd worry regarding the Pixhawk, might possibly be the company being bought by one of the biggies that you talk about and taking it big time commercial. Hopefully, the fact that this is open source will make that impossible to do.

I think about this stuff every time I spend another $500 dollars, thinking, am I just throwing money down the toilet.

 

[R_Lefebvre]

jfro, yes, barely a day goes by without me wondering when either Amazon or Google will just buy out 3DR. I just hope I get taken along for the ride, though that seems less and less likely. Anyway, if they do buy out 3DR, they cannot close-source the software or existing hardware designs. The hardware could be taken closed-source if they did a clean-sheet design. But they could never take Arducopter closed-source. They couldn't even fork it and keep going with closed source developments, because it is released under an open source license that is like cancer. Anything it touches becomes open source. The only real question in my mind, is what would happen if a major change to the company occurred, and it stopped sponsoring developers for the open source code. Would the main guys be able to secure funding another way so they could keep working full-time? Or if they were converted to employees, and started working on a closed-source clean-sheet software redesign... would anybody be able to pick up where they left off with Arducopter? It's extremely complicated at this point, and some of them are extremely talented. It's hard to imagine anybody would be able to continue. Would it die on the vine?

As far as throwing $500 in the toilet however, I don't see that. For $500, you're getting a really good value on a full featured flight controller that works really well. Doesn't matter what happens in the future, you are already getting much more than you pay for.

Compare that to myself, I've basically invested 3 years of my life into this. If the project just stopped... that wouldn't be good for me at all.

 

[Old Man]

jfro,

I see things the way you do for the most part, although I believe that as long as we have access to higher level technology we should be able to own and use it. I'll keep buying as long as they are available. I won't get into the politics but our government has well demonstrated that people's rights are whatever they want them to be at the moment. A few court judges still view the Constitution as a functional rule set but many no longer do. If they work for the federal side the odds are against you.

I also have some of the questions Rob does going forward. I work for a company that as an independent start up created many outstanding new products and designs and was extremely successful building a niche in the UAV field that everyone wanted. Affordable too from a government perspective, but not from an individual one. It was bought by one of the majors a few years back and has since been subjected to a slow assimilation into the policies and procedures of the purchasing company. Since that initiated the creative processes and new designs have decreased at a rate equal to the speed of integration into the new company. For all intents and purposes people now work hard to keep their jobs instead of working to create and produce cutting edge products. Dying on the vine might be an apt description.

Everyone is for sale, only the price is in question, and many small companies have a desire to be bought up by a larger one. For quite a few start ups that was the primary line in the business plan. I hope 3dR does not go that route but they are opening up or introducing a lot of technology to the public that before now been the realm of governments and military. I know this because I've been using some of the functions for the past 10 years. It's exciting to see this stuff getting out there in the open but at the same time it opens the doors to others areas that governments don't want people to know about. Doing one thing establishes a logical path to another. They can't control the Chinese and others on the international front but they could control importation and or sales of many things and make illegal those they could not control through restrictions. ITAR rules even have a methodology for that though one of the qualifications for controlled products and technology. An open source concept, technology, or product in and of itself is not controlled but combined with multiple layers of open source technology can and has been made restricted technology. It's also in part how they define OpSec. A small piece of information is not an issues but combining many small pieces can provide an accurate over view of that which was intended to be kept secret.

Don't misunderstand, I support 3dR and what they are doing all the way and really like their FC/AP packages. I'm just concerned that because they are so good we'll lose out in the end. 3dR has already initiated a level of export restriction and I wonder why that came about. If they get slapped with ITAR rules they are forced to restrict sales in any direction to only those where they can assure such technology and information can be controlled to the most distant point of dissemination. That includes intellectual property, voice conversations, e-mails, texts, plans, and products. It's a scary thing once you've had to deal with it and it encompasses domestic and international distribution.

 

[tahoelight]

Not really feedback, but can someone tell me what the small built in battery is used for on the latest Pixhawk board? If mine doesn't have it, should I be concerned?

 

[R_Lefebvre]

You should probably be concerned that you have a clone. Just kidding but... I can't speak to the quality of clones. But to answer the question about the battery, it's main purpose is in the future to allow in-flight reboots. It's not possible now on Arducopter, and I'm not sure if it ever will be (more likely an airplane thing). But who knows.

 

[Old Man]

An in flight reboot of a copter FC would prolly work out the way DJI GPS pucks do. Trip the switch and all bets are off knowing where it's gonna go.

 

[tahoelight]

So are you saying a real 3dr pixhawk has the battery, but it does not function for any real purpose right now? Testing the waters into APM. Should be fun it actually may go into a plane before one of my MR rigs. Should I be starting with the latest Pixhawk release or will an older version (clone or not) get me going in the right direction? I have heard there are some QC issues with all of the versions. Uh oh, I just asked for an opinion

 

[jdennings]

So are you saying a real 3dr pixhawk has the battery, but it does not function for any real purpose right now?

Yep
('m sure RL will correct me if wrong ...)

Should I starting with the latest Pixhawk release or will an older version (clone or not) get me going in the right direction? I

have heard there are some QC issues with all of the versions.

If you're talking hardware releases, you want 2.4
Software: Latest available in mission planner.


My experience:
1 DR Pixhawk, 2 RTFHawk Clones.

No issues whatsoever, working right out of the box.
Have heard of issues with both vendors.

Main difference with 3DR vs clones: df13 connectors vs micro-molex.
RTFhawk case not as slick as 3DR/FixHawk.

Support:
- 3DR : Issues, but dedicated site plus if you're a potential vendor I bet they'd listen.
- RTFHawk: None from vendor, decent on that other forum.
- Fixhawk.: None from vendor, decent on that other forum, x'ept thread starter is ok with electronics but no expert yet thinks he is. Noob with advanced multitrotors. US RCTimer reseller knows way less than you do but advertises opposite whenever and will fight forever to prove so. Pathetic flame wars.

I'd recommend 3DR unless a couple hours of your time is worth less than $50-$100 savings .

Uh oh, I just asked for an opinion

There you have one!

LOL!

 

[R_Lefebvre]

So are you saying a real 3dr pixhawk has the battery, but it does not function for any real purpose right now?

Yes, that's my understanding.

My opinion on clones is basically this. 3DR is the only flight controller company that funds the development of Arducopter, the software that makes the hardware do something useful. Without 3DR, you wouldn't have any option in this price range, because the software only got good when a few key developers were able to work full-time on the code. None of the clone manufacturers give one penny to development.

Now, you could call me biased because I have a minor sponsorship from 3DR. But I don't think you can actually argue with the logic and/or morals of that statement. Some people make a righteous statement that 3DR is "ripping people off" because they mark things up over what a manufacturer in China can do. But given the mark-up is only $50-100, I really don't think that's unreasonable. They carry all of the burden of not just software, but also the hardware development.

It really is that simple.

Yes, it is legal to buy clones. And it is legal to manufacture clones. But I don't think it's ethical, until such time as the cloners start giving back into the project in some meaningful way. There are now companies making RTF Phantom-like quadcopters, at half the price of the Phantom. I'm sure they will sell boat-loads. That is only possible because they are using Arducopter. Yet they contribute *nothing* to the project. I don't think that's ethical at all.

 

[Old Man]

You hit one of my hot buttons. After 45+ years in the RC hobby I've watched companies dedicated to the furtherance of the hobby spend tens of thousands of $$ to deverlop new technology and superior products only to have it copied by overseas manufacturers that have contributed absolutely nothing to improving the hobby or the products used. Generally the copies have been inferior to the originals but they sold for less, which was all the justification a very lot of consumers needed to buy the copies. Much, if not most, of the software we use today was not developed in any way by those selling it for the least amount of money. The cloners don't give a hoot for the customer or product reliability, they carry no product liability, but people flock to them while ignoring the people that designed, developed, and initially marketed the product and still carry the product liability while providing customer support.

Ethics? Don't even mention ethics. Most, consumer or marketer, don't have any today and, I'm sorry to say, haven't for a long time. It's all about a buck and many get exactly what they paid for.

 

[tahoelight]

Sorry guys, didn't mean to start an ethics debate. I've read quite a bit about this one on another forum. I didn't get this controller from a dealer and I do plan to support 3dr. This is one of many controllers I own from Hoverfly, DJI, Xaircraft, openpilot.... I don't know why it has taken this long to try out APM, but I have a feeling it will be a good fit for many of my projects. Would hate to be judged for some controller I ended up with in my stack of goodies.
Adventure awaits.

 

[Old Man]

No worries man, it was just a long standing thing for me with the hobby industry in general. I too think that once you get the hang of it you'll wonder why you didn't do it sooner.