Better (Best) Option For My Desired Use? School Me!

[Pura Vida]

I'm new to the MR world and am looking to pick up my first one. It will be used to provide aerial photos for work projects around harbors and channels. My desired parameters are as follows;

- Needs to carry a Go-Pro or similar weight and gimbal.

- Needs to be easily packed into a "reasonable" sized Pelican Case for flight/transportation

- Needs to have approximately 15 minutes of flight time

- Would really like to be able to have it programmable for autonomous flight

- Programmable flight needs/is preferable to be done in the office prior to deployment in the field

- Minor weather/rain resistance would be a huge plus

After talking with my local hobby shop I believe DJI's Phantom 2 with extras fulfills all of these requirements. This is of course assuming Ground Station is available mid month for the P2, as they are claiming. Is there any other options that would better fulfill what I am after? It does not necessarily need to be RTF. The other appealing aspect of the P2 is the affordability, at approximately $1500 for everything I'm looking at seems pretty reasonable. I don't think I'm willing to go much over $2k at this time, but would still really like to hear about any and all options. Is their better quality copters out that that would be more reliable? Is there superior autonomous flight controls and software available? How much are the fly aways I've read about a ligitimate concern? Specifically in remote villages with little expected interference? If Ground Station is the best available software, but ends up not being available for the P2, is there another DJI platform that fits the above criteria? Keeping in mind the size and portability is a HUGE advantage with the P2. Thanks

PV

 

[Motopreserve]

Hey PV. Welcome to the forum.

I think one of the keys to your post is that you mention using this MR around harbors and channels. This seems to me a guarantee for wind (possibly heavy). I have read several posts speaking directly to the fact that the frame/shell that the Phantom is encased in is not conducive to windy flying.

Plenty of people have opinions regarding DJI. Love 'em or hate 'em - no one can argue that new technology sometimes has glitches, so if they are just now going to implement flight programming, there may be some time needed for the bugs to get worked out. If you are talking about pre-programmed flights, I think the 3DRobotics products were out front with this. The new version of their FC is the Pixhawk. Don't know much about it - but you might want to do some research there.

Also, salt air may not be great for any of these multirotors. Apparently the motors can take a little weather (not necessarily salt air), and covering everything else would be key.

Without a doubt, regardless of the choices you make - the first thing you will need to do before taking on any of your above requirements, is practice. Especially if you plan to fly regularly in and around people at harbors. This may seem obvious - but your post was fairly comprehensive, but did not mention the steps (mini practice quad, simulator) you plan to take to ensure that your skills are up to the task before heading out to the job.

Good luck. It's an obsession that takes hold and is tough to shake...

 

[jbrumberg]

Welcome Pura Vida. Any chance that you are from Costa Rico? Motopreserve offers some great advise. I would add get extra props and other replacement parts. You will crash. Everyone crashes in the early and some cases many stages of the learning curve.

 

[SoCal Blur]

The TBS Discovery might be a good alternate choice as well. As to FC's with flight programming, besides 3DRobotics that Motopreserve mentioned, the Multiwii board, because it is open source, also allows you to load a version of of Arducopter which will give you flight programming options. The downside is that the learning curve for setting up the Multiwii board can be a bit steep. The upside is that it is a lot less expensive.

 

[Motopreserve]

The Disco version quad might be a really great choice. There is a new frame out that I have been interested in called the CineTank. It has some good dampening for a front mounted GoPro/camera using a "clean plate." Depending on your needs - you may be able to get away with no gimbal - or there are gimbal mounts that address the H-Quad style.

More to think about...

 

[Pura Vida]

Thanks for all the info! I'll definitely do some more research on the options coming. I definitely plan on doing plenty of practice flying before going into the field. Although obviously different, I do have a decent amount of time flying various Blade helicopters, is it isn't completely foreign to me. Close but not completely... (So wait, you mean I can't just set my way points, go out into the field, press the "go" button and expect perfect results....??? Every time??? :frog: ) The wind shouldn't be too much of an issue as I'm always on site for a number of days and have other procedures that we can't do in windy conditions. Yes, the wind can get hellacious at times, but nothing we haven't had to deal with before. As far as the salty air, we normally don't have much for humidity up here (Alaska, sorry not in Costa Rica) but it is something I'll have to watch for. Thanks again for the great info!

PV

 

[Motopreserve]

So wait, you mean I can't just set my way points, go out into the field, press the "go" button and expect perfect results....??? Every time???

You'd be amazed by some of the posts around here

 

[SoCal Blur]

(So wait, you mean I can't just set my way points, go out into the field, press the "go" button and expect perfect results....??? Every time??? :frog: )

You'd be amazed by some of the posts around here

It depends on what you mean by "perfect results". I watched a video of a company that has written software that does exactly that. It's like ArduCopter/ArduPilot on steroids. You program in the waypoints and whatever other instructions that you want it to do at each point. The you hit a button that sends it to the MR. The MR then turns on, does a self system check, waits until it gets a GPS lock, and then takes off and performs all of the commands and returns to home. The entire time its sending back a live video feed to the operator who is watching it on his tablet.

 

[Motopreserve]

How much?

 

[SoCal Blur]

How much?

They didn't say. They demoed it at some type of event and an official from another country's military wanted to set up a meeting with them so I'm guessing more than either of us can afford.

 

[Motopreserve]

They didn't say. They demoed it at some type of event and an official from another country's military wanted to set up a meeting with them so I'm guessing more than either of us can afford.

Yep, I had a feeling that it would be outside of the budget mentioned in post #1

 

[Pura Vida]

That's damn impressive regardless. Repeatability is always the big question though. How many times have you seen something demo'd perfectly then once released to the public and in the field, well, not so much... This applies to everything, not just MRs. All joking aside, ideally I would like/am hoping the whole autonomous aspect is fairly reliable. Sure would make things easier! It doesn't have to be perfect, just not stray too far to cause "undesirable contact with foreign object" and that it returns to home...

PV

 

[Motopreserve]

I think repeatability (or lack of widespread success) is partially a product of the GPS we are using in close contact to all the other electronics. If you watch the readout on an andoid of how many satellites our multiwii connect with it's jumping around often. Obviously factors in the sky as well, but the reliance on waypoints is just not something that makes me totally comfortable with right now on the multiwii. I've read too few success stories (it's new as of this latest FW version). The APM/pixhawk is supposed to be solid - but I haven't researched it much. Interesting though.

 

[Pura Vida]

So I really like the Isis from 3DRobotics. That looks like that would fit my criteria really well. Does anyone have experience with their software and autonomous flight controls? How does it compare to DJI's options? Is one more reliable than the other? Superior options? I really liked how you could select different options on the 3DRobotics sight and it added up the total cost. But, does the Isis come with a radio? I never did see if it did or not. And it looked like the Isis came with the necessary options to run the autonomous flight control out of the box. Is this correct? Thanks.

PV

 

[Motopreserve]

There is apparently a learning curve to the 3DR flight controllers. The DJI is supposed to be more simple to use. The 3DR pix hawk is definitely geared toward autonomous flight, as opposed to others that are geared toward you flying it with the radio - and the possibility to program waypoints (brand new in the latest multiwii code). So it seems a choice between what your goals are.

I believe the pixhawk with GPS is about $279. Not sure if you need OSD etc.

Most products don't come with a radio (usually different manufacturers) - but some companies offer sales from within the site.

 

[jbrumberg]

PV- If you are referring to the 3DRobotics Iris, the RTF comes with a Flysky model (adapted) Tx according to the literature and material that I had read in the past. A lot of people may complain about the 9x Tx series, very few people complain about the Tx range. I like the idea that they are made in in USA and Mexico. They have a great following at RCG.

 

[Pura Vida]

Thanks for the info. I'll check out RCG.

 

[Pura Vida]

The Isis looks really nice but it is stating to get a little on the big side for me at the 550 scale. The advantage goes to the P2 for that aspect. The other advantage for the P2 is availability. I can buy it today were the Isis isn't available from what I could see. Any word on when the Isis will start shipping? The advantage for the Isis is it comes with the autonomous flight capability which DJI has not made available yet for the P2. Maybe I will give them both a call and see what kind of feedback/feeling I get from each. Now I just need to need to come up with a few intelligent questions...:livid:

 

[jbrumberg]

I have been following the Iris through RCG since August. Availability of whole units and parts seem to be a problem from the posts. Response at least on a e-mail/telephone customer support basis appears excellent, but I think they are limited due to their small size and newness. Some people may question the use of the Flysky transmitter protocol as well. Flysky developed that particular "9X" transmission protocol. I have a Flysky TH9XB. It is a basic, modestly built, full featured 9 channel transmitter. It has good range as a transmitter. The materials used in the construction and construction of the Iris seem pretty solid too. People worry about their quads operating in moisture. People should think about their transmitters operating in moisture BTW- something to think about.