Replies to This Discussion

3D RoboticsPermalink Reply by Chris Anderson on February 16, 2012 at 8:34am

1) They can be separated, although it's best to send it back to the factory for repairs and let them do it. If you take them apart yourself it will void the warrenty (and you may very well melt something important)

2) At the moment we are not selling daughterboards separately. Again, much experience has shown that if people do their own soldering, we're going to end up with tech support problems that will overwhelm us. 

3) See above. 

In short, in the next batch we will give quite a lot of flexibility at order time as to what configuration you want, with both daughterboards and connectors. But once it's made for you, we won't encourage user soldering. Of course you're free to try what you want, but it will void the warranty (like most other electronics). 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ockert on February 16, 2012 at 11:19am

Much clearer thanks Chris

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rod Cole on February 16, 2012 at 10:21am

I checked the Twitter feed and they did not update the last order shipped yesterday. Could we please get an update?

Thanks

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Don Brooks on February 16, 2012 at 12:35pm

I'm sure they're busy making/testing/packing/shipping them.

I just got my ship notification and I'm above #17000.

• ▶ Reply

ModeratorPermalink Reply by Graham Dyer on February 16, 2012 at 1:00pm

Ordered my APM2 5 Dec 2011, just over 10 weeks ago, but I have now had confirmation of shipping however shipping always seems to take a long time from DiyDrones, so I might get mine around 13-14 weeks after ordering.

Patience apparently is a virtue...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Don Brooks on February 16, 2012 at 1:14pm

At least you'll be eligible for the good will credit they're offering! I missed it by one day... :(

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Earl on February 16, 2012 at 2:25pm

I am order 185xx. I hope to get mine shipped this week. Not realistic ?

Earl

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hans Miller on February 18, 2012 at 2:55pm

Hi all,

 

   Please let me begin by saying that I immensely value the individual contributions of the developers and the following criticism should not take away from the time and effort they have elected to give.

   With that said, I believe the latest happenings in firmware development and release have entered the realms of the absurd.

   How is it, that 2.3 was touted as a "final release"? After following the running commentary on various issues with 2.3 I chose not to use it and to wait instead for 2.3.1 only to find out that the developers have decided to upgrade 2.3.1 to 2.4 BETA and to release it to the wider public for testing - say again? This leads me to believe that there have been significant  changes to the code yet again, and not just fixes to the extant bugs.

   This approach may work for the people who have far more time, money and knowledge than the "average" user. I believe the average user accepts that they will have to do a fair amount of improvements on their hardware and spend time tuning their values to get good results. The approach that I have outlined in the first couple of paragraphs simply makes this impossible. For me the ideal is that once we get to a final release, I can then concentrate on making my side of things work the best it can, and after a thorough flight testing progress, actually start using the 'copter (photography, etc). This is currently made impossible by the progression I have outlined in the first paragraphs. Things simply move to fast and too chaotically for someone with maybe 10 hours a week to spare.

   Only once a fully (I know that's a relative word) debugged final version is available, should development move to include new features and improve on the finer points of the previous well performing version. 

 

   To conclude: I have been getting encouraging results with 2.2bX but I dare not start my whole tuning and testing program all over again, until I have some sort of confidence in a "final" release. I simply do not posses the means to put blind confidence into yet another release that is being touted as the "best one yet". I am approaching a point where I will seriously consider just biting the bullet, abandoning Arducopter and looking for another platform.

Thanks,

 

Hans 

 

• ▶ Reply

3D RoboticsPermalink Reply by Chris Anderson on February 18, 2012 at 3:10pm

Hans, sorry for the confusion. Perhaps I can help explain a bit better. There is no "final release" and I hope there never will be -- that would mean that we've stopped innovating. Instead, these are the release schedules.

• ArduCopter 2.x. This is now "feature complete", which is to say no major features will be added to this generation. Instead, all releases will only be bug fixes and performance upgrades. 2.4 is just that -- it fixes a bunch of bugs in 2.3 and improves the performance. There may be other releases in the 2.x generation, but they won't change the feature set significantly. We expect to release 2.4 to the Mission Planner in the next 24 hours or so. After that, I expect the release schedule will slow down dramatically. Maybe 2.4 will in fact be the last release in the 2.x generation, but it really depends on what shows up after thousands of people fly it on every possible kind of frame and equipment. 
• ArduCopter 3.x. This is the version that the developers are now focused on, and will include new features and functions. It's scheduled for mid-year. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hans Miller on February 18, 2012 at 3:19pm

Hi Chris,

 

Thanks for clearing things up a bit. I understand a lot of the terminology issues come about because there are quite a few people working on this project and posting up using their own words. It's nice to hear an explanation from yourself.

 

Thanks again,

 

Hans 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Johann Van Niekerk on February 18, 2012 at 9:30pm

Hi Hans

 

Sorry to jump in here but this is something that you may want to take into consideration for usesing the APM plateform  for aerial photography, Chris mentioned it in his reply " hope there never will be "

 

The fact of the matter is There is fundemetail issues in the coding structure that will not allow for beter results with the hardware availble and instead of fixing these there is new features added and new fixes done on a daily bases. think of it as trying to patch a leak in a tire with the nail still in it.

 

Dont get me wrong   Iv been with DIY now for 2 years if not 3 and saw the release of APM1 1280 then APM 2560 and now APM2 and im greatfull for the teams effort and input into this but im also afraid that what Ellison said is not totally valid, becuase when you fly a code you like and you get problems you launch a blog to ask and explain your problem , and the first reply you get from any of the dev members is "Have you updated "  same with the mission planner ever time i start it it pops up with a screen. "want to update" its a bad cycle that teh dev team is in at the moment and after making suggestion from many different angles and people , asking for JUST a  Relible stabilize mode that people can fall back on when the new code doesnt work , just gets iggnored.

 

Then there is a arugment it is the cheapest pilot for what it can do around and that DIY is intrested in Autonumous flight not stabilize, fact of the matter is BMW cant sell a car with a cool feature to make popcorn if it can not drive reliable . thats way Mercedese will always sell more cars that does even have windows but it can drive.  If you are looking at getting in the air quick and with no hassel one name stands out AT THE SAME price as DIY   DJI NAZA video below.  its $229 abd it only has stable mode but the stable mode is so accurate clean and Trustworthy i can give it throttle and it will stay with in 500cm spot , with out Sonars, Optical flow GPS or anything.

 

if you require waypoint navigation then upgrade to the DJI MKW pilot with GPS. it cost far less in the long run then APM1/2/3/4 untill Chris ... and the dev team releasize that there is problems at the fundementals of the code and not the hardware.

 

ANyway my rant and rave but I hope this helps you Hans and others wanting a working plateform.

 

JOhann

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ellison Chan on February 18, 2012 at 3:23pm

Hi Hans, I understand your frustration.  I also agree that the software updates are coming in fast.    

Here are my suggestions:

1. Whomever is  finding all the rapid software updates overwhelming, stick with the firmware that you've tuned your drone with.
2. Keep following the discussions regarding the different releases, but there's no need to upgrade to every revision that we put out
3. Don't feel the need to update, if your drone is already flying well.
4. Upgrade only to the newer declared  major releases, unless you're interested in testing the interim releases on your drone.

The fact is that the release discussion are started to keep everyone informed on the features and progress being made at each major release.  It's up to each individual to decide on upgrading to it or not based on their own comfort level.  Don't bow to peer pressure, just because some people have declared that it is 'good'.  The quality is very subjective.  What my be good for one frame may not be good for your frame.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 8
• 9
• 10
• 11
• 12
• …
• 25
• Next ›
• Page