Hello,

I just wanted to start a post discussing AC3.4.  People should be aware that I'm not reviewing the code in Master or doing test flights at this time.  Recently, a large set of changes went into Master related to refactoring the flight stabilization for all Copter vehicles. So far a few problems have been found related to landing detection and I'm not sure what else.  So there is some risk to flying Master right now.

Unfortunately, I'm just not able to support development at all.  I'm too busy trying to develop commercial opportunities.  And right now I actually have a negative income and simply cannot afford a helicopter crash. I crashed a copter in December I haven't even fixed yet.

Tridge is doing some review and testing of Master on Helicopter. But I'm not sure if that means the AC3.4 release will be pushed out at the same time as Multirotors. 

Rob

Views: 666

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Just the way it is a the moment I guess.  3.2.1 is solid and I'm happy about that.  I have yet to try 3.3 and I think I will hold off

Regards,

David R. Boulanger

WOW,Hopefully AC3.4 energy and multi-rotor firmware update together

Hi,

I'm beginning the integration of a Pixhawk running AC3.4 on a TREX 600E with a Microbeast as external rate controller (for the added safety in case of Pixhawk loss, and because it already flew more than 150 flights without any problem).

Right now I'm in a table/bench test phase. I noticed 2 things compared to AC3.3 (http://discuss.ardupilot.org/t/arming-throttle-with-copter-3-4-trad... and http://discuss.ardupilot.org/t/heli-rsc-problem-in-copter-3-4-tradh...). Note sure if it is bugs or misconfiguration from my side (hence the forum threads) but once I'll be fixed on this, I'll be ok to do some flight tests with this release.

Perhaps it would be great to have a post listing all the known bugs. It will be helpful for those who want to test to know what should be avoided to test or so...

I Don't think it is recommended to have a Flybarless controller downstream of the Pixhawk.  I Don't know why you are worried about the Pixhawk failing.  If it did how would the Microbeast get it input signals?  Sounds like a bad way to set up a Heli to me.  You may also be running a great risk using 3.4.

Regards,

David R. Boulanger

http://diydrones.com/profiles/blogs/canberra-uav-demonstrates-helic...

Hi,

Please take a look at this link.

I know it's not common to do so but as you saw there, Tridge demonstrated that this is totally doable. In fact is "just" as if you control a flybared heli with the autopilot.

I didn't say that I'm planning to have mux on the SBUS line so that I will be able to completely short cut the Pixhawk out of the loop if needed. This way fly aways, vibration issues or even complete loss of the autopilot, if any, could be controllable.

Best regards,

Nicolas

I have followed the Link you attached.  I guess the definition of Pixhawk failing is open to debate.  I have a 600E with a Pixhawk.  You should have zero vibration issues unless you have some type of mechanical failure in flight.

Regards,

David R. Boulanger

Reply to Discussion

RSS

© 2019   Created by Chris Anderson.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service