Can someone tell me what the 1.x means in the title of this forum?
Is it firmware or frame related or something else?
I assumed it was firmware related and that this forum would have died by now.
The reason I ask is that there are 6 question in the first 3 page that haven't been answered.
Is this because the majority of people now use the ArduCopter 2.x forum and don't see the questions?
Replies
Hi Alan
Its simple. 1.x means all software builds below 2.0 for Qudrocopters. I am not exacly sure with what SW release Jason implemented multirotors other than quads.
2.x means SW builds revision 2.0 and up for multirotors.
About unanswered questions, have a look at the date. Maybe the questions are old or discussed and solved somewhere else.
Did that help?
Anyway, welcome to the project and fly safe.
Best
Christof
One thing is most certainly for sure - this was a terrible introduction - quite possibly my worst ever. The equivalent of walking into Chris' house and throwing dirt all over the carpet... I find that pure text either doesn't do enough to convey tone and intent (especially sarcasm) ... or perhaps it actually reveals much more tone and intent than one might wish... Either way, when it gets down to the core of things, I don't mean to create trouble or cause harm/anger/discomfort/etc... I'm here for the same reason as everyone else. Perhaps I'll even learn to play nice with the other kids as a result.
I should have been more specific ... FRAME ... all the source code in the world isn't going to work unless there is a physical device to put it on. So please, don't let me get away with this, but rather point me in the correct direction of the CAD files illustrating the FRAME. Preferably something other than the NON-DXF .DFX files. And if you don't wish to do this for me, why not for the several others that have asked about this in a much less crass manner?
And Vernon, not being someone who's privy to the business plan, I'm pretty sure you're not the best person to respond in the first place. You did get one thing correct, though... DXF -is- an AutoCAD format... so you'd at least expect it to open in AutoCAD. Do you have AutoCAD? Have you tried opening the "AutoCAD" files? Most likely not - so unless you want another "beating" I suggest you do your homework before responding.
"I attempted to demonstrate the pattern that every part of this is documented, with full open source and current, accurate, and useable information by the community at large."
And you are wrong.
I'm wondering the same thing. Honestly, I find the format and organization (or rather lack of) very unfriendly for the uninitiated...
And it certainly looks like you can now add this question to the list of unansweredas well.
But what really bothers me right now is the open source label that supposedly applies to these ArduX projects... What I've seen in my first few days here doesn't come close to my understanding of open source... The "get it" is emphasized much much more than the "contribute to it" or the "make it" that the microcontroller scene is experiencing. The only design files I've seen are some sort of bastardized .DXF files (read: not even close to being properly formatted) That might not be a problem if there was an indication as to what particular package was used to produce these files.
Come on guys... even the Arduino team has even figured out how to produce adequate CAD files... Does this simply not fit well with your business plan (Chris?)
Replies are welcome. Answers too.