Discussions

Best open source autopilots v.s. commercial autopilots for conventional fixed wing unmanned aircraft usage

Posted by Anna Tian on January 4, 2015 at 7:53pm

Hi,

 

Open source autopilots are widely used in the RC toys. I tried 3DR's pixhawk. It seems to be quite okay. There are also other open source autopilots.

The commercial autopilots are always used in commercial unmanned aircraft. They are somehow much more expensive than open source. I’m wondering what are commercial autopilots’ typical advantages compared with the best open source autopilots for conventional fixed wing usage. Could anyone give any hint on that?

 

Best,

Anna

You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!

Join diydrones

Tags: pixhawk, autopilots, commerical, vs
Email me when people reply –
Follow

Replies

          • Darrell Burkey > Anna Tian January 8, 2015 at 2:34am

            What companies do you mean by 'commercial flight controllers'.

            • Anna Tian > Darrell Burkey January 8, 2015 at 2:53am

              The company which sells commercial autopilot, e.g. Micropilot, Cloud Cap

              • Moderator
                Gary Mortimer > Anna Tian January 8, 2015 at 2:58am

                Those companies need to adapt fast and have a tiny market share. Closed source autopilots have a limited future. They have a place but not mass market.

                • John Smith > Gary Mortimer January 16, 2015 at 4:49am

                  (as far as it is for the USA) I think if you were to really study what the FAA is doing and trending towards, you will find that they are not in favor of any sort of "Open Source" AP's. So any sort of acceptance will not be coming in the near future if ever. At least that is what I have been seeing and hearing to date.

  • Andre K. January 4, 2015 at 11:31pm

    Based on places I've worked/Businesses I visited, most commercial missions are (easily) done by opensource ArduPilot.

    Some bigger planes were CloudCap, and now mostly Micropilot.

    But now with even AP reduncancy based on cheap Pixhawks.

    don't buy into "milspec"- which is mainly used as a word used by sales - most people seem to think they can throw together some AP with a few $ more expensive capacitors and +40degree components, and suddently fly standard servos and non-deicing wings in -50degree.   You can provide a good enviroment and conformal coating on standard AP, making it more resillient, then invest some on proper power supplies, and not throw all load on one on two.

    • Anna Tian > Andre K. January 5, 2015 at 3:52am

      Thanks, Andre.

      Could you please let me know, if that's for your convenience, which commercial unmanned aircraft or missions are done by open source autopilots?

      • Andre K. > Anna Tian January 5, 2015 at 4:26am

        Most commercial missions are mapping, mostly for high precision elevation and terrain models using orthogrammetry or laser scanners.

        Then we have visual, thermal and corona sensor inspection of high voltage transfer lines.

        • Anna Tian > Andre K. January 5, 2015 at 5:21pm

          Can you tell me which companies and which products use open source as you know, if it's for your convenience to tell? 

          • Andre K. > Anna Tian January 5, 2015 at 11:53pm

            Well, it would be impolite to tell who is using what, except for the three companies I am involved in, - sending you a PM with the names. .   Also at least 30% of other members of UAS Norway seems to do so, based on the relatively few I've spoken with.

            • Anna Tian > Andre K. January 6, 2015 at 1:08am

              Thanks. Why they use open source but not 'more reliable' commercial solution? What's the main reason? To save money or to enjoy the more advanced function the open source autopilot provide?

This reply was deleted.

Activity