I have had my DJI Phantom for about 3 weeks now and loved how easy it was to setup and fly. The best part was flying in GPS mode, I could just let go of the sticks and it would hover in place.
Yesterday I decided to take some go pro pics of the intercoastal waterway and all the fishing boats docked at high noon.
Of course, the first time I fly near any body of water, my Phantom decided to go berserk and landed into the marsh.
I was able to salvage it and and the go pro, but I'm pretty sure it will never fly again, nor do I want to waste any more time/money with DJI products.
So I have been doing research on the IRIS and wanted to know how it compared to the Phantom, specifically does it have a GPS flight mode where I can let go of the sticks and it hover. I believe Pixhawk has a 'loiter' mode - is that the same thing?
Also, DJI Phantoms are apparently notorious for random fly aways - is there a chance the Pixhawk or IRIS will have the same issues? With the Phantom, you have to be uber careful where you fly and calibrate your compass before every flight...such a pain.
With the IRIS/Pixhawk, do I have to worry about stuff like that?
What about disappearing features and wiki contradictions??
I think the issue with the Phantom is not the flight controller but the radio Tx it comes with. It's a low end unit. The phantom is IMHO really isn't a serious RC product but more of an advanced mass produced toy.
That might be true if a Phantom receiver wouldn't bind directly to a Futaba transmitter without modification. I used to use a T8FGs with my P1, but after migrating my fleet to FrSky, I run an X6R in my P2 for the Taranis. Not hard to install. I don't know many people who fly the stock receiver because your programming features are limited. FWIW, I used to think that it was a toy until I flew one with a different TX, and then wanted one. My P2 has a H3-3D gimbal for my GoPro B3+, iOSD mini, Immersion 600mw VTX, and a FlyTrex. And I still get around 11 mins out of the battery with all of that hanging on it. It's reliable, easy to fly and configure, packs into a reasonably sized case, and has plenty of performance for aerial photography. Does it look more like a toy than the Iris because it's white :)
@Dan - That's good info, thanks. Too bad they fly away so often. And yes, they look more like a toy because they are white. That's a given. :-)
The first thing that should be done is every page is tagged in the title with the version it applies too. At the least readers will know if its still valid.
I know this is generated from the source, but what version of Arducopter is this for ?
Given the scales of values has changed here there, some of these suggested ranges are of course downright wrong.
This page should **never** be out of sync with the latest release.
At the very least there should be multiple versions of this for each and every release, so if people dont want to upgrade their firmware they at the least have a reference to look at. It must really annoy people to suddenly have no doco because they are on an old version.
The console screenshot shows Arducopter v2 beta and we are now 3.2, and the text is probably just as old. A lot has changed, much has been added from the CLI and removed due to flash space. That means the first page that anybody probably comes to have a look at advanced configuration is completely useless. That just leaves a very bad impression on those many eyes.
This is probably one of the most important pages in the entire documentation and its over a year old and terribly wrong. A year in Arducopter is an eternity.
I dont want to scream at the developers but before releasing new versions the documentation should match. If the doco is not ready then the software doesnt continue to move forward. I could go on and im guessing other pages are just stale.
Software without documentation (out of sync is even worse) is just bad & unprofessional.
Exactly, one has to wonder how many tried and followed the doc and then crashed. I know there are idiots who dont know or even try to read and do the right thing, but when your getting bad advice, that can only make that user unhappy and disappointed.
One day someones going to get hurt because they followed bad documentation or guessed and bad stuff happened.
After a colleague crashed into saltwater, I can recommend you just wash out your copter (just fresh water at first), then finish off with some alcohol to help things dry properly.
Your battery won't be salvageable, but the rest will probably work fine, once everything is *completely* dried. Our drone just needed a new circuit board in one of the ams as it got damaged during the crash.
Otherwise, it flies again!
I chose the IRIS over the Phantom for waypoint navigation, extensibility, and support and self-help resources. I've since found the IRIS is also more durable and reliable than I would have thought, and capable of high-grade video when tuned properly. I'm one of those guys who bought a full IRIS/Tarot set-up as my first quad. Starting from zero but with plenty of research and a few new skills under my belt, it's been a total blast without a single significant crash, incident, or system malfunction and dozens of successful missions. Those times things have gone screwy can be traced back to user error/ignorance or, in one case, an underpowered design that has been resolved with the IRIS+.
That's good info Rodney. Do you mind saying what is the Android app that you use to check GPS? Thanks.
Danwhat I have used for years is a ( DUAL ) Model XGPS150 universal GPS receiver. I am running a Galaxy tab 10.5 with Android APP from GG MobLab called Bluetooth GPS. I have this on my phone also. So when I go out to fly I set the GPS receiver out on the ground to check location and signal strength. Gives you a good indication of a fly or NO fly situation. You know if you are getting a good signal on the ground its going to be better in the air. here are a few screen shots sitting in my office with the unit next to me.. It works well enough to save me from a possible GPS signal issue.