Hi,

could you tell me who is personally, legally accountable in case of drone crash case reported to law enforcement officers, FAA due to known bugs, flaws in Pixhawk flight controller ?

I have followed tens of discussions on this and other forums and questions asked by hobbyists are responded by hobbyists either.

There is no interest on the side of Pixhawk developer/s  from Switzerland

to take active part in such discussions.

The last discussion at DIYDrones

and history from

https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/drones-discuss/iZmeopHOLGM/discussion

are good examples how hobbyists try to response to problems asked by hobbyists and just fail, since such questions should be responded by genuine

developer/s of Pixhawk originating from the Switzerland.

GPS is used...

No GPS isn't used...

I am surprised to learn GPS is used..

I have been surprised ..

Views: 3448

Replies to This Discussion

Get a life.

If some knuckle head fouls up his setup and then his aircraft crashes and causes property damage or personal injury,  HE is responsible, so quit trying to put the DEVs on the spot for something YOU have obviously done.

And to be honest, all I have seen you post is crap, and if I ran this forum you'd be on the outside looking in.

USE AT YOUR OWN RISK!!  The user is responsible for his actions.

Regards,

David R. Boulanger

+1000

@David,

you are not correct.

There is no use at your own risk, since Pixhawk is not IT software only product for home use.

Developers of Pixhawk are fully aware of problems, bugs, flaws in algorithmics

and discuss these from time to time.

Pixhawk is not Linux , you risk nothing failing to attach your new printer.

Pixhawk is software product to make your personal drone to fly.

It's ok if it lets you fly safely.

It's not ok, if it lets you fly not safe.

Ok, Pixhawk is underfunded project, sponsored by 3DR, by the Switzerland and some others known or unknown entities.

The problem with Pixhawk is obvious bugs, flaws, reported for years are discussed

over and over again by new hobbyists and no cure is offered from developers, who find themself legally not accountable for a possible drone crash, personal injuries

and followed compensation claims.

Keeping Pixhawk underdeveloped, underfunded, is protecting business by DJI, Parrot, 3DR and some others, since manufacturing Pixhawk based professional drones for sales is 100% collapse risk business ( in compensation claims).

At the same time, keeping Pixhawk underdeveloped, underfunded keeps innocent hobbyists 24h busy asking the same questions over and over again, making of them

army of free beta testers, drone crashers at free disposal.

The more problems with Pixhawk the more money goes to DJI since many

prefer to buy pretested, ready-to-fly personal camera drone off-the-shelf, for immediate use.

If Pixhawk with tons of bugs, flaws has no future to succeed (latest market share data), why Pixhawk developers, the developer from Switzerland, is not looking for to turn Pixhawk into Kickstarter project to get public funding, to make Pixhawk 100% safe and completed, hiring real aircraft engineers to inject into Pixhawk safe flight control theory and practice, to inject expertize and lastest, state-of-the-art

in autonomous aircraft control.

If the intention of developers is to keep Pixhawk to never compete to DJI and other manufactures of professional personal drones, just say so in public.

Otherwise, turn Pixhawk into professional r&d project, get funding, hire professional aircraft engineers, testers, IT engineers to make it top drone pilot project.

It's not smart if it takes years for innocent hobbysists to guess if GPS is used 

or not in one of flight modes.

Developing unsafe flight modes, new ones every time is exposing innocent hobbyists

to problems with law enforcement officers, FAA, in case of drone crash, personal injuries and other follow-up.

Pixhawk is not Linux, you can shot-off your PC every time, generating no risk to third parties.

Pixhawk is offered to make your personal drone to fly safely 100%,

so Pixhawk developers are legally accountable for bugs, flaws in code, algorithmics, avionics data processing.

You do know the pixhawk is a piece of hardware, right?  Like a computer, or a car?

@Moderator:

This guy is a troll, nothing more, nothing less.  His ignorance is only surpassed by his arrogance.

It is obvious to the most casual of observers that Darius Jack's primary agenda is to post content that are plainly accusatory, disrespectful, and inflammatory diatribes against members of the development team who, in the spirit of the concept of Open Source, have so generously poured countless man years of mental and physical effort into this project.  I say it is time that we as the end users and benefactors of this selfless generosity show our support for and our gratitude to our benefactors by standing up in the defence of the Development Team against these heinous and unwarranted attacks.

I want to be the first to stand up and cast my vote to have Darius Jack banned.  

How say you all?

 

Reposting this pic from fsnoop just because:

-  I can

-  It cracked me up

- It's even funnier than  "Pixhawk developers are legally accountable for bugs, flaws in code, algorithmics, avionics data processing", no small feat!

-  It sums it up

Just don't make the same mistake I made.  Ignore him.  He, like a house plant,  will eventually wither away to dust.

Regards,

David R. Boulanger

The FAA is unambiguous.  Drones are aircraft and fall under title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 (and others) for operational regulation:

§91.3   Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command.

(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.

Any accident, regardless of the cause, is the responsibility of the Pilot in Command.  This is also subject to the regulations of the NTSB, Title 49 part 830, which defines what an accident is and what has to be reported. I think it unlikely any drone crash would rise to the definition of "accident".  If the FAA insists we abide by these regulations, we should insist on applying all of them.

First of all, Pixhawk is NOT a software its the name that was given to the flight controller, you tool...

Second of all, the developers have gone through extreme measures to ensure, the firmware you upload to the Pixhawk is safe to use and won't cause any issues. 


Third of all, its your responsibility to ensure your drone has been setup correctly, failure to do so can lead to crashes and you SHOULD NOT be holding the developers accountable for, because of your stupidity and ignorance to adhere to procedures.


I've been in this hobby for years and I fully understand the risks associated with this hobby. If my plane/drone crashes, that's because I did something wrong, and I must accept the mistake and learn from it.


Last but not least, blaming someone else (developers) for your stupidity and lack of knowledge on the subject is a recipe for disaster. I'd encourage you to do some researching and reading, it helps...

3D Robotics is clear as well, "IN NO EVENT WILL 3D ROBOTICS BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR DAMAGES, INCLUDING ANY GENERAL, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING
OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE SOFTWARE"

It open source software, everyone writes it, it's nobody's fault.

I'm not normally one for interference, moderation etc, (partly because if provoked i have a very poor filter and tend to get quite opinionated so would be quickly moderated out of any conversation), but it must be said he is so disruptive and negative to so many otherwise sensible discussions that I'm very surprised he hasn't been at least warned or toned down.  IMHO this is a failure of the moderators.

I started off thinking he was just a bit new, or a lonely bot someone was testing, then thought maybe he was a bored teenager trolling from a parents basement, then to just thinking he was a troll.  Now I don't believe anyone could be this stupid and ignorant and think there must be an actual agenda at play - a DJI troll, for example, deliberately disrupting alternative technologies.

It's quite clear he doesn't have or fly a pixhawk, apm, or px4 software, or any other kind of drone for that matter, his sole reason of existence on this forum seems to be to troll others, put others down, or draw people into one of his (non existent) schemes to fix one of his (invented) syndromes.

RSS

© 2019   Created by Chris Anderson.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service