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 ..
Replies
You do know the pixhawk is a piece of hardware, right? Like a computer, or a car?
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.
+1000
USE AT YOUR OWN RISK!! The user is responsible for his actions.
Regards,
David R. Boulanger
@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.
What type of sUAS do you fly and own. Just curious.
WHAT? Everyone knows trolls don't have time to actually do anything other than troll !
@Erik,
I am interested to implement Personal Drone Certification Standard.
If personal drone manufactured by DJI, so certified by DJI as aircraft to meet all aircraft standards.
If assembled by DIY, so assembled from certified parts.
Parts certified by every single manufacturer of drone parts.
Since many drone parts like motors, ESC, battery, BEC .... may find use and application in non-drone products, I would like manufacturers of such parts to declare, they are fit for drones, have been pretested to operate safely, if installed in DIY drone (aircraft).
Exactly to save jail term in few cases of third party personal injuries due to drone crash piloted correctly by a hobbyist, if the drone has been assembled from "Drone Certified" marked parts, assembled correctly according to attached manual/s and piloted safely, under FAA standards
and the crash is due to failure, burn out in drone part, drone sensor, drone controller or drone firmware code.
It may take me few days, weeks or months to have manufacturers of drone parts to implement
"Drone Certified" Mark and Standard globe-wide, since no regional restrictions exist.
Self certification procedure by manufacturers of drone parts looks to
be a welcome standard under new personal drone registration legislation enacted and implemented by FAA,
to let hobbyists and give them a chance and an apportunity to select and purchase
"Drone Certified" parts only for use to build his/her DIY safe drone.
"Drone Certified" Mark and Standard can be implemented easily by first manufacturer of drone parts, second, third, today or tomorrow,
as a guidance to DIY drone hobbyists to select and purchase
"Drone Certified" marked parts, tested to meet safe personal drone (aircraft)
operation standards set by FAA.
So I still don't have many answers yet.
Just let me know your opinion about
"Drone Certified" Mark and Standard for drone parts
What you are trying is finding a way to make a buck or two from the drone industry and the users. If you are really concern the safety, please contact AMA, they are in the R/C business for much much longer time than drone which is the latest addition to R/C. Which was good for R/C should be good for the drone.
BTW automobile has been around very long time now, can you name one that is perfectly safe? same for any other man made objects, drone carries certain risk. That said, I don't see it is riskier than gun. Why don't you try to make gun more safe.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 5 Next