--------------------------------------
The Quanum i8 Radio was developed specifically for APM/PixHawk users. The dial has pre-set PWM positions that can be assigned by the user via Mission Planner software. Along with 2 sliders for gimbal control and 8 channels in total the Quanum i8 is a groundbreaking radio and the first radio system in the market developed specifically for Ardupilot users. The included receiver is also said to have simultaneous PWM and PPM output! Each position on the dial is indicated by one of the 6 LEDs on the top of the radio, a set of stickers to suit your mode selections will be included with each radio to customize your setup.
http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__90960__COMING_SOON_Quanu...
(reposted from this discussion)
Comments
@Chris, I know and understand why and where you are going with the Solo.
But it's worth noting that one of the most rapid growing trends right now is FPV racing. Going the exact opposite route doing manual control as much as possible. And speaking as a long time hobbyist. For me manually piloting and the feeling of mastering the task, has a much better long time appeal. Just pressing a button and watching the copter do it's thing get's old very quickly..
I would love to see an HMI control system that goes beyond RC hobby systems which have been anachronistic for at least 10 years already. Hopefully it will be powerful, flexible and well designed.
@Artem: We focus on autonomy and near-autonomy, which means that all user modes are GPS assisted and fly-by-wire (or fully autonomous). That means that all inputs are inherently damped, and thus super low-latency control is not required (that said, the SoloLink latency is ~the same as RC control in my experience, although I'm not a fast-twitch pilot). It's just a very different user from RC fliers.
I think you'll see the drone industry increasingly diverge from the RC industry in terms of the underlying technologies as companies like ours align with the smartphone industry roadmaps. Right now I think the only RC technologies we use in Solo are the brushless motors. Everything else is custom or standard mobile/internet standards.
@Chris, Thx for the reply!
I am all for the integrated RC+telemetry+video link, just curious how the current solo solution fares fares against the popular RC protocols in terms of latency and noise tolerance.
IMHO for now, a simple "market share holder" solution like working with openTX and frsky would ensure wider market reach now with a future upgrade to a more advanced solution. Just saying that right now market needs 3DR presence in that niche.
my 5c
@Artem: We, like DJI, are moving away from RC protocols and using more mobile/Internet standards, such as advanced long-range WiFI (which we currently use in Solo), software-defined radio and eventually open-spectrum LTE. This allows for better phone/cloud connectivity, which is one of the things that differentiates drones from RC aircraft. I expect that the community will continue to develop for RC protocols, but as a company we're focused on next-gen wireless technologies that come out the smartphone industry.
@ Rob, we are talking about HK... shit needs to be so cheap that with 10x markup it should cost less than the competitors. Also, the market is full of newbs who do not even expect this functionality, so they'll sell this "toy" regardless. What puzzles me is why 3DR haven't build such a system themselves yet?!? or at least release solo controller+Rx in a nice package... or at least work with open TX community and frsky to bring proper mavlink support into taranis?
btw, if anyone knows, how solo's radio link fares against a conventional RC links like DSMX, FASST, ACCST
They wouldn't have to write a whole system themselves. It's a minor mod. Especially if using OpenTx as a base, it's trivial.
And even if they did have to write it from scratch, what's the big deal? I did it myself, wrote an entire Tx program myself, from scratch, 2 years ago, and it included this functionality. I don't understand how companies can produce a product without putting any effort in?
@Rob
Because they would have to write a whole RC system for themselves, instead I think what they are using is a simple "hardware" solution and existing flysky hardware/software.
I think that its pretty neat that APM has influenced the creation of a radio system that is marketed specifically for APM.
That being said, I will now risk 'judging a book by it's cover' and say : That I think this particular offering is most likely a quick & dirty design that is populated with mediocre components. Just say'n
Chris
no telemetry? what a waste of an idea!
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next