Hi all Open-Source enthusiast,
Paparazzi UAV, the real Open-Source autopilot driven by a community of users without an economically driven goal. Today we are adding an extra autopilot board to there long list of supported autopilots.
The Pixhawk autopilot board will be integrated in our next software release! The video shows the first flight with Paparazzi UAV on a Pixhawk, more videos will follow.
Why choose Paparazzi UAV?
If you are looking for an advanced, modular open-source autopilot which has features others can only dream of, you choose Paparazzi UAV.
You can make the comparison between Windows and Linux. For example APM is the Windows unfriendly plug and pay software, While Paparazzi UAV is the Linux of autopilot systems, where everything you can imagine is possible.
We make it possible for you to choose the best software for your needs, on the hardware platforms that are right for your project.
Wishing you successful flights,
The Paparazzi dev team
Comments
@davidbuzz: That's sort of my take as well. I have waited to try APM when the features caught up to Paparazzi but didn't want hardware forcing me to choose one or the other. Now this opens up that it should be possible to flash Paparazzi STM32 hardware with ArduPilot code right?
I'm going to buy a PixHawk soon because it's high time I actually started flying with MissionPlanner and ArduPilot code. I'm looking forward to it actually. There's many options even with PixHawk now.
Something I feel personally is really nice with an open hardware and software is the choice of choosing from many different vendors for the same hardware and picking who I support not having that choice forced on me by simply having only one place to get it. It makes the vendor work harder to have to earn the business not just rely on it not being available anywhere else.
@Felix, ( and others)
ArduPilot supports features equivalent to what have been described ( "complex missions", "multi-UAV support"), so I see no compelling reason to change. :-) Also, I have tried paraprazzi previously, and my experience was similar to others..... I wasted hours and hours trying to get setup, and then was never able to get it to work. Clearly my knowledge/experience was a limiting factor, but documentation and perceived complexity also play a part. I'd personally love to see more cross-over between the two projects, so having "your software" running on "our hardware" is cool.
@Tony sorry for the delay
Some Paparazzi concepts are really powerful (e.g. Flight Plans to create complex missions, multi-UAV support) and you can think of Paparazzi more like a toolbox that tries to enable you to plug together the hardware and software modules you want as opposed to one fixed firmware that comes pre-compiled for a specific board/use-case.
But I know neither APM nor PX4 well enough to make any flight performance comparisons here...
@ Rob Ok, sorry, then I misundertood your video. Was just happy to see another UAV developer being enthusiastic about flying in the cold!
@Rob, yes, it has done extremely well indeed. Thank you for pointing that out.
David, I did not mean to take away from that significant accomplishment from any group. I'm just pointing out that Ardupilot has also done quite well in the competition.
From the 2009 archives on the Paparazzi Wiki: "Paparazzi was a big success at the 2009 UAV Outback Challenge held at Kingaroy Airport, Queensland, Australia, Sep. 28-30. Team “Look mAh, no hands!” representing Brisbane Grammar School, won the ‘Robot Airborne Delivery Challenge’ placing 1st, after performing an autonomous mission phase including autonomous payload release. The team consisted of four members in their senior years of high-school, and was led by team captain Ben Paratz. Many thanks to the paparazzi community, not only for the autopilot itself but for the assistance that was enthusiastically given whenever needed."
@Rob: I said: " I helped a grade school class get their hardware and they took first price their initial go at it some years ago"
I did not say "won" Outback Challenge. There are many different sub-contests. It seems your dismissing their achievement to make a point which for them was probably quite an accomplishment for a grade school class.
@Martin, the intent of the video was not so much to speak of temperature during the flight, but rather the performance of the flight. Smooth, stable performance, even when being dunked in powder snow. There is only one clip in that video which is slow motion (one of the snow dunks) the rest of full-speed video, demonstrating the stability and smoothness of flight.
I would like to see videos like this from Paparazzi, I haven't seen any yet, so I really don't know what performance levels are like.
@David, Andrew Tridgell won the last Outback challenge, using Ardupilot. It is also capable of being flexible and high performance.
I am definitely interested in trying Paparazzi and it will be high on my list. More so if I can use a Pixhawk.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 5 Next