Jordi has been flight testing ArduPilot all week and we've got a raft of new code to share over the next week and an exciting new dimension of ArduPilot to reveal. First, today's installment: an updated version of the standard ArduPilot code, with PID loops improved and some bugs caught. You can find the code here.
This is the last version of ArduPilot that we will be releasing with a NMEA parser. Although NMEA allows you to use any GPS module with ArduPilot, it's inefficient and ultimately limiting in accuracy and reliability. Going forward we will be supporting SirfIII binary mode with the EM406 (if you have one, there's nothing you need to do to switch to that mode; the code will do it for you) and the Ublox 5Hz modules. Everyone with the recommended combo of ArduPilot and EM406 are fine. Those of you with other GPS modules are also fine for now, in that this is the latest and greatest code for this version of ArduPilot, but you won't be able to migrate with us to the next version. (Although you can always tweak our code for your own GPS if you want).
All this is the lead-up to the next release, in a few days: ArduPilot with built-in stabilization and navigation, flying great in a plane you may recognize ;-) More later..
u-blox is great and I highly recommend the GS406 from sparkfun. It regularly locks 6+ sats at 24+ dB, indoors, behind metal window blinds, even with heavy rain. The only down side is you need to solder breakout wires onto it since nobody has cables or connectors. Also the antenna looks like a midget sex toy.
Reto: thanks for the clarification, and no offense taken. We're continuing to support the recommended GPS module (EM406), but others will continue to be evaluated and supported as our our technology needs require. Staying with the leading edge of the project may require upgrading GPS modules every now and then, but sticking with the EM406 is a safe option for the foreseeable future.
Thanks! this is great news. It seems that the basic "core navigation" is now complete, AND fully working. It's all icing from here on out. Great job guy's!
@Jordi: thanks for the precisions about climb rate problem with NMEA parsing.
Chris: if you felt my reaction was to discourage somebody, then you've misinterpreted my point which I can resume as follows: since things seem to evolve in favor of binary gps for code efficiency reasons, then I'll have to get an EM406 to stay tuned with the project, or I'll adapt the new code to keep slower ASCII NMEA parsing for my setup.
That's all conclusion I made. I am sure you can understand that the change between the present orientation as defined in this post and your comment about the Locosys 20031 GPS here can have surprised me a little bit. And it is because it is an open source project that I expressed my little surprise. Seems I shouldn't have?
To make things as clear as possible, I am amazed by the project Jordi and you have created and are running so nicely. This project rocks and I wouldn't like to miss the slightest evolution. Since I'm a newbie, if I do not get immediate sense of everything, then, well, I'll ask as I have done until now... if it is ok with you. On my side, I just can hope it's ok. Finally, I really hope you didn't take my comments as personal as I took your responses, but if it should be the case, then I'm sorry having chosen wrong words in my comments. As we know all, sometimes language is killing communication!
William: I think my RTL problem was poorly tuned PID loops. We've evolved them considerably since then. Jordi has demonstrated solid waypoint and RTL flight on several platforms since then.
Reto: Roadmaps change, projects evolve. This is the way technology works. We try to share our thinking in public at all times to get community input, and I hope you don't mean to discourage us from doing that. This is an open source project, so if you don't like our roadmap you are very welcome to create your own and fork the project in any direction you wish.
I'm actually a little surprised by your reaction. Have you ever participated in an open source project that didn't evolve its roadmap over time? I sure haven't.
Comments
Chris: if you felt my reaction was to discourage somebody, then you've misinterpreted my point which I can resume as follows: since things seem to evolve in favor of binary gps for code efficiency reasons, then I'll have to get an EM406 to stay tuned with the project, or I'll adapt the new code to keep slower ASCII NMEA parsing for my setup.
That's all conclusion I made. I am sure you can understand that the change between the present orientation as defined in this post and your comment about the Locosys 20031 GPS here can have surprised me a little bit. And it is because it is an open source project that I expressed my little surprise. Seems I shouldn't have?
To make things as clear as possible, I am amazed by the project Jordi and you have created and are running so nicely. This project rocks and I wouldn't like to miss the slightest evolution. Since I'm a newbie, if I do not get immediate sense of everything, then, well, I'll ask as I have done until now... if it is ok with you. On my side, I just can hope it's ok. Finally, I really hope you didn't take my comments as personal as I took your responses, but if it should be the case, then I'm sorry having chosen wrong words in my comments. As we know all, sometimes language is killing communication!
I'm actually a little surprised by your reaction. Have you ever participated in an open source project that didn't evolve its roadmap over time? I sure haven't.
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next