Users feedback report around GCS software
As many of you already know we are putting a strong effort on investigating possible improvements that could be done on Ground Control Stations interfaces. We would like to thank everyone who spared some time helping us with our 1st round survey (results can be seen on the link below).
1st Round - GCS Users Feedback
By now, we prepared a 2nd round survey that aims to refine the results and gather more feedbacks and insights from the community. The new survey is on the link below.
2nd Round – Ground Control Stations – Detailed usage
We are extremely happy to share the results with the community, but we really need your help to spread the survey and gather as many user responses we can. So please, share the link with the world.
@Karthik Desai Unfortunatelly we didn't have enough answers on the second survey, but we were working on a Usability Test on QGroundControl that we will post soon. Thanks for your interest. You can follow our work here: https://github.com/Dronecode/UX-Design
Hey so any updates on this? :) been a while!
@all, I’ve updated the post including the next step of our research.
Please, share it with anyone who could contribute and let’s find more interesting things together. ;)
@luis Thanks a lot! for sure we will count with you. Yesterday we post a second round survey, so if you could answer and spread the word will be very helpful. Thanks a gain.
Count me in for a further survey. IMHO we are still looking at UX that aren't (yet) too user centric but more geek centric. That is also a problem related to the Flight Controller and its origin.
but good work with this first survey.
@mark Thanks for the feedback. We hope too. Could you help us on that?
@ben About Intel... we are investigating improvements that could be done on GCS interfaces and UX in general. We are planning another online survey, so we can add your feedback on that. Thanks!
Hi, Good report. Thank you for share it.
Nice report, I can imagine it took a lot of time to prepare, thanks for that !
One thing I find confusing is that the report doesn't really compare different GCS systems. It looks like the goal is to find common issues for all GCS, which is fine.
But in the end it mainly cites specific user quotes about specific GCS without explaining which GCS was targeted. So we have to assume that the specific quote was actually true for all GCS, or guess which GCS was discussed :
“Software dont make what you think.”
“Proprietary software from now defunct company.”
“Poor camera planning, does not estimate the number of pictures needed for required overlap very well, especially side to side.”
“Hit auto by accident, causing quad to fly away, used RTL to recover.”
Maybe a larger user sample, and a table showing the 'score' on different criterias for different GCS would be also interesting. Then if the data shows pattern such as "all GCS have a bad usability score" then it can be a very useful feedback for GCS designers.
I'm probably too curious, but was the report sponsored by Intel ? Are you (or Intel) going to develop a new GCS concept ?
Thank you !
I greatly appreciate this effort, as I think human factors engineering hasn't traditionally received enough attention in this ecosystem. Improving ground station interfaces could go a long way in minimizing confusion, engineering out human error, and improving the reliability and safety of UAV operations. Gathering data on user experiences is a great place to start in improving those interfaces. I do hope more people will choose to participate in future surveys. Thanks again for your effort!
@joseph Thanks for commenting. It's the idea, to go further on this investigation and we hope more people could share information with us. Soon we will post another survey.