Hello Fellow Yuneec Pilot!
Join our free Yuneec community and remove this annoying banner!
Sign up

Why won't Yuneec Produce a Comprehensive User's Manual?

Joined
Jan 5, 2017
Messages
52
Reaction score
20
Location
Chandler, Az
Why would a manufacturer produce a good product, Typhoon H, and not spend a few dollars compiling and distributing a comprehensive owners manual? The cost of producing this manual has to be MUCH less expensive than the warranty costs Yuneec incurs due to new user errors that could be avoided with said manual! Imagine BMW selling a new car with a cursory 4 page owners manual and the owners have to find bits a pieces of information online on how to properly use most all of its systems.
 
Jizzy,
If you find the answer to that you best play the lottery.
We have been asking the same question since day one.
 
Why would a manufacturer produce a good product, Typhoon H, and not spend a few dollars compiling and distributing a comprehensive owners manual? The cost of producing this manual has to be MUCH less expensive than the warranty costs Yuneec incurs due to new user errors that could be avoided with said manual! Imagine BMW selling a new car with a cursory 4 page owners manual and the owners have to find bits a pieces of information online on how to properly use most all of its systems.

JizzyJiz -
Sadly, this is incredibly common. One of my departments runs the soup-to-nuts process of documentation, enablement and manual creation for products - it is a huge effort when you have a mass-produced product. That isn't to say your point is not valid; there are many ways it could be argued that effective documentation can help reduce product returns, warranty claims and even FTC consumer accidents/complaints (at least within the US).

For a product like these drones, you have to factor in localization costs as well as legal. In many states the manual is, in fact, considered a form of contract or agreement of understanding that can also leave the corporate entity culpable if not properly written (eg. insufficient formal notices, scenario based examples, etc.)

Also keep in mind the infancy of the software and the frequency of the updates, dramatically adding to the effort and cost. One of our clients was a just-launched security cam company, each software update cost around $9-12k for documentation rewrites that included reprint of physical material for in box physical product plus web-copy updates and PDF updates.

As a consumer it's totally annoying, but from the back-end, I completely see why it doesn't happen. Luckily, with hobbies such as this, there is an inherent parallel to web/online sharing that accompanies the purchase/use of such a device (for example, this forum!) - this often helps soften the need for official/thorough documentation from the manufacturer and, in some cases, creates justification within their minds for them to not throttle-up effort.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jester and mcbutler
Might a short version of your excellent behind the scene description of the documentation process be shortened to $$?
 
Might a short version of your excellent behind the scene description of the documentation process be shortened to $$?

Aircraft manufacturers and car manufacturers produce basic /adequate user manuals because they make a profit at it right? My pilot operating handbook for my 1963 Debonair has most all the information I need to fly it along with, guess what, user manuals for upgraded avionics/flight systems. Strange concept right PatR? Follow the aircraft industry model for Pilot operating handbooks. If Yuneec has too, charge an extra $50 per TH for an up to date POH thats included with the TH, offer an update service subscription for those that will pay, training videos/ seminars and just maybe people would crack open their wallets and pay for some of it. Like I said my freaking grill has better documentation/online videos from the manufacturer than the TH. Good enough process for you "PatR"?
 
Why would a manufacturer produce a good product, Typhoon H, and not spend a few dollars compiling and distributing a comprehensive owners manual? The cost of producing this manual has to be MUCH less expensive than the warranty costs Yuneec incurs due to new user errors that could be avoided with said manual! Imagine BMW selling a new car with a cursory 4 page owners manual and the owners have to find bits a pieces of information online on how to properly use most all of its systems.

Yes, this is an issue that irritates many of us. And its what makes this forum so important for those of us who want to know about all the advanced features of our aircraft.
I have to believe that Yuneec's tech support would spend a lot less time answering questions that would normally be handled by a comprehensive owners manual. But instead of creating it once and making available to everyone, they choose to spend their days explaining these things over and over again 1 customer at a time day in and day out!?! Yes it would be much cheaper to produce a manual and then make available as a PDF download, and we would be happy to pay the actual printing costs!
 
Jizzy,

You prolly know I'm a pilot and think aircraft should have ops docs and references. I also do preliminary write ups for ops and maintenance documentation. The tech writers take it from there. I understand the trials and tribulations that can be associated, even for docs that have to fit NATO standards, but there are established standards. Translations require copy writers for the intended locale, and those can easily be hired.

Now the above references civilian and military use aircraft so they have to be of considerably greater depth. Consumer level multirotors need only provide textual description of the operating system, flight modes, camera controls, firmware upgrade process, concise description of calibration processes, and operating limitations. Some reference to periodic service intervals would be helpful to prevent crashes from worn out component failures. All of that might lower the final margin a little bit but it would also increase the margin by reducing "warranty" work. It would also cause more people to buy the product because the maker suddenly looked and acted like an outfit that intended to be around for awhile. They might also try keeping their website up to date. Has anyone yet been able to register their aircraft online?
 
JizzyJiz -
Sadly, this is incredibly common. One of my departments runs the soup-to-nuts process of documentation, enablement and manual creation for products - it is a huge effort when you have a mass-produced product. That isn't to say your point is valid; there are many ways it could be argued that effective documentation can help reduce product returns, warranty claims and even FTC consumer accidents/complaints (at least within the US).

For a product like these drones, you have to factor in localization costs as well as legal. In many states the manual is, in fact, considered a form of contract or agreement of understanding that can also leave the corporate entity culpable if not properly written (eg. insufficient formal notices, scenario based examples, etc.)

Also keep in mind the infancy of the software and the frequency of the updates, dramatically adding to the effort and cost. One of our clients was a just-launched security cam company, each software update cost around $9-12k for documentation rewrites that included reprint of physical material for in box physical product plus web-copy updates and PDF updates.

As a consumer it's totally annoying, but from the back-end, I completely see why it doesn't happen. Luckily, with hobbies such as this, there is an inherent parallel to web/online sharing that accompanies the purchase/use of such a device (for example, this forum!) - this often helps soften the need for official/thorough documentation from the manufacturer and, in some cases, creates justification for them to not throttle-up effort.
Interesting view from someone in the know, thank you Steve..
 
They don't make any money in documenting their product. If a manufacturer can save a nickel per unit you can bet they will do it. Also they have no "Watch Dog Agencies" there.
You must also recognize that English is not their first or native language. Many of the engineers were trained abroad and not in China and it might not have been an English speaking country.
I taught specialized course in calibration procedures to our customers for the equipment they had purchased from us and many of them were not able to speak English. We had interpreters that would translate what I was saying to them and their question back to me. German and Spanish were the most challenging.
The Germans did not have one word for AC power and called it "Up river and Down river current."
The Spanish speakers were from Spain, Columbia, Venezuela, and Brazil. Brazilian spoke "Portuguese" and it was hard to do.
The only thing the companies earned from good documentation is goodwill of the customers.
 
Last edited:
Jizzy, They might also try keeping their website up to date. Has anyone yet been able to register their aircraft online?
I registered mine with no problem, however I can't log in to the website.
 
They don't make any money in documenting their product. If a manufacturer can save a nickel per unit you can bet they will do it. Also they have no "Watch Dog Agencies" there.

I wouldn't say a company makes no money in documenting their product, it can - in the long run - increase margins for profitability when documentation is sufficient and correlated to reducing tech, service and warranty calls. The FTC, in the US, is the 'Watch Dog Agency' that controls the relationship between physical product to consumer. Further, in this particular new budding industry, the FAA steps in further down the line on consumer use ad-hoc to local law enforcement - when applicable. But, no, there is not a specific new agency dedicated to the growing world of multi-rotor consumer aircrafts.

You must also recognize that English is not their first or native language. Many of the engineers were trained abroad and not in China and it might not have been an English speaking country.

I would agree - as to my original reply, the cost of translation as well the the cost of dedicating internal resources absolutely plays a role in a company's ability to begin a thorough documentation process.

The only thing the companies earned from good documentation is goodwill of the customers.

This isn't necessarily true, at least from the perspective of acting as an impetus for driving documentation initiatives. Companies, first and foremost, document out of identified minimum necessities and capacity they have at the time of their initial offer. They also do not initially worry about earning good will of customers (via manuals/documentation) - the documentation often serves to reduce costs at either an operational, production or legal level. Automobiles have excellent manuals and documentation - especially as their in-cabin electronics continue to advance. But you never hear someone on a car lot saying: "I'm definitely getting that Audi because of the splendid job they did on their recent manual." As arguably, nor do you see anyone purchasing a drone based on the level of available documentation... at least for me.
 
Jizzy,

You prolly know I'm a pilot and think aircraft should have ops docs and references. I also do preliminary write ups for ops and maintenance documentation. The tech writers take it from there. I understand the trials and tribulations that can be associated, even for docs that have to fit NATO standards, but there are established standards. Translations require copy writers for the intended locale, and those can easily be hired.

Now the above references civilian and military use aircraft so they have to be of considerably greater depth. Consumer level multirotors need only provide textual description of the operating system, flight modes, camera controls, firmware upgrade process, concise description of calibration processes, and operating limitations. Some reference to periodic service intervals would be helpful to prevent crashes from worn out component failures. All of that might lower the final margin a little bit but it would also increase the margin by reducing "warranty" work. It would also cause more people to buy the product because the maker suddenly looked and acted like an outfit that intended to be around for awhile. They might also try keeping their website up to date. Has anyone yet been able to register their aircraft online?
I registered mine online
 
Why would a manufacturer produce a good product, Typhoon H, and not spend a few dollars compiling and distributing a comprehensive owners manual? The cost of producing this manual has to be MUCH less expensive than the warranty costs Yuneec incurs due to new user errors that could be avoided with said manual! Imagine BMW selling a new car with a cursory 4 page owners manual and the owners have to find bits a pieces of information online on how to properly use most all of its systems.

The internet has become the great equalizer, though a two edged sword... they know that we as users, with online forums and video uploading sites as a publishing platform, will fill the void exactly as we have done in the Want to help make a better manual? thread.

We do so in the spirit of "for the common good", though we do so as unpaid employees and with no responsibility on Yuneec's end. Their legal team would simply say none of that online information is officially from Yuneec, and therefore they would have 0 legal liability for any information disseminated. No expense and no legal risk could be interpreted like a remarkably sound business strategy IMHO.
 
Last edited:
The internet has become the great equalizer, though a two edged sword... they know that we as users, with online forums and video uploading sites as a publishing platform, will fill the void exactly as we have done in the Want to help make a better manual? thread.

We do so in the spirit of "for the common good", though we do so as unpaid employees and with no responsibility on Yuneec's end. Their legal team would simply say none of that online information is officially from Yuneec, and therefore they would have 0 legal liability for any information disseminated. No expense and no legal risk could be interpreted like a remarkably sound business strategy IMHO.

Outside of legality, the "common good" becomes open to interpretation. If none of the information is validated or certified to be accurate and no formal process is followed, it simply serves the purpose to interested parties that want to consolidate - hopefully accurate - information to a place where it cane be shared, etc.

I would hope that a Yuneec (or others) see threads or manuals like the one you mentioned and hopefully feel a sense of responsibility to step in and offer guidance or correction and additional information if they saw fit. Then again, hope is not a strategy...
 
I'll simply point to user documentation for APM and Eagle Tree Vector flight controllers as examples of manuals that significantly decrease user errors while expanding product functionality for those that buy them. I have both and the documentation, which was available online, largely influenced my purchase decisions. I also have FC's that were accompanied with little in the way of documentation, which were later set aside in favor of more fully documented FC's.
 
The FTC, in the US, is the 'Watch Dog Agency' that controls the relationship between physical product to consumer. .
Which has ZERO authority in CHINA.

I would agree - as to my original reply, the cost of translation as well the cost of dedicating internal resources absolutely plays a role in a company's ability to begin a thorough documentation process.
In China they don't operate with the same business models we do. The expenditure of capitol would not be supported by management due to how many staff members it would require test and document every facet to a sufficient level.

This isn't necessarily true, at least from the perspective of acting as an impetus for driving documentation initiatives. Companies, first and foremost, document out of identified minimum necessities and capacity they have at the time of their initial offer. They also do not initially worry about earning good will of customers (via manuals/documentation) - the documentation often serves to reduce costs at either an operational, production or legal level.
As far as the Chinese are concerned, They say, "Sue me and waste your time and money just to irritate yourself." Look at all of the patent infringements and do you think compensation will ever be forth coming? There were hundreds of children killed by a chemical added to powdered baby formula.
It was well proven and was there a payout? No, but even worse there were execution of company officers.
They don't work on our type of business plan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PatR

New Posts

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
20,955
Messages
241,593
Members
27,286
Latest member
lahorelaptop