- Joined
- Jul 4, 2017
- Messages
- 4,258
- Reaction score
- 2,025
As I have mentioned before, land your bird facing into the wind this will keep the bird from tipping or drifting upon landing.
Another bad landing
- Thread starter pipinmels
- Start date
PatR
Premium Pilot
And it’s been spoken! No room for debating that one.
Ya but...
Although not accepting a pattern event that can be repeated solely as pilot’s incompetency, based on the lack of existing on another H. That in itself would be an error in logic too, way to many other possible variables. One is pilot’s error... other undetermined at present.
Here's where I'm coming from with my "harsh" statement. If the software was a problem, everyone would be having landing problems. Since I have used every H firmware version to date I have yet to experience a bad landing, one that I could not control, with two different Typhoon H's. That amounts to well over 400 landings with quite a few of them being conducted from sloped and rough terrain. I too have had a few "skippy" landings but every one was induced by me through incorrect control inputs. I've rolled an H twice, once through an bad control input and the other deliberately for a video. Failing to land vertically will also cause a skippy landing. Multirotors do not "slide into home" safely as they don't have wheels, instead having ground "skewers". Sure, the earliest couple of firm/software versions were more "snappy" in control response but anyone with "educated" thumbs that understood how a multirotor worked could land them successfully every time. Since then the firm/software had been deliberately degraded to permit newbies to have a less sensitive aircraft. Too many complained about how their H would wobble when departing a hover, thinking something was wrong with it. Few bothered to note that wobble didn't telegraph into the recorded video and was not a debilitating factor. That wobble was indicative of a flight controller set up for best response, not as our grandmother's station wagon. Now we have a pretty tame flight system that no longer fits the high performance description of the aircraft.
Hardware can most certainly cause control issues but defective hardware cannot be fixed with software. To provide a blanket software update to everyone to attempt correction of a hardware issue would have to assume that all systems were defective. Again, that's just not the case. How someone sets up their system can certainly impact how it lands, and there is one in this forum that found that out the hard way. Others that mess around with the rates and expo can also negatively impact how their aircraft performs. Those that execute all their take offs and landings in Turtle mode set themselves up for a landing issue as the speed at which the aircraft responds to control inputs will be sluggish, and occur slower than the conditions mandate. A compass going south or not calibrated can cause problems, just as failing to perform accelerometer calibrations can. Of course everyone says they performed all the calibrations when they share their problem flight experiences, just as most will boldly state they didn't do anything wrong. The system did them in all by itself.
Of course, water in its various forms can certainly cause electrical issues that may manifest themselves as landing or other control issues, but that is essentially a hardware problem
Actually Pat, as expected in rational logic, I agree with your discourse for the points you’re touching on... pilot error is always one of the primary factors considered. As always, good discussion.Excusing temporarily other similar scenarios and using mine as the focus, I acknowledged the possibility of pilot error although citing a few variables “common” within several possibilities doesn’t isolate one as cause... doing so limits the diagnostics of core problem.
To jump to the end momentarily, as expressed today in the other thread on cold landings. Four batteries fully flown today, temps above sub-freezing (finally) at 36-38F, RH dry weather, winds 6-14 (cross wind)... a first for the H flights above freezing.
Performed multiple landings per battery in an attempt to simulate previous ill-behavior of AC, intentionally spent battery to low 14.3v triggering the engine boom lights to flash all indicating need to promptly land as an attempt to examine low battery behavior. Overall made every attempt to recreate the previous 3 flights sessions with exception of one variable.... temperature. Every liftoff, hover, landing, rapid decent flared landing, compass calibration error, angled surface, and purposefully dropped the H 3-4” above ground to induce a bumpy landing. All produced controllable smooth landings... and more importantly noticeable, the motor behavior stepped down without erratic behavior. After first 2 batteries, I even induced slightly poor stick behavior to test how far sticks needed to be off to induce unstable touch down... was much further than my fingers normally move controls... and quick to correct with a 4” hover and landing.
Personally, stick behavior has always been an awareness to me. Flying RC collective Heli w narrow skids, it’s all gentle sticks or you flip in an instant. Until recent experience with H, haven’t had a stable photo platform behave so poorly... and after today seeing the controlled behavior within the H sharply improve, I’d consider this bird a little sensitive to cold. Yuneec states -5C / 23F minimal... does that indicate mine is higher temp tollerance? My assessment has been “new” AC; every motor, bearing, bushing, etc has not accumulated hours to seat or polish components... making tolerances minimal & introducing erratic problems. Put 20 hours of warm / hot weather, I’d predict next cold Winter would perform acceptable. How many have taken a new H out of box and exposed it to sub-freezing temps for initial flights... probably not common.
********
Returning to my issue a few sections above, discussed FW (software) needing updates. More common than not if it’s not a hard failure, poor connection, moisture, installation build, or failure due to high / low temp on printed circuits, it’s rarely a failed electronic part compared to erratic behavior caused by FW and poor programming not accounting for unforseen operation parameters. The majority of electronic corrections are performed by FW updates.... yes,occasionally induces a new problem... temporarily.
If the result of “improved” software decreases performance (axial pivots, climb, etc) then it’s poorly designed FW or the attempt is not to improve but cover a problem or inferior designed tollerance component.
My example of FW to address landing ease for the majority of new Buyers should not effect performance, it should sense using one to multiple sensors already present in AC to cut power faster than Pilot when grounded... the accelerometer can easily be used for ground impact. If take-offs have been difficult for new flyers, then FW can smooth out control inputs until AC is 10-20 Ft off deck. On these electronic platforms, it’s all in the FW. Every aspect in these “fly by wire” systems comes down to FW programming.
In today’s competition: linear speed, axial pivot speed, ascend & decend rates, ultra smooth hover, maximum stability, improved assistance take-off & landings, gentle response and quick response are assets needed to attract Buyers which is all dependent on FW accomplished in programming multiple matrices and tweaked through updates. The FW development environment is where competition is clearly beating Yuneec. Some might say it removes the Pilots skills and control of the AC; actually it's improving the interaction, we're currently only minimally controlling the AC flight dynamics now.
Not excluding the hardware and camera designs as vital, just not part of this discussion.
The H would be an ultimate attraction in multiple tracks if the FW utilized the capabilities of the 6 motors and designed the User interaction providing predictive landing / take-off, gentle and aggressive behaviors, high performance, stable low speed. If this sounds contradictory and not obtainable, as a small example fly a new small or large competitive model, it’s being done.
Pilot error is a constant variable with an AC, but with modern electronics a lot can be assisted or prevented while improving the pilots enjoyment. We’re not flying these marvelous electronic machines to focus on piloting dynamics, these are purchased to easily pilot and perform other tasks: flying, photos, etc.
Last edited:
FlushVision
Premium Pilot
So true. I had a P2V (now retired) and a P2V+ which I still use. With both I quickly realized just how much they liked to tip over in anything more than a slight breeze or less than near perfectly level ground. In consequence, I almost exclusively hand catch my P2V+...no more broken props. This is in contrast to my H where I hand catch far less often simply because the landing gear has a far superior footprint than those early Phantoms.
Mark, Thanks of sharing!
You and many others find ways to counter landing or take-off operations. That's kinda my point... on an electronic platform where the majority of the dynamic flight management is through FW that shouldn't be accepted as satisfactory and it certainly doesn't present Yuneec's product as competitive and hurt's word of mouth advertisements. It is a super craft, but needs to stay competitive!
I'm sure if you wanted to expend the time, you could improve your landing skills but on modern drones for the majority of buyers, that's not expected and shouldn't be required to use as intended, a pleasurable photo platform.
Although, advanced settings should be available for Pilots desiring enhanced controls requiring advanced piloting skills.
PatR
Premium Pilot
I totally agree with you with some of the above. Yuneec could do a lot better with their software development, I don't look for any of that to change going forward and based upon copies of a text exchange between Yuneec and a good friend I know they have not been doing anything with the H firmware after the update released last March. If any H updates were to occur they would happen after the H Plus is to be released, sometime near the end of May or beginning of June. Comments in the text exchange indicated Yuneec felt there was no need to update the H firmware as it has been viewed as stable.
Personally, I don't think a lot of the hardware used in the H employs any quality level standards. They take what they get and it goes into the assembly where it might work today but not tomorrow where they will use their over worked C.S. department to make things right later.
OTOH, I do believe that as systems increase in capability/complexity there should be a mandate that owners be equally trained and capable in order to obtain and make use of them. Having enough cash to purchase is not an effective qualifier. This is a bit raw but as systems become more complex and capable they should not be in the hands of the inexperienced. If such systems required greater operator skill there would be an associated decrease in irresponsible and dangerous flight operations. The newbies with more disposable income than common sense would be crashing them before they could cause too much trouble with them, having to learn important lessons the hard way.
LOL... Totally With ya on that one... but not nice, we’re suppose to share our toys. It’s got to be one or the other eventually... either totally controllable drones any one could fly. Or a recognized society that is required to meet various regulations, requirements, and piloting skills. Limiting the controllability & intelligence of drone and placing more demands on the pilot. That would limit the pilot society and the majority of improper flying.
With the projections of drones and new manufactures over the next 10 years, I’m doubtful control will be enacted until Big Govt has no other means. Then what do you do with all the millions of functional drones in households.
PatR
Premium Pilot
If that was actually a question and not pontification, my answer would be that consumer drones would either be in the hands of trained and licensed people or they would be grounded. The writing is all over the wall with that as the people developing drone regulations and system requirements are structuring their efforts to favor big money, large staff systems with far greater capability than what can be provided at our level. What they have will cost a lot more to make and operate but if the skies are cleared of us "riff raff" it becomes a seller's market. I see the timeline for that being much, much less than 10 years. There is only one consumer drone manufacturer assisting that frame work process; DJI.
Anyone remove the spring from the throttle? I hate the spring (have never had a spring on the throttle on any of my other aircraft) so having to hold the throttle down on the "H" is a little more difficult.
I'm used to bring it down and when it touches down I put the throttle fully down and then release it so I don't induce any yaw.
I have not tried this on my "H" yet. Just asking if anyone else has done this?
I'm used to bring it down and when it touches down I put the throttle fully down and then release it so I don't induce any yaw.
I have not tried this on my "H" yet. Just asking if anyone else has done this?
Erm, what spring? The left stick does not have a spring in the forward/back direction.
You are using an ST16?
Edit - egg on face
I'd just been using a Spektrum with a fixed wing and confused myself!
Last edited:
Yup. ST16. Sure does have springs.... All axis are self centering. Spring return on all. Well mine for sure.... and every video that I've seen.
PatR
Premium Pilot
The ST-16 has a "center loaded" throttle stick. Positions above center initiate a climb, below center initiate a descent. Center stick position is essentially a "hover/hold" position, a position that will hold the altitude it is at if no other stick inputs are received. It's done this way to make it much simpler for those new to multirotors and those flying the camera more than the aircraft to maintain altitude. Operators that have built their own systems or having a lot of experience with earlier systems where bottom throttle was idle and everything above bottom throttle was a proportional increase in RPM often don't like a center loaded throttle. Those people are often more adept in multirotor operations and might see the center loading feature as performance limiting.
Because of the way the Typhoon H system is designed I would not eliminate the throttle return spring. Doing so could introduce unexpected consequences.
Because of the way the Typhoon H system is designed I would not eliminate the throttle return spring. Doing so could introduce unexpected consequences.
I am a retired airline pilot with over 25,000 hours of flying 40 plus years. I can tell you for sure there are numerous factors that are outside of the equipment or the pilot like ground effect and low level fast wind changes. Experience is the only real way to counter the numerous external changes. The definition of experience is someone who has already made that mistake.
It is because of the security issue with DJI collecting all this information that the Army has order no use of DJI UAVs until a security issue can be resolved.
I've written on another post that I am on my 3rd Drone manufacturer (the past 2 have left the consumer/prosumer market and have moved into the industrial/military markets). Because of this the price of their drones are now out of the hands of most consumers ($4000-$8000 price point). Have unbelievable capabilities and systems. While more complex, the automation does not fix stupid or novice stick time. But we still need our toys..... AKA drones for the hobby and consumer market. Problem is these things have jumped in intelligence and the cost has stayed pretty neutral. Experience is lost when the price to play is not sufficient to hurt. (Funny how many hollywood kiddo's are driving lambo's and could not care if they crash, wish I have disposable cash like that). So there is a market at this price point..... I had to drop my older drones because I could not afford them any longer at $3000 for a basic plain unit that needs $1000 in options to crank.
People need to join the AMA and a club to learn responsible flight skills and put in the flight/sim hours. When I cannot fly i'm on the sim's practicing. Not a stunt or beautiful flyer but good enough.
People need to join the AMA and a club to learn responsible flight skills and put in the flight/sim hours. When I cannot fly i'm on the sim's practicing. Not a stunt or beautiful flyer but good enough.
rdonson
Premium Pilot
I understand why our government should be very concerned.
On the other hand....
If I were DJI or any UAV company I would want every bit of data I could get on all aircraft of mine that flew. Think statistical analysis, probabilities, machine learning, deep learning applied to a vast store of UAV flight data. Think “Money Ball”. You might come up with a competitive advantage that could be very significant.
I have found that unless I can assure my takeoff and landing sites are completely level allowing all skids to touch down simultaneously I hand catch. If you takeoff on unstable ground with any angle say on a hill, it seems the H480 will drift slightly. I calibrate accelerometer and compass almost every single flight (if flying in a new location from last flown and calibrated), and balance props every 10th flight. I have found when I hand catch, the motors at times will slow down to idle but start up again when I let go of left stick, so I hard stop with red button if needed and prepared for the motors to power up also. This is due to the takeoff altitude ground, and catching at a slightly higher altitude (My hand above my head reaching up). Also never takeoff or land in smart mode or near any vehicles as it will interfere with your compass.
Similar threads
