Build 829 (Patch) is now out. Here we go again!

RPR · Apr 5, 2019

PatR said:
I don’t know how old you are but I first started teaching aviation in 1987, with one of the lessons about how flight instruments function, including a pressure altimeter. So thanks for the brief reminder.

A divergence between pressure and GPS altitude has no impact on lat/ling position. GPS altitude is almost always inaccurate, which is why the military still insists everyone referenced pressure altitude. If GPS altitude is to be used for altitude reporting it has to be modified/corrected with an offset formula.

You’re my hero... salute!

Jesonus · Apr 6, 2019

One question, is there any way to download the images without having to remove the card from the camera?

mbernholdt · Apr 6, 2019

RPR said:
I don't get, why you went from 822, downgrade to 652, just to update to 784? Where you could of just stacked and replaced 822 directly using 784.

Tried that as well and since Oliver had succes with going down to 652 and back up this seemed like a good solution for the time.

LinsonW · Apr 6, 2019

Jesonus said:
One question, is there any way to download the images without having to remove the card from the camera?

Please try YuneecPilot app

mbernholdt · Apr 6, 2019

DoomMeister said:
Just a note, the important part of post #136 is the response from Yuneec. The firmware changes were an attempt to escape from IPS, but did not solve the problem. The act of being outdoors to get good GPS and then toggling Manual mode off/on/off several times and toggling GPS on/off/on several times cures the problem.

This may be something that a future update could cure? You shouldn’t have to repeat an action several times to get the desired results.

Correct it must be a small bug in the software and although not directly the costumer service representative did admit this by suggesting several tries to fix the issue [emoji16]

RPR · Apr 6, 2019

We all flip flop on this build like it’s the last grain of wheat on earth. This build is not solid, but instead it is a safety concern.

@PAT R brought the possibility of a barometer error that got a lot of us re-evaluating. Could this be the reason why we have a solid connection, but our TH Plus just wants to....

Man, I am tried of reading about this flip/flop build. On to the next one, pease Yuneec. lol

Fred Garvin · Apr 6, 2019

LinsonW said:
Please try YuneecPilot app

Says it’s for the Mantis. Will this app work on the TH+?

DoomMeister · Apr 6, 2019

Fred Garvin said:
Says it’s for the Mantis. Will this app work on the TH+?

It is for the Mantis Q. I would say connect to the camera via WiFi, open the YuneecPilot app and see if the camera files show up in the gallery. Worth a try.

NRHK · Apr 8, 2019

I wanted to fly tomorrow for the sakura in Japan with the H PLUS but reading this topic and the other about the build 829 makes me afraid

to resume the part I know well:

1/ the hidden menu is not accessible anymore but WHY?
because on the H PLUS (which is totally different than the H520, H etc: no need to calibrate others things excepted compass calibration
all the others calibrations are not useful ANYMORE, evidence=many fly without ANY problems of gimbal and acceloremeter, only technicians can access to this hidden menu in factory to CALIBRATE
and this is why it is hidden because a sit is calibrated in factory, it doesnt need to get modified)

2/ Japan FW (blablabla): it never ever exists a japanese FW and will never exist: only US, EU and CN
how I know? I am living in Japan and we work HARD to implement the YUNEEC in Japan (problem of the 5,8 signal which is not allowed here)
I guess I am the UNIQUE one to have a H520 and a H PLUS in Japan working and authorized
I use the CN firmware so stop please to believe that a japanese upgrade, patch FW exist

mbernholdt · Apr 8, 2019

NRHK said:
I wanted to fly tomorrow for the sakura in Japan with the H PLUS but reading this topic and the other about the build 829 makes me afraid

to resume the part I know well:

1/ the hidden menu is not accessible anymore but WHY?
because on the H PLUS (which is totally different than the H520, H etc: no need to calibrate others things excepted compass calibration
all the others calibrations are not useful ANYMORE, evidence=many fly without ANY problems of gimbal and acceloremeter, only technicians can access to this hidden menu in factory to CALIBRATE
and this is why it is hidden because a sit is calibrated in factory, it doesnt need to get modified) [emoji14]

2/ Japan FW (blablabla): it never ever exists a japanese FW and will never exist: only US, EU and CN
how I know? I am living in Japan and we work HARD to implement the YUNEEC in Japan (problem of the 5,8 signal which is not allowed here)
I guess I am the UNIQUE one to have a H520 and a H PLUS in Japan working and authorized
I use the CN firmware so stop please to believe that a japanese upgrade, patch FW exist

Don't worry it flies fine

NRHK · Apr 8, 2019

thx I thought same
But when you go to a four about drone, always FW problems
I never had

i will see

QUOTE="mbernholdt, post: 182323, member: 14680"]
Don't worry it flies fine
[/QUOTE]

Phaedrus · Apr 8, 2019

I flew on Saturday. 822/829 in southern California.
No issues.
Did some distance testing over open land. Lost video link at 2,350 feet out at 300 feet agl. Still had full radio link. Flew to 2,500 feet and came home. Did not use RTH. This was using the mushroom antenna. I want to try it with the flat patch antenna.

RPR · Apr 8, 2019

822 does not perform as promised. Don’t believe the hype, this build needs to be examined closer, because truthfully the only build that’s working, with 90% dependability is build 784. And I’ve spent hours trying to understand it, but it proves to be a flip/flop build. Why? I fly the same route, inspect the same structures, and mostly on the same location.

I work in the industry where safety is the number #1 priority, and I’m proud to fly the underrated Yuneec, so performance has to be Top, and right now it’s Build 784.

The H Plus should not have similar tools to that of the H520? I disagree, because simple tools should be readily available to the operator. IMU, GYRO, RC Mapping calibration... etc...

Phaedrus · Apr 8, 2019

Refresh my memory on the shortcomings of 822/829 that you see.

10-8 · Apr 8, 2019

Some users will have some issue on FW for any build by any manufacture (Yes, DJI included. Watch the forums after each release.) But the majority of those flying on 822 have not had any issues. I have seen 4 or 5 report an issue, but not definitive on it being related to the build. Myself and many others are flying it every day without issue.

TurboDad81 · Apr 8, 2019

I was having a pretty bad issue with my H Plus ascending on its own. I flew yesterday (right after the apparent April 6th GPS "restart") and it flew beautifully. My transmitter has never had this many SATs before. I'm almost wondering if my whole issue was with the GPS satellites. I haven't flown it since yesterday, so I don't know if it's going to happen again or not. But I will say, yesterday was my best flight yet with the H Plus. Still using the 822/829 build.

TurboDad81 · Apr 8, 2019

Not sure if you can read that. The transmitter has 18 SATs and the H Plus has 19 SATs.

LinsonW · Apr 11, 2019

TurboDad81 said:
I was having a pretty bad issue with my H Plus ascending on its own. I flew yesterday (right after the apparent April 6th GPS "restart") and it flew beautifully. My transmitter has never had this many SATs before. I'm almost wondering if my whole issue was with the GPS satellites. I haven't flown it since yesterday, so I don't know if it's going to happen again or not. But I will say, yesterday was my best flight yet with the H Plus. Still using the 822/829 build.View attachment 15780

Do you know how to reproduce the ascending issue easily? I flied several butteries but didn't meet it again. Yes, before it occurs with my bird.

TurboDad81 · Apr 11, 2019

I think the key is, let it boot up and get GPS SATs in the teens before trying to launch. That could take several minutes, but whenever I do that, it flies perfect.

RPR · Apr 11, 2019

TurboDad81 said:
I think the key is, let it boot up and get GPS SATs in the teens before trying to launch. That could take several minutes, but whenever I do that, it flies perfect.

The problem that I have encountered is that the RC has solid 14 or more sat link counts, the AC has 20 link counts, and the ascending symptom still persist. I can replicate this many times over. Unlike build 784, I can confident in flying the build with 4 to 5 sat link, without any hiccups.

784 (disclaimer: compass/gps has been relocated) Note my Sat. link are RED

Test 1: Test 2:
822 First impression:
822 Second impression, it blew me away, actually. I was able to calibrate the IMU and GYRO within the 822.

Second week, S M H

IMU calibration should only be initiated once and then forget, also the IMU calibration is needed, during sudden change in flight characteristics.
I won't insult anyone's intelligence, because YUNEEC is playing the oh "Really?" our beta testers did not find anything wrong, and or even DJI has firmware problems. Please do not let this be the case Yuneec. I once, went viral in social media that got your attention, I will not go there again, but would rather keep things here..

If you notice the drone hovering at an angle when there is little to no wind, or it drifts up without your input. CALIBRATE!
After a crash or a hard landing. A calibration would be smart.
When you first receive the drone. All of the sensors comes pre-calibrated, but your new YUNEEC had quite the journey getting to your front door. We’ve all seen those videos of porch cameras capturing delivery drivers doing their best Joe Montana impression with packages. CALIBRATE!
After a firmware update. I personally calibrate, some don’t calibrate the IMU after every firmware update and have never had an issue with it, but some swear by this practice including myself.
You do not need to calibrate the IMU before each flight; that would be redundant and unnecessary. If you don’t currently fall into one of the above categories, but if you do CALIBRATE!

YUNEEC is using a barometric altimeter integrated in the same device (baro-IMU) I dug deep under the canopy and ID each one of my components. Software/Firmware updates are not always reliable and in some cases, result in safety issues. Recalibration is an important step in mitigating risk due to unknown factors generated via the software/firmware update process. Compass, accelerometer, etc all must be recalibrated. It is also a good idea to let the aircraft sit for a few minutes after powering up, to acquire all satellites prior to flight after a recalibration.

I have never encountered an EKF error with my H Plus not until, I updated to Build 822. The EKF failsafe monitors the health of EKF (the position and attitude estimation system) to catch problems with the vehicle’s position estimate (often caused by GPS glitches or compass errors) and prevent “flyaways” AND THIS IS NOT A BARO issue, but will point to GPS/Compass SAT link issue.
Build 822 is a great build, but it needs to be enhanced to where it does not fails peak to giving the operator a good Sat/GPS link, where in reality it is not a solid connection.