Can you swap the CG03+ with a C23 on a Typhoon H and control it with a ST-16?
- Thread starter 4N6Guy
- Start date
It's been asked before. Some of these threads are worth reviewing if you want to know more:
"Search results for query: C23 Typhoon H"
"Search results for query: C23 Typhoon H"
There were plans for the C23 to be available for the H480 platform, but Yuneec never released it. The reason it can’t be used with the H480 is that code would have to be written and an update to the ST-16 firmware released to incorporate it. With the H480 out of production and relegated to legacy status, there will be no updates forthcoming.
Gotcha...the upgrade path for Yuneec is kinda like Apple and IPhones. Want better capabilities, buy a newer model...
I suppose I should have intuitively understood that....
I suppose I should have intuitively understood that....
The newer technology in the H Plus provides a more stable platform, much more efficient and more powerful. It's simply a better platform for the C23 camera.
PatR
Premium Pilot
As the current market value of an H-480 is only about $300.00-$400.00 is also doesn’t make a lot of sense trying to adapt a camera selling for a higher price than the aircraft.
I guess my view is that as long as the camera can be operated, I don't care what it's carried aloft by. Typhoon H, H Plus, glider, balloon....carrier pigeon...whatever works..
With that price it MUST be the body and transmitter only...with a camera this hex still runs in the mid $500+ range, unless I'm living under a rock somewhere?...
Legacy shmegacy, to bad that Yuneec abandoned this platform, guess we can blame DJI , "progress" & profit or lack of such will cause a ceasing of anything eventually.
PatR
Premium Pilot
If you have one, try selling it. Obtaining $500 will be a difficult thing to do.
As for consumer drone camera interchangeability, I’m afraid some people are limited in their understanding of the business model commonly employed by consumer drone manufacturers. Their intent is not to make new products backwards compatible, but to obsolete old product in order to sell new product.
Let’s face reality for a moment and accept that consumer drone manufacturers intentionally blocked people from installing better factory brand cameras on older aircraft models. They well understand people would want to spend as little as possible to have more than they already do. The manufacturers prefer that you spend more, not less.
With enough time, labor, and money almost any camera can be made to function in place of another. The effort usually result in something wildly different from what was desired. If someone was serious about camera adaptation they might consider experimenting with something worthwhile, like adapting a DJI X7s. In principle and practicality the effort would be no different from what would be involved with the E-90/C-23.
With the pre-order purchase price of 1800 the typhoon H is perfectly suited to the improved cameras.. evidences shows Yuneec simply chooses to abandon their customers...
There isn't a single technical reason for every camera released not working on the earlier models... other than the bad choices Yuneec continue to make.
As a earlier adopter of the Typhoon H, I personally helped pay for its development..... so with the deception about future expandilbility, its pretty natural for a number of us to get somewhat upset when new camera models come out that we were told would be compatible with our model..
I won't ever make the same mistake again... yuneec lost a customer forever.
PatR
Premium Pilot
Chad,
As one that pre-ordered the H-480 in March of 2016, before they were released, and having two of them, I sort of figure I was an “early adopter” too. However, considering the various brands and models released before and after that date I don’t recall any brand of “consumer” drones that provided for payload versatility, discounting Yuneec’s offering of a thermal camera with the H-480, until the Inspire was released, and with that only in later versions. If you wanted payload versatility you stepped up to considerably more expensive and complex professional equipment. For the most part that still holds true today.
Price wise I agree that Yuneec has gone overboard with price for what is being provided, exacerbating the situation by deliberately limiting functionality of their higher priced products in order to force people to buy two or more models to do what a single less expensive model can do in other brands.
IMHO, that has been an incredibly stupid business decision as, hoping to increase sales volume obtained with the success of the H-480, they threw away the satisfied customer following they developed with the H-480 in the development and release of their so called “enterprise” drones. While other brands have been increasing model functionality and payload performance with smaller price increases, Yuneec has been limiting functionality by releasing the same product over and over again at progressively higher prices, differing mostly in minor firmware variations and installing somewhat different cameras, with each having issues that restricted optimal performance.
Although their customers have repeatedly stated what they wanted or needed Yuneec has elected to ignore customer advice and suggestions. From my perspective, our efforts to “enlighten” Yuneec have been in vain and any further effort to help them improve and prosper is like beating a dead horse. At best they will say what we want to hear but do completely the opposite.
As one that pre-ordered the H-480 in March of 2016, before they were released, and having two of them, I sort of figure I was an “early adopter” too. However, considering the various brands and models released before and after that date I don’t recall any brand of “consumer” drones that provided for payload versatility, discounting Yuneec’s offering of a thermal camera with the H-480, until the Inspire was released, and with that only in later versions. If you wanted payload versatility you stepped up to considerably more expensive and complex professional equipment. For the most part that still holds true today.
Price wise I agree that Yuneec has gone overboard with price for what is being provided, exacerbating the situation by deliberately limiting functionality of their higher priced products in order to force people to buy two or more models to do what a single less expensive model can do in other brands.
IMHO, that has been an incredibly stupid business decision as, hoping to increase sales volume obtained with the success of the H-480, they threw away the satisfied customer following they developed with the H-480 in the development and release of their so called “enterprise” drones. While other brands have been increasing model functionality and payload performance with smaller price increases, Yuneec has been limiting functionality by releasing the same product over and over again at progressively higher prices, differing mostly in minor firmware variations and installing somewhat different cameras, with each having issues that restricted optimal performance.
Although their customers have repeatedly stated what they wanted or needed Yuneec has elected to ignore customer advice and suggestions. From my perspective, our efforts to “enlighten” Yuneec have been in vain and any further effort to help them improve and prosper is like beating a dead horse. At best they will say what we want to hear but do completely the opposite.
Last edited:
PatR
Premium Pilot
The truth can be painful but nothing changes what it is. Lacking further firmware updates, expanded payload selections, and a limited battery supply, each successive H model accelerated the depreciated value of the H-480.
Even when it was a new model release, attempting to sell one used was lucky to generate half the original selling price. That’s how RC has worked from the beginning, massive loss of value the moment a product was delivered. Time, available available quantity, advances in technology, and succeeding models further impact loss in value.
Even when it was a new model release, attempting to sell one used was lucky to generate half the original selling price. That’s how RC has worked from the beginning, massive loss of value the moment a product was delivered. Time, available available quantity, advances in technology, and succeeding models further impact loss in value.
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2018
- Messages
- 1,103
- Reaction score
- 1,013
- Age
- 58
- Location
- DFW Metroplex
- Website
- orbisdroneservices.com
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2019
- Messages
- 183
- Reaction score
- 141
- Age
- 40
It could actually be possible. ST16 is probably a no go for video downlink, but if the C23 is still based on Ambarella chipset and it transmits video and camera controls over IP and REST API like the CGO3+, it could be doable using a laptop or an Android phone with little sw development. Also, if the communication protocol between the drone and the camera could be resolved, there is no reason why it could not be controlled by the PX4-enabled 480. I might do something like this if I'll find an affordable C23 for myself... ;-)
Other interesting option for the camera replacement, would be the Sony RX0, with Micro Four Thirds mount and lens... ;-)
Other interesting option for the camera replacement, would be the Sony RX0, with Micro Four Thirds mount and lens... ;-)
Last edited:
Similar threads
