CES 2018; Yuneec 3 announces: Typhoon H Plus, Firebird FPV airplane and HD racer drones

[arruntus]

The problem I have is mandatory RTL if radio contact is lost.

Going back to DIY Arducopter is looking better once I figure out a camera/gimbal combination. People would laugh if they knew what frame I'm considering

In the first firmware it was possible to choose what the drone should do in case of activating this failsafe. Then the option disappeared, which I still don't understand.

The problem of finding a good combination of camera, gimbal and geo-referencing images is not easy to solve. I've looked at it many times and there's always something wrong. Either a camera of poor quality, or no georeference or the gymbal is worth an eye of the face, or it does not rotate 360 degrees............. If you find a good combination please let me know

 

[Brahma]

Hopefully, the airspace restriction on the H+ only refers to altitude, because FAA waivers are possible, the assumed liability and updating the bird would be a tremendous licensing burden for yuneec. FAA paper sectionals (and who uses them anymore) are updated every 6 months, and flight software depicting actual airspace (I use Foreflight) is a minimum of $200 a year. So if yuneec really wants to get into the airspace game, they are cost-prohibitively doomed.

I'm waiting for the FAA to pass the need for transponders to kill the vast majority of this industry off.

 

[arruntus]

Hopefully, the airspace restriction on the H+ only refers to altitude, because FAA waivers are possible, and updating the bird would be a tremendous licensing burden for yuneec.

Or they tell you that the H PLUS is not for this type of flight and that you have the option of the H520. Restrictions are always bad..........................................

 

[Brahma]

Or they tell you that the H PLUS is not for this type of flight and that you have the option of the H520. Restrictions are always bad..........................................

That will kill off Yuneec.

 

[PatR]

Going back to DIY Arducopter is looking better once I figure out a camera/gimbal combination. People would laugh if they knew what frame I'm considering

I most certainly would not laugh. We should never discount or ridicule experience

 

[PatR]

In the first firmware it was possible to choose what the drone should do in case of activating this failsafe. Then the option disappeared, which I still don't understand.

The problem of finding a good combination of camera, gimbal and geo-referencing images is not easy to solve. I've looked at it many times and there's always something wrong. Either a camera of poor quality, or no georeference or the gymbal is worth an eye of the face, or it does not rotate 360 degrees............. If you find a good combination please let me know

Arruntus,

I'm puzzled about your reference to a gimbal for photogrammetry applications. A gimbal is not necessary at all, just a fixed position camera that's well isolated from vibration. Discarding the gimbal provides many options for relatively low cost, high resolution cameras with geo reference capabilities. The 520's primary forte' is geo reference missions and my opinion has all the fan fare over their new gimbaled cameras more of a distraction to excite consumer level purchases, having much less value for those that already understand what is necessary for aerial mapping activities. As for inspection missions the 520 is just too expensive for what it is when fitted with a 12Mpxl camera. Had the E-50 been designed around a 1" sensor, 20Mpxl format it would have made more sense as there are more that would use the 520 for inspections than for mapping. Lest we forget Lidar is now smaller, lighter, and less expensive than only a year ago and many that have been doing small area 3D orthos have found it a better, and more accurate, alternative. It's also becoming a staple among law enforcement agencies.

For those not familiar with Lidar an example in a company advert at the link: Velodyne Slashes the Price in Half of Its Most Popular LiDAR Sensor - sUAS News - The Business of Drones

 

[Tuna]

Airspace restrictions are not going to go away for drones that can be bought by any Joe off the street in their local store. Companies like Yuneec and DJI know that if they want to sell to that market (and not just licensed pilots), they have to assume everyone is an idiot and will do the dumbest, most dangerous thing with their drone. Because (as we see with each new drone launch), someone will. And you don't want to be the company who's logo is seen next to the wreckage that a kilo of drone travelling at 60 mph can create.

Yuneecs' solution with the H480 is quite reasonable - if you are smart enough to read the appropriate part of the manual, contact their guy and make a sane request, they allow you to disable the restrictions. I can't support people who think that this is an unfair burden on their hobby. It's something you do once.

 

[PatR]

I was taking part in a discussion about the E90 distortion on facebook when Douglas Spotted Eagle commented that it was better to fix the distortion in post-processing as that would be higher quality than having the camera fix it. So, I have little faith that the issue will be addressed.

That is a very distressing statement as it silently alludes to a residing deficiency that will not be addressed.

 

[PatR]

Tuna,

Your post was quite profound, and touched the one thing so many fail to accomplish. Reading manuals and reviewing other associated reference material to find what they need before proclaiming there's an issue.

For the record, I'm guilty of the same from time to time.

 

[PatR]

The 8 meter landing zone feature forces you to be at least 8 m from the aircraft when you land it. Do you really think it needs to be implemented on the H520? Is it necessary to implement it in any drone? It's like saying... when you use a nail gun, don't put it on your chest and push the button. It is logical, as a pilot, to preserve safety, it is your responsibility to maintain your safety and that of others. There are situations in which due to lack of space you have less than 4 meters to land or take off the drone. You're finished with that function.

Agreed. The 920+ also has the Smart Zone function, something that just wastes a switch position for people fly such an aircraft. The manual mode with the 520 was a much more sensible path to take. Smart Mode was made for people that have never flown before to get them in the air quickly. All the major consumer drone manufacturers have employed the same under different names for the sole purpose of being able to advertise their wares can be flown by anyone, even those with no previous experience, so buy, buy, buy.

 

[Brahma]

Airspace restrictions are not going to go away for drones that can be bought by any Joe off the street in their local store. Companies like Yuneec and DJI know that if they want to sell to that market (and not just licensed pilots), they have to assume everyone is an idiot and will do the dumbest, most dangerous thing with their drone. Because (as we see with each new drone launch), someone will. And you don't want to be the company who's logo is seen next to the wreckage that a kilo of drone travelling at 60 mph can create.

Yuneecs' solution with the H480 is quite reasonable - if you are smart enough to read the appropriate part of the manual, contact their guy and make a sane request, they allow you to disable the restrictions. I can't support people who think that this is an unfair burden on their hobby. It's something you do once.

I can't get their restrictions to be set and work on my bird, let alone how to remove them.

 

[arruntus]

Arruntus,

I'm puzzled about your reference to a gimbal for photogrammetry applications. A gimbal is not necessary at all, just a fixed position camera that's well isolated from vibration. Discarding the gimbal provides many options for relatively low cost, high resolution cameras with geo reference capabilities. The 520's primary forte' is geo reference missions and my opinion has all the fan fare over their new gimbaled cameras more of a distraction to excite consumer level purchases, having much less value for those that already understand what is necessary for aerial mapping activities. As for inspection missions the 520 is just too expensive for what it is when fitted with a 12Mpxl camera. Had the E-50 been designed around a 1" sensor, 20Mpxl format it would have made more sense as there are more that would use the 520 for inspections than for mapping. Lest we forget Lidar is now smaller, lighter, and less expensive than only a year ago and many that have been doing small area 3D orthos have found it a better, and more accurate, alternative. It's also becoming a staple among law enforcement agencies.

For those not familiar with Lidar an example in a company advert at the link: Velodyne Slashes the Price in Half of Its Most Popular LiDAR Sensor - sUAS News - The Business of Drones

No PatR, I mean the ideal combination, which is multi-purpose and not just for photogrammetry. Gymbal is not necessary even if it helps the photos to be taken completely vertical. Combining all these factors you have a combination that allows you to make photogrammetry, record video, take pictures, and so on. If it is well balanced enough you don't need to have different cameras or gimbals.

A Sony QX1 camera with interchangeable lenses and Mavlink communication would be ideal. By changing the lens you have photogrammetry, video and inspection. Then a Gymbal 360 that adapts well to the camera and you have it all

 

[PatR]

I may be wrong but I read that as 40% quieter than the model it's replacing - not 40% quieter than the 520.

Anyway, apparently anyone can make their craft quieter in a couple of seconds, according to Simon Thomas (I don't understand a word he says, but I didn't need to):

Pretty easy to do when you increase the size of motors, diameter of the props, and reduce RPM. A reduction in RPM has the most impact as ~80% of electric multirotor noise emanates from the propellers, with the tips generating most of that.

 

[PatR]

No PatR, I mean the ideal combination, which is multi-purpose and not just for photogrammetry. Gymbal is not necessary even if it helps the photos to be taken completely vertical. Combining all these factors you have a combination that allows you to make photogrammetry, record video, take pictures, and so on. If it is well balanced enough you don't need to have different cameras or gimbals.

A Sony QX1 camera with interchangeable lenses and Mavlink communication would be ideal. By changing the lens you have photogrammetry, video and inspection. Then a Gymbal 360 that adapts well to the camera and you have it all

You just presented the solution to having a single platform that does most everything, payload versatility. No one payload will do everything so the ability to change lenses, cameras, gimbals, fit other more advanced payloads, and utilize different communication protocols on a single platform. This is where the high end professional market goes when they need a new platform. Expensive, yes, but cheaper over the long run. Kind of like our cars. We can carry whatever will fit in them, we don't have to buy a new car every time we carry something different.

 

[arruntus]

Airspace restrictions are not going to go away for drones that can be bought by any Joe off the street in their local store. Companies like Yuneec and DJI know that if they want to sell to that market (and not just licensed pilots), they have to assume everyone is an idiot and will do the dumbest, most dangerous thing with their drone. Because (as we see with each new drone launch), someone will. And you don't want to be the company who's logo is seen next to the wreckage that a kilo of drone travelling at 60 mph can create.

Yuneecs' solution with the H480 is quite reasonable - if you are smart enough to read the appropriate part of the manual, contact their guy and make a sane request, they allow you to disable the restrictions. I can't support people who think that this is an unfair burden on their hobby. It's something you do once.

I'm sorry, Tuna, but I disagree. There are many fully accepted, unrestricted examples in which absolutely all of us once again exceed the limits. Voluntary or involuntarily.
The speed in a car depends on each country, maximum speed in motorway 120km/h (to give an example). We will limit all cars so that they cannot exceed 120km/h because there are many idiots who overstep the limits and put the lives of others in danger. This would be an example of the misuse of a car that is totally comparable to the misuse of a drone. The solution is not that, it is to educate, to teach why it is wrong, the risks involved etc. and not always to prohibit.

We always want to ban everything, what's next? not being able to go out on the street because you might fall down and break something? Do we break Internet neutrality? (I'm sorry, I already know that the latter is an example that is on the agenda and very controversial). The more prohibitions we have the more idiots come out from underneath the stones teaching us how they are smarter than anyone else and can break those prohibitions. To have the possibility and not to break the rules will always be in the hands of people with common sense if no one has to come to ban it. That's called freedom. That you don't comply? a punishment is imposed for breaking the rules of the society in which you live. The opposite is more like a dictatorship than anything else. I don't mean to be disrespectful, I'm just giving my opinion.
On the other hand, of course reading the manual is necessary. Anyone should do it with any product they buy. Then comes the crying of people who have broken the 500,1000,1800 or 3000€ drone in 30 seconds. It's your fault for not following the basic steps.

Any drone that is not in an area intended for model airplane flights must comply with the airspace regulations of each country. These areas also comply with regulations. Flying as a hobby doesn't mean you can do whatever you want. Just read what pilots of manned aircrafts say about drones........

I can't support people who think that this is an unfair burden on their hobby

There are many of us who fly professionally apart from doing it by hobby. In short, it's like accepting, if you do it for hobby I charge less and you have restrictions and if you do it professionally I charge more and you don't have restrictions........ that little I like that. It's a trap, we should all be against it.

P.D.: Once again I apologize for my bad English, I hope I haven't written any nonsense and that you understand what I mean.

 

[arruntus]

You just presented the solution to having a single platform that does most everything, payload versatility. No one payload will do everything so the ability to change lenses, cameras, gimbals, fit other more advanced payloads, and utilize different communication protocols on a single platform. This is where the high end professional market goes when they need a new platform. Expensive, yes, but cheaper over the long run. Kind of like our cars. We can carry whatever will fit in them, we don't have to buy a new car every time we carry something different.

Being something very difficult to get if you don't want to sell even the kidneys is why I bought the H520. There is a lot of configuration and adaptation work behind to achieve this, it is possible but it costs a lot of money and work. Of course it would be a solution with which you would not depend on any manufacturer. We are fortunate to have free firmwares with no obligatory limitations. In fact, the new systems of Yuneec are based on one of those free systems but they are already putting prohibitions on it.........

It seems that we forget that manufacturers are there to make money and that is why they put up fences which, as you go through them, increase the economic outlay.

Precisely for this last reason, the buyers of the H520 have felt so bad about it that they announce the H PLUS when we are as we are..........

 

[PatR]

The ability to use what we want or need, when we want or need, and permit a system to fly as desired is precisely what Pixhawk and PX4 were designed and developed to accomplish. Many high end makers understood this and generated designs to accommodate flexibility. DJI figured this out a little later and designed an FC to come up with their M series systems. Se now we have Yuneec, utilizing PX4 protocols, arbitrarily restricting user access to open source code, flight modes, and limiting system functionality, in two platforms. How can that make sense?

BTW, the base price of flexibility does not need to be high. That X8 I mentioned earlier had a street retail price of only $1,200.00, RTF with a Tarot gimbal, when it was released three years ago, You had to provide your own payload. As coarse as this may sound, it's unfortunate but the 520's market research was faulty. The demographics just aren't there for the 520 to become the mainstay of the Yuneec line of aircraft. The 520 is a system designed to best fit a small niche' market, and will remain that way unless Yuneec does something they have not done before, act quickly to address the limitations that are preventing 520 owners from using the aircraft in the manner it could be. Failing that it will precisely follow the path of the 920, an aircraft that was too expensive, with a very limited user base.

 

[Haydn]

but looks like replacement body parts may finally be coming for the h520 form the h480plus side (referring to arms and motors)

I have parts for the H520.
Not sure why you can't get them.
I have then all in stock.

 

[terrence davidson]

no one in the united states has any of the critical parts yet. yuneec usa has yet to get them to dealers in USA . I could get them from copter.EU but have trouble with Germany language to fill out the order form. at min I want the charging adapter for the st16s battery they offer with the banana plugs. resorted to purchase of new h520 for main parts supply only. Even dealers here can not do repairs yet for there crashed h520 that they have from other users.

 

[Haydn]

no one in the united states has any of the critical parts yet. yuneec usa has yet to get them to dealers in USA . I could get them from copter.EU but have trouble with Germany language to fill out the order form. at min I want the charging adapter for the st16s battery they offer with the banana plugs. resorted to purchase of new h520 for main parts supply only. Even dealers here can not do repairs yet for there crashed h520 that they have from other users.

If you need anything let me know.
The charging adapter is their own creation.