RTH Failsafe (I know this is probably covered somewhere but...)

[radicalregard]

Ok. So the manual and other forum posts suggest that "upon loss of signal from the st16 the Typhoon H will return to the home point..." etc etc., however, if the TH only supports returning to the st16 and the st16 is not available (say the battery ran down), what is the home point? Will it return at all?

On many (most) other high end systems a complete loss of control signal results in configurable failsafe behavior which is usually returning to the last place it was set to be a home point. (Usually where it armed). 3DR and DJI, for example, both do this.

Has anyone one had experience or tested with a complete loss of the st16 as in ... dead or off. Turning off the controller, as some suggested is not a great idea, but these things do fail, get dropped, get wet, run down etc. so what will happen? Anyone really know?

 

[KBflyer]

Works the same as the ST10. There are Youtube videos showing the guy turning off the controller and the bird flies right back to where it to off.

 

[Rayray]

Flies back to the H's GPS initial set point (on RTH). Not ST-16's GPS.

 

[Steve Carr]

Flies back to the H's GPS initial set point (on RTH). Not ST-16's GPS.

Are you sure about that Ray? I understood it returned to the last known position of the ST16. Since the H and the ST16 constantly share their current location, the H always knows where the ST16 is located. If you were in follow me mode and traveled a couple of miles and your ST16 suddenly died, you would want it to land at that point rather than trying to fly back 2 miles. Guess it needs to be tested to make sure.

 

[KBflyer]

You are right Steve. It will land at the last know location of the ST16. Hopefully its level ground and not water

 

[radicalregard]

Gonna need to test it. Really makes me nervous but it has to be done. I'll let you know.

 

[Steve Carr]

Gonna need to test it. Really makes me nervous but it has to be done. I'll let you know.

I think you could safely test it by moving the left antenna on the ST16 straight out and covering it with a piece of foil to block the signal. Removing the foil would allow you to quickly reconnect the controls. I'm not certain if there is a redundant antenna inside the ST16. If so then it would still remain connected so you would also have to cover the front of the ST16 as well.

 

[radicalregard]

Yeah. We were just talking about it at the shop and I think that we will be putting it in a radio test cage (essentially a faraday cage) in the field which should block the signal, but allow us to reconnect quickly (hopefully) if things start to look sketchy. That should handle all 3 signals.

 

[glider]

RTL on the H is dynamic. That can be a pro or a con.

 

[PatR]

I sort of screwed up on the second flight and took the ST-16 out of telemetry mode and into the tablet mode. FYI, don't do that while in flight. It's like shutting down the ST-16. The H rose a few feet and flew back to where I had been when I switched out of telemetry mode and hovered.

 

[radicalregard]

I sort of screwed up on the second flight and took the ST-16 out of telemetry mode and into the tablet mode. FYI, don't do that while in flight. It's like shutting down the ST-16. The H rose a few feet and flew back to where I had been when I switched out of telemetry mode and hovered.

That's interesting, not surprising, and a tiny bit disturbing. It is good that it flew back to where you turned it off (bodes well for my test this coming weekend). However applications this complex do crash so that implies that the controller is completely dependent on the application and when it crashes the controller is gone. That is unlike other products that use the tablet as an auxiliary to the r/c controller.

 

[PatR]

The way I figure it, until we all start springing a few hundred grand for a Mil Spec level UAV and a another hundred or so for the payload we won't have the reliability we would like. For what we pay for these things they function extremely well, and failures are not as frequent as I would expect them to be.

 

[radicalregard]

The way I figure it, until we all start springing a few hundred grand for a Mil Spec level UAV and a another hundred or so for the payload we won't have the reliability we would like. For what we pay for these things they function extremely well, and failures are not as frequent as I would expect them to be.

True dat! However, "You don't actually think they spend $20,000 on a hammer, $30,000 on a toilet seat, do you?
- Julius Levinson

 

[Rayray]

You are right Steve. It will land at the last know location of the ST16. Hopefully its level ground and not water

Correct. I was wrong, sorry. I kinda wish it would (or could) return to the liftoff point.

 

[PatR]

True dat! However, "You don't actually think they spend $20,000 on a hammer, $30,000 on a toilet seat, do you?
- Julius Levinson

Since I actually make UAV's for the mil/com market I can honestly say they truly get what they pay for in the medium and high altitude, long duration market. The military doesn't pay that kind of money for toilet seats and hammers, that's the space agencies

On the back stroke of all that, you should see how much the government paperwork costs to comply with. That alone adds 50% to the price of anything they buy. You can make a hammer pretty cheap, but you'll need to hire 30 or more people to check all the rules for compliance, review documentation procedures, comply with AS9100 requirements, research ITAR regs to establish your hammer is not in a restricted export classification, perform 5 audits to assure each individual and department has maintained compliance with published regulatory documentation, and assure packaging meets UN packaging standards, while using 100% recycled materials. All of that before meeting with a gaggle of Congressmen that will pressure your firm to re-locate to their district in order to employ their constituents. Lord help ya if there's a union that supports labor that makes hammers.

 

[Brandon B]

That's interesting, not surprising, and a tiny bit disturbing. It is good that it flew back to where you turned it off (bodes well for my test this coming weekend). However applications this complex do crash so that implies that the controller is completely dependent on the application and when it crashes the controller is gone. That is unlike other products that use the tablet as an auxiliary to the r/c controller.

...looking forward to results of your test I have wondered the same thing

 

[zandoli]

Test with GPS off too.

 

[YuneecHCali]

The way I figure it, until we all start springing a few hundred grand for a Mil Spec level UAV and a another hundred or so for the payload we won't have the reliability we would like. For what we pay for these things they function extremely well, and failures are not as frequent as I would expect them to be.

Guess you haven't flown with a pixhawk FC lol...those things do just about everything a military setup will do coupled with MP. I have an H and just sold my 3DR Iris+ and what a diff world it is moving to closed source.

 

[Brent]

Guess you haven't flown with a pixhawk FC lol...those things do just about everything a military setup will do coupled with MP. I have an H and just sold my 3DR Iris+ and what a diff world it is moving to closed source.

Love my IRIS+. Thinking about getting a Pixhawk 2. Would love the H with a Pixhawk FC.

 

[PatR]

Guess you haven't flown with a pixhawk FC lol...those things do just about everything a military setup will do coupled with MP. I have an H and just sold my 3DR Iris+ and what a diff world it is moving to closed source.

Actually I have a couple of them and they are the best FC's the consumer dollar can buy, but they aren't being used in the H. If Yuneec really wanted to smoke DJI that's what they would use.