Hello Fellow Yuneec Pilot!
Join our free Yuneec community and remove this annoying banner!
Sign up

Thinking of Buying a 920

PatR

Premium Pilot
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
10,787
Reaction score
6,265
Location
N. California
Would those of you that have a 920, are experienced multirotor operators, have put a few flights on the 920 after learning the system, and understand how cameras and systems are supposed to work mind posting some of your thoughts about the 920 performance and camera capabilities?

Edit,

My request for info may have some too late. The 920 is not an available product on the Yuneec website.
 
Joined
Apr 27, 2016
Messages
196
Reaction score
78
Age
77
The H920+ is a big heavy machine and it flys like one. Think Hawker 800 if you have flown jets or Beech A36 if you have flown light AC. The camera is the real deal. It is really a Panasonic GH4. It has real focus( auto if you like), 4/3 in. CMOS sensor, remote control zoom lens (14-42 mm) that is swappable. I am not a pro photographer but the stills and video look great to me.
Try Vertigo Drones, Terrestrial Imaging or Carolina Dronz if you are looking for a dealer.
 

PatR

Premium Pilot
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
10,787
Reaction score
6,265
Location
N. California
Ray,

No matter how I've tried to get to it, the H920 is not listed as a product that can be purchased on the Yuneec site. If you select "Shop" and then select "Drones" the 920 is not an available option. The 920 is shown on the site with descriptions but not listed in the Home page Drones drop down menu. On Yuneec's Main page the 920 is not shown at all. The 920 Pro is listed in the "Products" listing further down the page but you cannot link to the 920 after clicking "Buy" on the 920 page, the selection provides options only for the Breeze, H480, and 520. To me all this adds up to a product that has been discontinued but left unannounced.
 
R

Rayray

Guest
I see what you mean, Pat, although I lean toward it being a mistake or oversight on the part of the creators of the Commercial section.

Both Vertigo and Carolina Dronz have the H920+ listed for $4K. VD notes stock shortage, more in 2-4 wks, but CD apparently has stock.

Just one more thing. I believe a lot of the cost of the 520 can be accounted for by the sophisticated autonomous software included. No hefty monthly fees.

When you fly the 520, the first thing you notice (besides the "ARMED!" voice scaring you) is the incredible stability (in Angle Mode). Put it within several feet of a tall tower or water tank and it holds position. Seeing is believing.

I make no excuses for Y's missteps, they need to do better, MUCH better. Doggone, I still love the TH.
 
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
567
Reaction score
194
Age
72
Location
Cardiff-Wales UK
I thought of going for a 920+ but forum activity is almost zero. I got the impression that they must have sold half a dozen or so.
It looks a good machine and the CGO4 must produce superb pictures.

I was hoping that the H520 with E90 would meet the bigger machine in many respects - I'm not yet convinced that Yuneec itself really can serve professionals in a professional way. Distributors need that service relationship as well.

Meanwhile Typhoon H machines working well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: C&M Aerial Imaging

grind

Premium Pilot
Joined
Jul 8, 2017
Messages
22
Reaction score
18
Age
54
Location
San Antonio, Texas
A great thread--I too have been lurking, watching, reading--just not a lot of information on the 920+. I use a DJI mavic for carrying in my bicycle pack, but I have been very interested in picking up a larger drone with higher level camera for the purposes of better pictures/video and stability in windier conditions. DJI Inspire 2, Powervision Powereye, and Yuneec H920+ all come to mind. I would really like to go with the H920, but the lack of activity surrounding it combined with all the improved tech in the H520 leaves me wondering if the H520 is the way to go.

I guess in the end I am worried about dropping 4K on a system that seems to be obsolete before I even buy it (H920).
 

PatR

Premium Pilot
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
10,787
Reaction score
6,265
Location
N. California
For a true pro rig 4$ is realistically a drop in the bucket. I know it sounds like a lot of money but Pro rigs run up into well over $100k. The equipment is more sophisticated, should be of greater reliability, mission driven, and diverse in application. It's a very large change in perspective.
 

grind

Premium Pilot
Joined
Jul 8, 2017
Messages
22
Reaction score
18
Age
54
Location
San Antonio, Texas
Yes, I understand 4K is a good price--there are a number of systems for 4K--the question is, is the H920+ worth the 4K over the other 4K systems. No dealers here in Anchorage Alaska, so I do not have the benefit of laying my hands on these systems to find the best fit for me--I have to rely on reviews and user input.
 

PatR

Premium Pilot
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
10,787
Reaction score
6,265
Location
N. California
Similar here. I think I've enough experience to establish quantitive decisions if a few owners with significant operational history with different systems will provide input. The new owners with history only with simple systems are limited in what they can relate and often have difficulties adapting to higher end stuff, which heavily influences what they relate.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 23, 2016
Messages
104
Reaction score
21
I too have been watching the activity relating to the H920 and now the H920+. Over a year ago I became a new hobby enthusiast with the Yuneec Q500 and then the Typhoon H, one very minor crash when I first started flying the Q500, which by the way I still fly now and then, but my Typhoon H is my favorite, no crashes, no problems, even during all the update debacles back when. What really interests me in the H920+ is the better camera systems and now the upgraded software and ST16 controller that the H920+ has. I don't think I would of ever bought the H920 as it was, not enough bang for the buck, but now that Yuneec upgraded to the H920+ it is tempting, but as JCFlippen mentioned, the H920 or H920+ forum doesn't produce a lot of info. And now with the H520, well like I said I'm just an enthusiast and to put out almost $3300 for the H520 w/E90 camera which is just too similar to the Typhoon H which I already have and enjoy.
 

PatR

Premium Pilot
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
10,787
Reaction score
6,265
Location
N. California
Found out today the CGO-4 camera does not record geo position in EXIF photo data. It can't as it lacks the necessary hardware.
 

grind

Premium Pilot
Joined
Jul 8, 2017
Messages
22
Reaction score
18
Age
54
Location
San Antonio, Texas
Ultimately I will want to backpack the drone into locations--There are decent backpacks for the DJI Inspire 2, and it looks like the H520 can be backpacked in, but anyone know about the H920+?
 

PatR

Premium Pilot
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
10,787
Reaction score
6,265
Location
N. California
I suppose if you're pretty tall and don't mind carrying bulk and weight... The 920 is a large hex with a 920mm wheelbase, much larger than an Inspire when set up. It folds and the props detach but it's a pretty large package to haul on your back. There is a You Tube promo video that has a scene with someone having a 920 strapped to their back but you'll need to look for it.
 
Last edited:

PatR

Premium Pilot
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
10,787
Reaction score
6,265
Location
N. California
A few conversations with Terrestrial Imaging about the 920 generated quite a bit of information about the system I'd like to share for those that are entertaining a purchase.

The CGO-4 camera does not generate geo position data in the EXIF files. When Yuneec adapted the sensor from the GH-4 they might have figured the GPS data from the auto pilot would be enough for the users, and so discarded the GPS hardware from the camera. Team mode is not an option when using the CGO-4 and the ST-16.

Terrestrial Imaging developed an adapter mount to employ the CGO-3 and CGO-ET cameras. Using a -3 camera increases flight time considerably due to the reduced weight of the CGO-3 camera. More importance of this later in this post.

Yuneec discarded the ST-24 and incorporated the ST-16 for the 920. Why is unknown. Adopting the ST-16 killed the previous ability to import maps to the flight controller. This ended the easy method of developing way point flight plans that was available with the ST-24. if you want to build way point flight plans you will have to use either the CCC feature or Tuna's App.

Yuneec provides no information relative to the use of the ST-16 with the 920 on the Yuneec website. If you review the current User Manuals for the 920 they all reflect the use of an ST-24. This is very deceiving since features that had been available with the ST-24 are missing from the ST-16. Where the ST-16 is concerned, you're kind of on your own to figure it out.

Obstacle Avoidance (OA) and Real Sense (RS) are not available for the 920. If you're one of those that like to fly through the brambles and bushes you need to know how to fly. The aircraft is not going to save you from yourself. OTOH, the 920 can and has been flown in 30-40mph winds and maintained absolute stability. This is something common to larger hex and octo designs. The 920 is not as fast as an H-480 or 520. Top speed is a bit over 30mph. It's designed for imagery and film making, not FPV racing.

The D Pad features available for the Typhoon H on the ST-16 are not available for the 920. This is a major drawback since "Cruise Control" is not an option and the elimination of map importing also eliminated single way point (and "Tap and Fly) flight planning. Single way point flight plans cannot be accomplished with Curved Cable Cam (CCC) a multi point plan must be created, and using CCC the plan has to be flown to generate it, reducing useful battery time by the amount of time it takes to build the flight plan. See the earlier reference to Tuna's UAV Toolbox App.

The 920 can be flown using 2 or 3 batteries. Batteries are sold in sets, each set being a pair of batteries. If you want to make all your flights using three batteries you'll need two sets of batteries. If you want a spare set of batteries to fly triple battery flights you'll need three sets of batteries. They run about $275.00/set.

Flight time using 2 batteries and the CGO-4 is about 10 minutes or so. Using a third battery adds only a few additional minutes to the flight time. This is pretty much how things work when you add larger capacity batteries to multirotors. Much of the added capacity will be consumed by the system needing to generate more power to carry more weight so the benefit of larger batteries is inversely proportional to the added weight.

Using a CGO-3 camera increase flight time significantly due to the lighter weight of the camera. Using a CGO-3 camera has other benefits. It returns the Team Mode feature to the ST-16. It returns geo position reference to image EXIF data. If you have a spare, a 12 mpxl CGO-3 can be fitted with a Peau 8mm lens to deliver an inspection image that is equal or better than what is delivered by a 12 mpxl E-50. Going that route gives you an inspection camera on one hand with a CGO-4's 16 mpxl triple zoom and wide range of camera controls on the other. AT 16 mpxl the CGO-4 is only slightly behind the E90 in image resolution, but having a triple zoom could make it a better choice than the E-90 for a lot of applications. Just don't plan on doing mapping applications with the 920.

The conversion of the 920 to the 920+ introduced quick connect prop adapters. Although quick and easy the quick connects have had issues with detaching from the motors while in flight. If you are not adverse to doing things the old way the quick connects can be removed from the props. You bolt the props on just like in the old days. If you choose to go this route, check the length of the screws to assure they are short enough to clear everything inside the motors and use a little blue Loctite to make sure they remain affixed.

Do not look for soft/firmware upgrades going forward for the 920. They have talked a lot about improvements but over the life cycle thus far have done little in this regard. In ways they went backwards by eliminating the ST-24 in favor of the ST-16. Yuneec is putting all their focus on the 520 platform as it seems they are capable of only working on one thing at a time. Do not be surprised if Yuneec discontinues the 920 as they are not doing much now in areas of 920 improvement. They didn't sell a lot of them, which is understandable when you consider most people look for the lowest price they can pay to accomplish their intended tasks. A $900.00 Phantom or $1,200.00 H-480 is their working price point and spending more is something they are not prepared to do. On the flip side of this, with the H-520 being, when equipped with an E series camera, a $4,000.00 machine, making the price point between the 520 and 920 comparable. Because of the comparable pricing the 920 may now start seeing a lot more interest that it had previously. The only place the 920 takes a hit is with the loss of map importing and way point flight. For many this may not be an issue.

Mr Spotted Eagle, please take note. Yuneec needs all the platforms they currently have to maintain market viability. If Yuneec is serious about the commercial market putting a dev team on continued improvement of the 920 would be extremely beneficial to Yuneec's commercial market application interests.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Breizhdrone
Joined
Apr 27, 2016
Messages
196
Reaction score
78
Age
77
A few conversations with Terrestrial Imaging about the 920 generated quite a bit of information about the system I'd like to share for those that are entertaining a purchase.

The CGO-4 camera does not generate geo position data in the EXIF files. When Yuneec adapted the sensor from the GH-4 they might have figured the GPS data from the auto pilot would be enough for the users, and so discarded the GPS hardware from the camera. Team mode is not an option when using the CGO-4 and the ST-16.

Terrestrial Imaging developed an adapter mount to employ the CGO-3 and CGO-ET cameras. Using a -3 camera increases flight time considerably due to the reduced weight of the CGO-3 camera. More importance of this later in this post.

Yuneec discarded the ST-24 and incorporated the ST-16 for the 920. Why is unknown. Adopting the ST-16 killed the previous ability to import maps to the flight controller. This ended the easy method of developing way point flight plans that was available with the ST-24. if you want to build way point flight plans you will have to use either the CCC feature or Tuna's App.

Yuneec provides no information relative to the use of the ST-16 with the 920 on the Yuneec website. If you review the current User Manuals for the 920 they all reflect the use of an ST-24. This is very deceiving since features that had been available with the ST-24 are missing from the ST-16. Where the ST-16 is concerned, you're kind of on your own to figure it out.

Obstacle Avoidance (OA) and Real Sense (RS) are not available for the 920. If you're one of those that like to fly through the brambles and bushes you need to know how to fly. The aircraft is not going to save you from yourself. OTOH, the 920 can and has been flown in 30-40mph winds and maintained absolute stability. This is something common to larger hex and octo designs. The 920 is not as fast as an H-480 or 520. Top speed is a bit over 30mph. It's designed for imagery and film making, not FPV racing.

The D Pad features available for the Typhoon H on the ST-16 are not available for the 920. This is a major drawback since "Cruise Control" is not an option and the elimination of map importing also eliminated single way point (and "Tap and Fly) flight planning. Single way point flight plans cannot be accomplished with Curved Cable Cam (CCC) a multi point plan must be created, and using CCC the plan has to be flown to generate it, reducing useful battery time by the amount of time it takes to build the flight plan. See the earlier reference to Tuna's UAV Toolbox App.

The 920 can be flown using 2 or 3 batteries. Batteries are sold in sets, each set being a pair of batteries. If you want to make all your flights using three batteries you'll need two sets of batteries. If you want a spare set of batteries to fly triple battery flights you'll need three sets of batteries. They run about $275.00/set.

Flight time using 2 batteries and the CGO-4 is about 10 minutes or so. Using a third battery adds only a few additional minutes to the flight time. This is pretty much how things work when you add larger capacity batteries to multirotors. Much of the added capacity will be consumed by the system needing to generate more power to carry more weight so the benefit of larger batteries is inversely proportional to the added weight.

Using a CGO-3 camera increase flight time significantly due to the lighter weight of the camera. Using a CGO-3 camera has other benefits. It returns the Team Mode feature to the ST-16. It returns geo position reference to image EXIF data. If you have a spare, a 12 mpxl CGO-3 can be fitted with a Peau 8mm lens to deliver an inspection image that is equal or better than what is delivered by a 12 mpxl E-50. Going that route gives you an inspection camera on one hand with a CGO-4's 16 mpxl triple zoom and wide range of camera controls on the other. AT 16 mpxl the CGO-4 is only slightly behind the E90 in image resolution, but having a triple zoom could make it a better choice than the E-90 for a lot of applications. Just don't plan on doing mapping applications with the 920.

The conversion of the 920 to the 920+ introduced quick connect prop adapters. Although quick and easy the quick connects have had issues with detaching from the motors while in flight. If you are not adverse to doing things the old way the quick connects can be removed from the props. You bolt the props on just like in the old days. If you choose to go this route, check the length of the screws to assure they are short enough to clear everything inside the motors and use a little blue Loctite to make sure they remain affixed.

Do not look for soft/firmware upgrades going forward for the 920. They have talked a lot about improvements but over the life cycle thus far have done little in this regard. In ways they went backwards by eliminating the ST-24 in favor of the ST-16. Yuneec is putting all their focus on the 520 platform as it seems they are capable of only working on one thing at a time. Do not be surprised if Yuneec discontinues the 920 as they are not doing much now in areas of 920 improvement. They didn't sell a lot of them, which is understandable when you consider most people look for the lowest price they can pay to accomplish their intended tasks. A $900.00 Phantom or $1,200.00 H-480 is their working price point and spending more is something they are not prepared to do. On the flip side of this, with the H-520 being, when equipped with an E series camera, a $4,000.00 machine, making the price point between the 520 and 920 comparable. Because of the comparable pricing the 920 may now start seeing a lot more interest that it had previously. The only place the 920 takes a hit is with the loss of map importing and way point flight. For many this may not be an issue.

Mr Spotted Eagle, please take note. Yuneec needs all the platforms they currently have to maintain market viability. If Yuneec is serious about the commercial market putting a dev team on continued improvement of the 920 would be extremely beneficial to Yuneec's commercial market application interests.
The H920+ with a CGO4 DOES have waypoint capability. Maps can be loaded on the ST16 with a WiFi connection and waypoint missions created and saved for later use. Camera controls can also be created and saved. I am still learning the function but it does work. Some documention is available in version 3.0 of the H920+ user manual. I down loaded this manual from the U.K. Yuneec site. May not still be up.
 

PatR

Premium Pilot
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
10,787
Reaction score
6,265
Location
N. California
If I provided an e-mail addy would you send it as an attachment? I'm looking at the price quote for a 920 right now and if way point ops are there I'll make the order. Thanks!
 

PatR

Premium Pilot
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
10,787
Reaction score
6,265
Location
N. California
Seabee,

The manual is no longer available at Yuneec U.K. but I found the link you provided in the Tornado threads at the Yuneec Forum.
 
Joined
Apr 27, 2016
Messages
196
Reaction score
78
Age
77
Seabee,

The manual is no longer available at Yuneec U.K. but I found the link you provided in the Tornado threads at the Yuneec Forum.
Great, if it does not work I would be glad to send you the PDF file. It is ver 3.0 and has H 920 Plus on the cover page.
 
Joined
Apr 27, 2016
Messages
196
Reaction score
78
Age
77
Seabee,

The manual is no longer available at Yuneec U.K. but I found the link you provided in the Tornado threads at the Yuneec Forum.
Caution: the H920+ and ST16 requires the CGO4 to operate CCC and POI. Not sure about the waypoint function. Have not tested that.
 

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
18,546
Messages
216,294
Members
21,540
Latest member
hrinpek