- Joined
- Feb 24, 2017
- Messages
- 3,001
- Reaction score
- 3,196
- Location
- Central Florida
- Website
- copperdawg.com
Typhoon H+
- Thread starter seabee
- Start date
I hope a 3rd party steps in and offers mission planning, as in Mission Planner. I read the H+ manual; nothing in there about missions 
Peggy
Premium Pilot
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2017
- Messages
- 424
- Reaction score
- 376
I hope a 3rd party steps in and offers mission planning, as in Mission Planner. I read the H+ manual; nothing in there about missions
It won’t get it otherwise there will be no need for the 520
IMO Yuneec is making a big mistake. Maybe I'm so used to Arducopter and all the capabilities of my "obsolete" Solo it's expected, but $1800-2000+ is a lot to pay for even this fine machine with no possible 3rd party offerings in the future.
It's based on PX4 so it should be a no brainer.
Edit: I think the H520 still can't do missions and no 3rd party support. If Yuneec does get their act together the H520 will go extinct.
It's based on PX4 so it should be a no brainer.
Edit: I think the H520 still can't do missions and no 3rd party support. If Yuneec does get their act together the H520 will go extinct.
Last edited:
PatR
Premium Pilot
The 520 went on the extinction list within a week of its release. It’s lack of ability to do orbits or smooth waypoints transitions, blamed on an inability of PX4 code to allow them, helped kill it.
Funny thing, the H Plus, also using a PX4 based FC, can do orbits. Anyone else see a disinformation issue between the 520 and H Plus?
As for H Plus mission planning, it would be surprising if it allowed any more than CCC. A provision for planning a waypoint flight without first flying it would undermine the 520. If they were smart they would incorporate all the functional 520 features into the H Plus, raise the price, and drop the over valued, under performing 520.
Last edited:
rdonson
Premium Pilot
Sometimes companies just put the diss in the DYSFUNCTION. Two different development teams and tech writers who still can't write a manual. Oh well.
Anyway, I'm still pulling for a stellar performer. There a lot of new features that look great.
I'm hoping that the 520 orange shells are identical to the H+ shells so when I get the H+ it can be orange. Much easier to see than "silver"?
Anyway, I'm still pulling for a stellar performer. There a lot of new features that look great.
I'm hoping that the 520 orange shells are identical to the H+ shells so when I get the H+ it can be orange. Much easier to see than "silver"?
PatR
Premium Pilot
I'm sure they will be the same, as will the landing gear, booms, motors, and props. BTW, despite my grousing I'm hoping to see the Plus be a good bird.
They've got some upcoming competition though, so if it doesn't work they'll get hurt bad with a migration. The Parrot Anafi with a 180* vertical gimbal, 4K-60, 21 mpxl HDR camera for about $700.00 and Autel Evo for about $1,000. Autel pretty much screwed themselves in releasing the Evo with only a 12 mpxl camera though. Someone forgot to tell them 'It's all about the camera", and releasing a new drone with 4 year old camera tech is not a wise move. Add in an expectation (mine) that DJI will suddenly announce a significant price drop on Mavics and Phantoms and the Plus will have to run well out the door. I don't think anyone will be tolerant of bad performance reviews this time around.
They've got some upcoming competition though, so if it doesn't work they'll get hurt bad with a migration. The Parrot Anafi with a 180* vertical gimbal, 4K-60, 21 mpxl HDR camera for about $700.00 and Autel Evo for about $1,000. Autel pretty much screwed themselves in releasing the Evo with only a 12 mpxl camera though. Someone forgot to tell them 'It's all about the camera", and releasing a new drone with 4 year old camera tech is not a wise move. Add in an expectation (mine) that DJI will suddenly announce a significant price drop on Mavics and Phantoms and the Plus will have to run well out the door. I don't think anyone will be tolerant of bad performance reviews this time around.
Last edited:
rdonson
Premium Pilot
Autel has said that the 1” sensor camera for the EVO is still planned and will be in a future release but no dates were given.
I have been following both the Anafi and Evo and while they both have some appealing features - not least their price - I haven't yet seen any clips from either camera which gets even close to the H Plus C23 Spanish mountains footage. I'm told that the Anafi is exceptionally quiet and I very much like its vertical pan and lossless zoom (when filming at lower than max resolution). And the Evo looked a real winner when it was first touted as a 1" sensor at $1,000 but it hasn't delivered. And from the footage I have seen, both look like just another slightly washed-out sportcam whereas the detail and colour depth of the C23 look to me like pro video. And the ultra-clear new ST16 screen is also a must-have for me.
But competition is needed so I hope the Autel and Parrot offerings are successful and improve over time. Certainly their prices will attract a lot of people - although I don't know how Parrot especially can make a profit at the Anafi's price point.
rdonson
Premium Pilot
I feel the same way. I’d love the Autel with a 1” sensor for when I don’t feel like lugging the H around.
Once we’ve seen the Sony 1” sensor the smaller sensors just look like toys.
Once we’ve seen the Sony 1” sensor the smaller sensors just look like toys.
How you can wait until next year when I can feel your blood rising from here, I don't know. But you're a lot more experienced than me in the possible pitfalls of new models so I should probably bide my time. But, heck, I might not live that long…
I've had a quote which seems to be saying that they can deliver an RS model on Saturday, which would be great if true.
I've had a quote which seems to be saying that they can deliver an RS model on Saturday, which would be great if true.
A couple of points. I'm under the impression you can get Pix4D for the H520, so it certainly does support mission planning and third party software. (and, you can do log analysis and pilots logs with UAV Toolbox online ).
The fact that the H Plus is PX4 based may be meaning that the hardware is a PX4 based design (ie. the same hardware as the H520), but that doesn't mean it's running PX4 firmware. I've not checked the code base recently, but certainly curved cable cam and poi missions were not supported by the PX4 flight controller firmware a couple of months ago and I've no reason to believe that's changed.
As a third party supporter of the Typhoon H, I'm interested to see what the Plus is capable of, and would consider providing mission planning software if there is enough demand for it. Yuneec really need to prove themselves with this one though - I cannot justify developing software (buying the hardware, analysing the in-built software, developing a good solution, testing it across regions etc.) if Yuneec aren't able to get pilots excited about this product. It really is down to them to decide what sort of community and ecosystem they'd like to build. I want them to be successful, but I can't make decisions for them.
Personally, I feel this looks like a good product and I'm excited about the camera. Yuneec need to be punching this one home, and making sure H520 owners don't feel left out if they're going to build market share.
).The fact that the H Plus is PX4 based may be meaning that the hardware is a PX4 based design (ie. the same hardware as the H520), but that doesn't mean it's running PX4 firmware. I've not checked the code base recently, but certainly curved cable cam and poi missions were not supported by the PX4 flight controller firmware a couple of months ago and I've no reason to believe that's changed.
As a third party supporter of the Typhoon H, I'm interested to see what the Plus is capable of, and would consider providing mission planning software if there is enough demand for it. Yuneec really need to prove themselves with this one though - I cannot justify developing software (buying the hardware, analysing the in-built software, developing a good solution, testing it across regions etc.) if Yuneec aren't able to get pilots excited about this product. It really is down to them to decide what sort of community and ecosystem they'd like to build. I want them to be successful, but I can't make decisions for them.
Personally, I feel this looks like a good product and I'm excited about the camera. Yuneec need to be punching this one home, and making sure H520 owners don't feel left out if they're going to build market share.
If Yuneec are students of marketing, they will continue to let the brand leader spend the big bucks on marketing while they nip in like terrier puppies to bite chunks out of them with cheaper, maybe better, offerings. As things stand, marketing science tells us that if Yuneec splash the cash on marketing then the biggest beneficiary of that spend would be DJI.
But if Yuneec, by virtue of its cheaper or better products, could get to 30+% of the market for $1000+ drones, the lines of battle could be redrawn.
As things stand, if I were Yuneec, I would be spending my cash on very attractive trade-in offers to DJI owners.
But if Yuneec, by virtue of its cheaper or better products, could get to 30+% of the market for $1000+ drones, the lines of battle could be redrawn.
As things stand, if I were Yuneec, I would be spending my cash on very attractive trade-in offers to DJI owners.
PatR
Premium Pilot
Tuna,
People want to be excited about the Plus. I know I certainly do and there are many others that do more work than I and are much more creative than me. The CES hype, if true, would give them much of what they want.
Yuneec has the opportunity to rebuild their customer base. The only question is whether or not they’ve listened at all to what their customers told them, both in print and through disastrous sales numbers of the 520 and plummeting numbers of the H-480.
People want to be excited about the Plus. I know I certainly do and there are many others that do more work than I and are much more creative than me. The CES hype, if true, would give them much of what they want.
Yuneec has the opportunity to rebuild their customer base. The only question is whether or not they’ve listened at all to what their customers told them, both in print and through disastrous sales numbers of the 520 and plummeting numbers of the H-480.
I paid $159 for my last Solo. It is still the most advanced flight control system on the market, and with PH2.1 available, nothing even compares with the capabilities. It completely utilizes Mission Planner, or UgCS if preferred.
Yuneec is a Gold member of Dronecode and what did it get them? They should have partnered with Ardupilot. That would have gotten them full autonomous flight out of the box (they could put Yuneec nameplate on it) and with that the best flight control software that would have allowed them to integrate their special flight modes if desired. It would also have allowed full 3rd party development.
So now, with all due respect, Yuneec has released what appears to be a very sound mechanical bird with better hardware, but not much in the way of software advancements. It still lacks, in my view:
1) compass/GPS redundancy
2) improved battery monitoring
3) better flyaway protection (as in EKF used in AC)
4) full autonomous flight with the ability to bypass auto RTL (there are good reasons for this)
5) community based input for reporting software issues as is done with Arducopter
6) more options for RTL such as where it lands. IMO forcing the craft to land ~20 ft. away from the radio is
just plain stupid.
There are other issues, but that's my 2c.
I really want one of these H+'s, but for $2000 it is not looking it's worth the money at this point.
A couple of points. I'm under the impression you can get Pix4D for the H520, so it certainly does support mission planning and third party software. (and, you can do log analysis and pilots logs with UAV Toolbox online
The fact that the H Plus is PX4 based may be meaning that the hardware is a PX4 based design (ie. the same hardware as the H520), but that doesn't mean it's running PX4 firmware. I've not checked the code base recently, but certainly curved cable cam and poi missions were not supported by the PX4 flight controller firmware a couple of months ago and I've no reason to believe that's changed.
As a third party supporter of the Typhoon H, I'm interested to see what the Plus is capable of, and would consider providing mission planning software if there is enough demand for it. Yuneec really need to prove themselves with this one though - I cannot justify developing software (buying the hardware, analysing the in-built software, developing a good solution, testing it across regions etc.) if Yuneec aren't able to get pilots excited about this product. It really is down to them to decide what sort of community and ecosystem they'd like to build. I want them to be successful, but I can't make decisions for them.
Personally, I feel this looks like a good product and I'm excited about the camera. Yuneec need to be punching this one home, and making sure H520 owners don't feel left out if they're going to build market share.
According to what I've read:
The FC system is:
"Highly reliable PX4 flight stack based on Dronecode’s universal platform"
Yuneec invested a lot of money in Dronecode which from what I can tell at this point has produced an upgraded version of the H480 with not much in the way of firmware/software improvements.
Have you been to Arducopter's website lately or use the latest version of AC? Wow, it's just amazing how far it's come since 2014.
PatR
Premium Pilot
Many a business has taken it in the shorts due to obstinance[emoji6]. Even more from inability to adapt to changing market demands and conditions.
What you mention is why some builders of first responder systems remained with “home” assembled versions of Pixhawk. The system has the flexibility to adapt and the existing versatility eliminated a need to develop new code that had to be protected to remain proprietary. Nothing in either the H or H Plus is highly crafted code that needs to be protected from copying. I have yet to see anything the 520 does that can’t be done easier and perhaps better using flight planning features in a basic Pixhawk. Certainly Pix4D was fully compatible with Pixhawk long before the 520 was even dreamed of.
But this is an H Plus thread so lets see what it brings us.
What you mention is why some builders of first responder systems remained with “home” assembled versions of Pixhawk. The system has the flexibility to adapt and the existing versatility eliminated a need to develop new code that had to be protected to remain proprietary. Nothing in either the H or H Plus is highly crafted code that needs to be protected from copying. I have yet to see anything the 520 does that can’t be done easier and perhaps better using flight planning features in a basic Pixhawk. Certainly Pix4D was fully compatible with Pixhawk long before the 520 was even dreamed of.
But this is an H Plus thread so lets see what it brings us.
I suspect we are entering a new Big Brother era whereby governments won't want clever people producing DIY-updateable code or add-ons which might offer a route to bypass the factory-installed safeguards and security features. I guess all future software updates will be force-fed on the fly by the manufacturers so that operators don't get the option not to install the latest NFZs for example.
Similar threads
