Update on Typhoon H

[PatR]

Yuneec is constrained by management level decisions, something they have demonstrated they don’t want to change. There’s also a few Chinese patents they have to respect. They are also limited by finances, something they lost control of when a distributor bankrupted.

Some of you are preaching to the choir, and have come late to join it. Many have been hoping for a change in their decision making for a long time, but that has not happened.

 

[biltno]

I'm so confused why people view drones differently than any other product? If you bought a Ford F250 3 years ago, you wouldn't expect Ford to give updates or upgrades they have added to the new models. If there is a major flaw they should fix it, and provide parts for repair. The H-480 platform has been upgraded to either the H520 or H plus (both with their own benefits and flaws), but an improvement over the H480. My complaint is that they seem to leave out features that are standard on other drones from their competitors. I know many that we looking at the H plus decided on the Autel EVO not only for camera quality and functions, tap and fly waypoint, and forward and behind sensors. Yuneecs 6 rotors stability in wind was the only reason I bought 2 of my 3 Yuneecs drones I still own. It is not enough to compensate for the other lack of functionality.

I really don’t think you can compare new cars to drones I work in the automotive industry and I can give a quick example as to what I mean. Our infotainment units (audio navigation usb etc all in one unit) came out around 2013
Here we are late 2018 and software updates continue to come out to add features (like apple air play) and stability updates. I can understand yuneecs position on the H. It hasn’t been drone of the century by any means like every other drone has had its issues, but like others say and I agree it’s a stable well built drone for the money

 

[PatR]

Some have issues with the fact Yuneec does not provide in all of their products what DJI does. Nor do they understand that DJI did not upgrade their products through firmware releases, but did so with multiples of new model releases. Where Yuneec does provide new features through free firmware upgrades to obtain an upgrade with a DJI unit you have to buy a new product.

 

[Mrgs1]

Coming from lesser drones I feel Yuneec to be a big positive step, the drones I used were cheaper, yes you get what you pay for! It was nice to have smooth video, smooth operation and a level of reliability not in my previous drones.Uk support and not having to rely on an email unanswered to China.

 

[TimboSlice]

My point is that Yuneec needs to realize they could be competitive to DJI, Autel, etc if they did not skimp on their technology leaving out features on one drone, that they use on another. If you can make a camera that has a 1" sensor without horizon issues (make that standard); If you have obstacle avoidance technology (make that standard front, reverse, above, and below); if you have the ability to program way points on screen without flying a ridiculous route burning up batteries (make it standard); if you have barometric height adjustment capabilities (make it standard); and if you have the ability to track an object and follow (make that standard).

Why? Because their competition is, without sacrificing price. Look at DJI for example (I know they have flaws: uploading user videos to china, no fly zones, update requirements etc. I own 2), however they have incorporated their technology of camera quality, tracking ability, auto height adjustment, and waypoint programming throughout all of their platforms.

The only difference is the extreme camera quality from the spark camera to the X7, but you have a choice and you definitely get what you pay for. I'm able to upgrade my Inspire 2 from the original Zenmuse X4 it came with to the Zenmuse X5 that I did, and then if I wanted to go crazy the Zenmuse X7. I can do all of that without changing platforms, and I decide when to pay for an upgrade through the camera.

If yuneec was smart they would have made a platform like the H Plus (that we know is the H520), support it with firmware upgrades, and maybe slight version changes. Then have different camera options by partnering with Panasonic, Canon, Nikon whoever to create better cameras.

Yuneec has made many different platforms from the Q500, Q500 4k, H920, H480, H920 Plus, H520, H plus, Mantis. All of these have been designed for a single purpose without keeping focus that the competition was making each drone a multi use platform. They were making so many different platforms at different price points, selling them, giving one, or 2 firmware updates, and then abandoning the product completely for a new one, leaving their customer/supporters with a single use platform drone.

I still hope Yuneec learns and improves because competition is good for technology and consumer pricing options, but I have invested too much on their drones only getting partial satisfaction requiring me to look to other drone companies to get what I need to perform the tasks I want. I'm done for now with Yuneec hoping they will listen and then only will I invest in the future.

If you notice over the past 5 years, the youtube videos showing tips, reviews, and instructions on Yuneec drones by various people are no longer flying, or making videos on Yuneec drones. Myself and I know many others have bought their Yuneec drones based on these videos. Yuneec in my opinion owes residuals to these ones for promoting their product, however they have actual disregarded these ones going as far as threatening to take legal action at times.

So to Captain Drone, Roswell Flight Test Crew, Jeff Sibelius, BillNicholsTV, Demunseed, Bo Lorentzen, Richard Gilmore, and many others I thank you even if Yuneec doesn't. Notice there are no comparison videos or reviews, only videos clips showing cinematic footage.

I can shoot that from anyone of my drones and with video editing shine that turd to make it look good, especially in 4k. The devil is in the details as it is said. Cinematic footage may sell some drones, but professionals highlighting features and comparisons to other drones is what will sell most drones.

[MOD EDIT:] My apologies up front, to @AveryBadman96 in editing your post without asking permission. The only edits were made to add some paragraph spacing for written legibility. The post is too good to not be easily read.

Amen! Let me say "here here" to you thanking those named above for putting out good info via YouTube. I am heavily invested in Yuneec drones - love them - but.... the other day, a co worker let me fly his Mavic 2 - holy smokes.....ah, the problems of first world America.....

 

[Mrgs1]

Amen! Let me say "here here" to you thanking those named above for putting out good info via YouTube. I am heavily invested in Yuneec drones - love them - but.... the other day, a co worker let me fly his Mavic 2 - holy smokes.....ah, the problems of first world America.....

Always found the videos by I think Captain Drone, "Slam that battery into the compartment" I'm sure just pushing firmly til it clicks would suffice, I would be worried I might break something.

 

[Gurusonwheels]

I think your question needs to be answered with a question.

Having released the 520 and Zh Plus, why would Yuneec want to create updates for the old H? The H Plus is the H update.

why ?

because the H is a unfinished product and is dangerous at best .
if no other reason the update should focus on adding the extra button to disable the gps quickly .

no pilot should have to break LOS just to navigate menus to disable the gps and take back control .

this is both reckless and careless not to mention against FFA regulations without a spotter ( these are sold as hobby drones now lol )

if they continue to ignore this dangerous situation it could lead to someone being injured or killed .

hate to be that way . but lives are at stake here .
they chose to sell this unit as a hobby drone and as such needs to be safe for people that are not as agile as US pilots .

remember if your car has a safety issue even 10 years later the GOV forces them to fix the problem .
this is exactly the same issue and these business should be held responsible .

these fly aways due to defective GPS , compass etc could be prevented ....

 

[NorWiscPilot]

why ?

because the H is a unfinished product and is dangerous at best .
if no other reason the update should focus on adding the extra button to disable the gps quickly .

no pilot should have to break LOS just to navigate menus to disable the gps and take back control .

this is both reckless and careless not to mention against FFA regulations without a spotter ( these are sold as hobby drones now lol )

if they continue to ignore this dangerous situation it could lead to someone being injured or killed .

hate to be that way . but lives are at stake here .
they chose to sell this unit as a hobby drone and as such needs to be safe for people that are not as agile as US pilots .

remember if your car has a safety issue even 10 years later the GOV forces them to fix the problem .
this is exactly the same issue and these business should be held responsible .

these fly aways due to defective GPS , compass etc could be prevented ....

On the need for a physical GPS “switch” I must say I fully agree.

Aside from using the AUX button, I am struggling with an effective way to reprogram the mode switch. Personally, I would like the option to assign the function of the top position of the mode switch. That is, use a menu setting to configure the function to be either Smart or fully manual.

Reasoning is this: for those using smart mode as their preferred mode, would the ability to react and know to disable GPS be an inherent skill? Not trying to slight anyone. Only repeating the often stated mantra “learn to pilot the Typhoon [in angle mode].

I just know from experience with my H520... had it not been for the ingrained “flip a switch” ability to disable GPS assisted flight, without taking my eyes off the H520, I would likely not have been able to save it from the sudden pull of the trees magnetic properties, when I had intentionally put it in a hover under a bit of canopy of those same trees.

I want that no-look switch in my cockpit for all the significant aircraft in my fleet.

Just sayin’.

Jeff

 

[Mrgs1]

On the need for a physical GPS “switch” I must say I fully agree.

Aside from using the AUX button, I am struggling with an effective way to reprogram the mode switch. Personally, I would like the option to assign the function of the top position of the mode switch. That is, use a menu setting to configure the function to be either Smart or fully manual.

Reasoning is this: for those using smart mode as their preferred mode, would the ability to react and know to disable GPS be an inherent skill? Not trying to slight anyone. Only repeating the often stated mantra “learn to pilot the Typhoon [in angle mode].

I just know from experience with my H520... had it not been for the ingrained “flip a switch” ability to disable GPS assisted flight, without taking my eyes off the H520, I would likely not have been able to save the sudden pull of the trees magnetic properties, when I had intentionally put it in a hover under a bit of canopy of those same trees.

I want that no-look switch in my cockpit for all the significant aircraft in my fleet.

Just sayin’.

Jeff

How long does it take to disable GPS from the menu? Do you think the process can be speeded up with practice? Would it be a good thing to master.

 

[NorWiscPilot]

How long does it take to disable GPS from the menu? Do you think the process can be speeded up with practice? Would it be a good thing to master.

Personally, I have it mastered. In fact, it is part of my mental pre-flight checklist; just to think about GPS reminds me of the sequence, for the ST16 and H.

For the new pilot, or at least for the new H owner, the practice may not come in time for when an unexpected condition arises. Just read some of the thread starting with “Newbie here; first flights, H flew away.”

The point is, to execute the touch pad sequence, one has to take visual focus off the aircraft in order to do it.

Reminds me of an old golf axiom: the trait of a duffer is... after hitting a shot, they will return their gaze down at where the ball was, precisely at the moment they should have been watching the ball if they ever had any expectations of seeing it again.

Eyes up, intuitive and immediate, is what is needed.

Hope this helps clarify the need a bit more.

Jeff

 

[Gomi]

why ?

because the H is a unfinished product and is dangerous at best .
if no other reason the update should focus on adding the extra button to disable the gps quickly .

no pilot should have to break LOS just to navigate menus to disable the gps and take back control .

this is both reckless and careless not to mention against FFA regulations without a spotter ( these are sold as hobby drones now lol )

if they continue to ignore this dangerous situation it could lead to someone being injured or killed .

hate to be that way . but lives are at stake here .
they chose to sell this unit as a hobby drone and as such needs to be safe for people that are not as agile as US pilots .

remember if your car has a safety issue even 10 years later the GOV forces them to fix the problem .
this is exactly the same issue and these business should be held responsible .

these fly aways due to defective GPS , compass etc could be prevented ....

Dangerous at best? How do you fly your drone anyway?

 

[PatR]

Disabling GPS is irrelevant in a GPS loss situation. During a fly away GPS is already lost or the system is ignoring GPS info. In essence GPS has already been disabled and any additional action to disable GPS serves no purpose aside from assuring it will not be regained should the system regain signal or resume processing positional data.

As GPS does not establish altitude stability, something done through the baro altimeter, sudden extreme altitude changes would occur from large pressure changes or the operator’s left thumb.

As loss of GPS does not initiate an automated return to home it cannot by itself induce a climb to programmed return home height. Again, the baro altimeter will control that function when combined with a loss of RC signal. Not from compass failure, not from loss of GPS, but from lost RC communications with the aircraft.

For me it’s amazing how some people will try to assign a threat level to lack of an external GPS switch. Logic is not a function reserved for computers. The best computer available should be our brain, provided we bothered to learn something about what’s involved in making our toys stay in the air. Those that learn how these things tick and use a little logical reasoning will put themselves well ahead of the pack.

If and when a fly away occurs the fastest way to regain control, if control can be regained, is to flip that right switch from the top position to the middle position. The bottom position is useless in that condition because the aircraft no longer has a clue as to where home is or was so taking it out of a mode that is dependent on a relative home position (Smart/headless) is realistically the one and only hope we have. It does not exist anymore. During a true fly away directional control cannot be regained regardless of what you do. We should remember the system will no longer respond to control inputs in any way. Once we determine we cannot regain control the only other option is to turn off the ST-16 and pray it responds to the lost signal programming, but that’s not assured because it’s supposed to return to the last known position of the ST-16. If that position was established via GPS data you’re screwed.

GPS by itself does not cause a true fly away. If it did every time we turned off GPS to fly fast would induce a fly away. Loss of GPS slaving the aircraft to a position and orientation relative to the ST-16 can and will cause a loss of directional control, which can be instantly regained if the system is placed in Angle mode. That quick little flip of a switch is already at our fingertips. Should loss of GPS combine with massive compass errors anything can happen. Perhaps the best move is to send a descend command until it hits the ground instead of a climb command. If it responds you won’t have to go as far looking for it. Similar applies if a flight controller fails to respond to command input. It’s going wherever it wants to go and there will be nothing you can do about it.

 

[Gurusonwheels]

Disabling GPS is irrelevant in a GPS loss situation. During a fly away GPS is already lost or the system is ignoring GPS info. In essence GPS has already been disabled and any additional action to disable GPS serves no purpose aside from assuring it will not be regained should the system regain signal or resume processing positional data.

As GPS does not establish altitude stability, something done through the baro altimeter, sudden extreme altitude changes would occur from large pressure changes or the operator’s left thumb.

As loss of GPS does not initiate an automated return to home it cannot by itself induce a climb to programmed return home height. Again, the baro altimeter will control that function when combined with a loss of RC signal. Not from compass failure, not from loss of GPS, but from lost RC communications with the aircraft.

For me it’s amazing how some people will try to assign a threat level to lack of an external GPS switch. Logic is not a function reserved for computers. The best computer available should be our brain, provided we bothered to learn something about what’s involved in making our toys stay in the air. Those that learn how these things tick and use a little logical reasoning will put themselves well ahead of the pack.

If and when a fly away occurs the fastest way to regain control, if control can be regained, is to flip that right switch from the top position to the middle position. The bottom position is useless in that condition because the aircraft no longer has a clue as to where home is or was so taking it out of a mode that is dependent on a relative home position (Smart/headless) is realistically the one and only hope we have. It does not exist anymore. During a true fly away directional control cannot be regained regardless of what you do. We should remember the system will no longer respond to control inputs in any way. Once we determine we cannot regain control the only other option is to turn off the ST-16 and pray it responds to the lost signal programming, but that’s not assured because it’s supposed to return to the last known position of the ST-16. If that position was established via GPS data you’re screwed.

GPS by itself does not cause a true fly away. If it did every time we turned off GPS to fly fast would induce a fly away. Loss of GPS slaving the aircraft to a position and orientation relative to the ST-16 can and will cause a loss of directional control, which can be instantly regained if the system is placed in Angle mode. That quick little flip of a switch is already at our fingertips. Should loss of GPS combine with massive compass errors anything can happen. Perhaps the best move is to send a descend command until it hits the ground instead of a climb command. If it responds you won’t have to go as far looking for it. Similar applies if a flight controller fails to respond to command input. It’s going wherever it wants to go and there will be nothing you can do about it.

say whatever you want to protect this company . the bird has a safety problem that need to be fixed with some updates .

disabling gps always fixes the flyaways for me .

this is a unfinished product with serious safety concerns at best when it comes to the latest firmware .

 

[AeriaL]

say whatever you want to protect this company . the bird has a safety problem that need to be fixed with some updates .

disabling gps always fixes the flyaways for me .

this is a unfinished product with serious safety concerns at best when it comes to the latest firmware .

Disabling GPS also saved me 2 times...

 

[ArtCox]

That's the problem with proprietary systems. No Open Source software. Since the AUX button isn't being used, I wish there was a way to assign that as GPS On/Off.

 

[NorWiscPilot]

Disabling GPS is irrelevant in a GPS loss situation. During a fly away GPS is already lost or the system is ignoring GPS info. In essence GPS has already been disabled and any additional action to disable GPS serves no purpose aside from assuring it will not be regained should the system regain signal or resume processing positional data.

As GPS does not establish altitude stability, something done through the baro altimeter, sudden extreme altitude changes would occur from large pressure changes or the operator’s left thumb.

As loss of GPS does not initiate an automated return to home it cannot by itself induce a climb to programmed return home height. Again, the baro altimeter will control that function when combined with a loss of RC signal. Not from compass failure, not from loss of GPS, but from lost RC communications with the aircraft.

For me it’s amazing how some people will try to assign a threat level to lack of an external GPS switch. Logic is not a function reserved for computers. The best computer available should be our brain, provided we bothered to learn something about what’s involved in making our toys stay in the air. Those that learn how these things tick and use a little logical reasoning will put themselves well ahead of the pack.

If and when a fly away occurs the fastest way to regain control, if control can be regained, is to flip that right switch from the top position to the middle position. The bottom position is useless in that condition because the aircraft no longer has a clue as to where home is or was so taking it out of a mode that is dependent on a relative home position (Smart/headless) is realistically the one and only hope we have. It does not exist anymore. During a true fly away directional control cannot be regained regardless of what you do. We should remember the system will no longer respond to control inputs in any way. Once we determine we cannot regain control the only other option is to turn off the ST-16 and pray it responds to the lost signal programming, but that’s not assured because it’s supposed to return to the last known position of the ST-16. If that position was established via GPS data you’re screwed.

GPS by itself does not cause a true fly away. If it did every time we turned off GPS to fly fast would induce a fly away. Loss of GPS slaving the aircraft to a position and orientation relative to the ST-16 can and will cause a loss of directional control, which can be instantly regained if the system is placed in Angle mode. That quick little flip of a switch is already at our fingertips. Should loss of GPS combine with massive compass errors anything can happen. Perhaps the best move is to send a descend command until it hits the ground instead of a climb command. If it responds you won’t have to go as far looking for it. Similar applies if a flight controller fails to respond to command input. It’s going wherever it wants to go and there will be nothing you can do about it.

PatR,

With all due respect, I think we are talking about two different types of events on this one.

We are not taking about “loss of GPS” on here. (At least I am not.). The need for the ability to quickly and intuitively remove GPS from positional hold and control is during an episode where the GPS and compass subsystem thinks it should be somewhere else than where it currently is. The control inputs from the pilot are not being adhered to, due to the GPS commanding the craft to go somewhere, ignoring the ST16.

As has been stated in other threads as well as this one, the above conditions seem to be a major cause in this type of flyaway. Assuming the aircraft control system is still able to receive commands, and the GPS subsystem will respond to a “cease what you’re doing” command, we can regain full manual control.

Switching to angle mode is not effective here in that GPS is still active as a positioning system, as you know. If the GPS thinks it is not where it thinks it should be, it is going to take over. Only if we can tell the craft to disregard the GPS commands do we have a chance of recovery.

Hope this clarifies, at least to some extent, what the actual intent is behind this GPS toggle switch discussion.

Respectfully,

Jeff

 

[AeriaL]

PatR,

With all due respect, I think we are talking about two different types of events on this one.

We are not taking about “loss of GPS” on here. (At least I am not.). The need for the ability to quickly and intuitively remove GPS from the positional hold and control is during an episode where the GPS and compass subsystem thinks it should be somewhere else than where it currently is. The control inputs from the pilot are not being adhered to, due to the GPS commanding the craft to go somewhere, ignoring the ST16.

As has been stated in other threads as well as this one, the above conditions seem to be a major cause in this type of flyaway. Assuming the aircraft control system is still able to receive commands, and the GPS subsystem will respond to a “cease what you’re doing” command, we can regain full manual control.

Switching to angle mode is not effective here in that GPS is still active as a positioning system, as you know. If the GPS thinks it is not where it thinks it should be, it is going to take over. Only if we can tell the craft to disregard the GPS commands do we have a chance of recovery.

Hope this clarifies, at least to some extent, what the actual intent is behind this GPS toggle switch discussion.

Respectfully,

Jeff

Exactly! You nail it.

 

[PatR]

Without changing my position, perhaps turning the aux button into the RTH switch and converting the current RTH switch position to full manual mode would make people happy.

As for the rest of the H I can’t see anywhere Yuneec would want to change anything. The 520 and H Plus are the only platforms they’ll have any inclination to adapt. I believe the H-480 to be a “dead” platform for any further development.

 

[Mrgs1]

How big a problem is this really? In the context of units sold, and fail rates, how many thousands of units are being sold each year compared to the ones which do or don't fail, you only really get to hear the bad stories, or is it so prevalent that more units give problems and therefore a major flaw, people are always going to be vocal when there is a problem, is it more than you would expect due to quality control?

 

[Gurusonwheels]

How big a problem is this really? In the context of units sold, and fail rates, how many thousands of units are being sold each year compared to the ones which do or don't fail, you only really get to hear the bad stories, or is it so prevalent that more units give problems and therefore a major flaw, people are always going to be vocal when there is a problem, is it more than you would expect due to quality control?

one dead person from a hit from one of these out of control birds is more than enough reason to fix !

do we really need to wait for someone to loose there life from a 40mph drone to fix a problem
that could be fixed by the developer in one afternoon .