Has a 107 pilot I'm suppose to keep my H current with all updates, but it's rock solid even in high winds. If I'm sitting still my video looks like I'm locked down on a tripod. everything works great. So do I upgrade or not?
Upgrade or Not?
- Thread starter Richk
- Start date
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2016
- Messages
- 991
- Reaction score
- 247
- Age
- 56
Honestly no one can make that decision for you. About the only thing i can think of is get something in writing from yuneec that says you dont HAVE to update. That way the manufacturer is giving you instructions to follow.
Bill W.
Bill W.
This 2-24-17 upgrade appears to be rock solid, so if you are comfortable doing upgrades, go for it. if you have problems doing upgrades, pass on by. it only gives you the ability to change your max height, and adds more stability when landing.
I did it today. Took me a couple of hours but no glitches and flew 2 batteries just fine.
There you go.
I don't like OTA, so I just use a card, put both update files on it and do the ST16, then rebind, switch card to the Camera, and do the drone. Piece of cake.
I don't like OTA, so I just use a card, put both update files on it and do the ST16, then rebind, switch card to the Camera, and do the drone. Piece of cake.
FlushVision
Premium Pilot
I can only speak as a U.K. Civil Aviation Authority Commercial Operations Permission Holder which, I believe, is roughly comparable to 107.
Here, in the U.K. as part of the process to get the CAAs approval, one has to write an Operations Manual covering all the aircraft that one intends to use for commercial operations, and have that approved by the CAA before they will give a 'Permission'. In mine (over 50 pages long) I included a section on Firmware Updating Procedures in which I stated that if new firmware was identified from an aircraft's manufacturer, that I would monitor forums and other sources for at least a month to insure that the firmware is sound and not posing issues to others using aircraft of a similar model. If no issues were being reported, then I would update the aircraft and then flight test it in a secluded and benign environment away from the public before putting the aircraft back into commercial operations. Since my operations manual has been approved by the CAA, it follows that they are also in approval of my aircraft firmware management which is detailed within that document.
Now, as you are probably well aware, it is very rare that a firmware update from any manufacturer is without problems of some nature. Someone will inevitably report that an update has caused their aircraft some issues of some sort. These range from their update causing their aircraft to 'brick', or cause some other problems like TB affect or drifting, etc.
So what I'm saying, here, is that as far as the TH is concerned, and taking my 'approved' statement in my operations manual into account, I could very easily argue that there is never a time when I can be sure that updating the firmware on my aircraft won't cause some safety issue, and so it follows that if my aircraft is flying fine on its current firmware I can hold off on updating. My approved operations manual is essentially saying this.
Footnote: I got my H back at the start of June last year and I only updated the firmware for the first time last month and tested it last Friday because it was flying fine until then. I eventually decided to update it because I was experiencing some unusually long connection times between the ST16 and the camera which was sorted out using the update from November 16.
I hope this helps.
PatR
Premium Pilot
As a 107 operator it is your responsibility to assure the aircraft is safe for flight. Since firmware is an integral part of the aircraft operating system it becomes your responsibility to assure new firmware functions correctly prior to incorporating it into the operating system. In my view a 107 operator is fully justified in delaying firmware upgrades until it is established as safe and functional.
Something I find of interest is the habit of all the manufacturers in releasing firmware that has not been fully vetted. Since the manufacturers know they are providing firmware to commercial operators it won't be surprising to see the FAA or DOT start holding them legally liable for public harm induced by defective firmware. The public beta testing of new firmware needs to come to an end.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Something I find of interest is the habit of all the manufacturers in releasing firmware that has not been fully vetted. Since the manufacturers know they are providing firmware to commercial operators it won't be surprising to see the FAA or DOT start holding them legally liable for public harm induced by defective firmware. The public beta testing of new firmware needs to come to an end.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2016
- Messages
- 991
- Reaction score
- 247
- Age
- 56
I agree with this. Definitely use your best judgment as remote pic to determine if you need to do the fw update.
Bill W.
CraigCam
Premium Pilot
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2016
- Messages
- 1,520
- Reaction score
- 663
- Age
- 64
Me too. To much chance for drop in data with OTA plus I can use my Mac to retrieve files and worry less about cyber intrusion. Just went over 500' here in the Rio Grande valley east of El Paso. Did a lot of testing within a huge pecan orchard this studio is located on with no problems. This new firmware is solid.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
I do find it ironic that the FAA and other countries want UAS firmware to remain current, yet we rely on others willing to take a leap of faith and play with it first (guinea pigs) to gain confidence before taking the leap ourselves. The industry, especially the big players, needs to have better quality testing methods and should be required to meet certain standards before making a firmware available for download. Zero tolerance for failure should be the goal.
While this latest firmware seems stable, firmware historically has been hit or miss. Since this firmware is going into something that flies, an issue could cause loss of craft, property damage, and or personal injury. There's much less forgiveness for problems here. Just my two cents.
While this latest firmware seems stable, firmware historically has been hit or miss. Since this firmware is going into something that flies, an issue could cause loss of craft, property damage, and or personal injury. There's much less forgiveness for problems here. Just my two cents.
PatR
Premium Pilot
GW,
There's a caveat in vetting new firmware that's pretty much an 800lb gorilla, and that's in who is declaring it's good or bad. Might many problem reports come from new MR users that did not review install documentation and/or You Tube tutorials or might they come from very experienced operators with a history of documenting system performance? Qualifying the report sources is pretty important. Of course that does not remove any of the responsibility from those that are known to have provided defective upgrades. Some manufacturer assurances are needed with each new firmware release, along with clear and concise, published by the manufacturer, update process instructions. Hard to follow the instructions when those are not clear or ambiguous. Seems there's a need for professional tech writers.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There's a caveat in vetting new firmware that's pretty much an 800lb gorilla, and that's in who is declaring it's good or bad. Might many problem reports come from new MR users that did not review install documentation and/or You Tube tutorials or might they come from very experienced operators with a history of documenting system performance? Qualifying the report sources is pretty important. Of course that does not remove any of the responsibility from those that are known to have provided defective upgrades. Some manufacturer assurances are needed with each new firmware release, along with clear and concise, published by the manufacturer, update process instructions. Hard to follow the instructions when those are not clear or ambiguous. Seems there's a need for professional tech writers.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
PatR
Premium Pilot
Well I have 2 H's ..... both were spot on before today....... did the update on my 2nd H and it took me 3 hrs after it bricked and hd to restore to 1.29 via GUI. then do the SD card update in the camera....... did my NFZ disable ....... went out to test and NO GO..... NFZ is still active....... re-did it 5 times....... still no go....... I am not going to do my mailn H........ it was working perfect...... and still is
This is rediculas.......
This is rediculas.......
I think in regard to your 107 if you are happy with the operation of the craft leave you would be ok to leave it as is until you decide to upgrade.
As all these drone reg tends to follow/come from fullsize aircraft airworthiness regulations, the way it works is (with my fullsize aircraft inspectors hat on) if a document issued by the manufacturer is classed as mandatory then the upgrade/change must be completed before the next flight, if it is classed as an advisory notice then it is generally considered to be upto the owner when to implement, but to monitor the situation in the mean time.
If Yuneec stated this firmware update must be done by all owners due to a fault/glitch etc, then to comply to your 107 you would have to do it.
As it is just an upgrade then you would not be bound to do it in aviation law until you felt it was in your interest or you discovered a need.
As all these drone reg tends to follow/come from fullsize aircraft airworthiness regulations, the way it works is (with my fullsize aircraft inspectors hat on) if a document issued by the manufacturer is classed as mandatory then the upgrade/change must be completed before the next flight, if it is classed as an advisory notice then it is generally considered to be upto the owner when to implement, but to monitor the situation in the mean time.
If Yuneec stated this firmware update must be done by all owners due to a fault/glitch etc, then to comply to your 107 you would have to do it.
As it is just an upgrade then you would not be bound to do it in aviation law until you felt it was in your interest or you discovered a need.
I also Have Mavic Pro that a FW update came out this week as well.....that FW went right in no issues after and it is as steady as a humming bird...... I did the update on my second H and now I have problems I didnt have before....... and it took me 6 attempts to just get it completed...... YUNEEC needs to test their updates top tp bottom
My NFZ lockoutis not working,,,,,,,,it will not srart, even remvoving the GPS the motors still WONT START&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&Y
ANY SUGESTIONS.....? OTHERWISE I AM TAKING IT BACK 2.29
ANY SUGESTIONS.....? OTHERWISE I AM TAKING IT BACK 2.29
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2016
- Messages
- 991
- Reaction score
- 247
- Age
- 56
Very good information. I have had very little issues with my H and all of the updates have gone well. Im one of those guys...yeah I know.
I was thinking about what the faa would require as it concerns updates. Your statement makes sense. Yuneec needs to classify each update as mandatory or discretionary.
Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk
Similar threads
