About CUAV Pixhack V5

CUAV from Shenzhen, China, has newly developed a new Pix codenamed V5. It will start a global public test recently. The following are known materials:

Quick Summary
•Main FMU Processor: STM32F765◦32 Bit Arm® Cortex®-M7, 216MHz, 2MB memory, 512KB RAM

•IO Processor: STM32F100◦32 Bit Arm® Cortex®-M3, 24MHz, 8KB SRAM

•On-board sensors:
◦Accel/Gyro: ICM-20689
◦Accel/Gyro: BMI055
◦Magnetometer: IST8310
◦Barometer: MS5611

◦8-14 PWM outputs (6 from IO, 8 from FMU)
◦3 dedicated PWM/Capture inputs on FMU
◦Dedicated R/C input for CPPM
◦Dedicated R/C input for Spektrum / DSM and S.Bus with analog / PWM RSSI input
◦Dedicated S.Bus servo output
◦5 general purpose serial ports
◦4 I2C ports
◦4 SPI buses
◦Up to 2 CANBuses for dual CAN with serial ESC
◦Analog inputs for voltage / current of 2 batteries

•Power System:◦Power: 4.3~5.4V
◦USB Input: 4.75~5.25V
◦Servo Rail Input: 0~36V

•Weight and Dimensions:◦Weight: 90g
◦Dimensions: 44x84x12mm

•Other Characteristics:◦Operating temperature: -20 ~ 80°c

It is known to use the F765 processor and many other upgrade updates. But I don’t know if the current Ardupilot firmware supports it or not. I’m going to use a traditional helicopter to test this flight control. I need to ask whether AC 3.6rc1 FW supports this.


1 Like




Suggest several appropriate attention!

It’s highly recommended that Ardupilot suits for V5 hardware.Redundant backup now needs stronger CPU for it ASAP!!!


We don’t have support for F7 processor for now.
@xu_freeman, we aren’t using F4 at full capacity, so this new one bring nothing else that copying the design of the Cube !


Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, if it done properly, unfortunately this is not that type. :confused:


Support for F7 is being actively worked on, with F745, F767, F777 boards at various stages of booting/testing (maybe F765 and F769 too - not sure).


Yes, as James says, F7 support is coming. I assume that a board has been sent to Tridge and/or Sid… I’m pretty sure it has been. There are other developers in the ArduPilot/ChibiOS channel that seem very capable of doing the ports as well so perhaps posting in there to see if anyone is interested in helping out with the port.


make px4fmu-v5_default upload

is the command to compile the firmware.


1 Like

In order to thank the ArduPilot team for their support, we will give a free pixhack v5 to every ArduPilot developer. We tried to contact you but did not reply! We hope to have good communication with the ArduPilot team.


I highly recommend taking this offer up.CUAV Pixhacks are my go-to FC,both v2.83 and v3,due to their excellent build quality and reliability (never had a problem with any of mine).I will for sure be getting one of these ASAP.They are definitely worth a good look at.

Shame about the cube lay-out (I don’t like it personally) but multilevel boards are where things are going I guess.


Fully agree with you about the cube layout. I would hope CUAV would learn from the mistakes of others to improve their builds.

1 Like

Having multiple hardware vendors is good for the ArduPilot community, so I think as long as they’ve followed the Pixhawk2.1 interface standards (licensed under OSHW 1.1/CC BY-SA 3.0), and respect the licence, this is a positive development.

Having said that, ProfiCNC/Hex are developing a ‘Red Cube’ using the STM32F769AI, so choosing the STM32F765 seems to unnecessarily fragment hardware integration efforts from my perspective. The feature differences between the two µCs is negligible.

I’ve sent you a PM with my address. I’d like to add support for this board in ArduPilot.

1 Like

I recouped my first controller pixhack v3, I intend to use the drones of agriculture that we manufacture here in Brazil, we aim to replace the pixhawk, so we like dpo designer PIXHACKV3, and now with version 5 seems to be spectacular, I will definitely want one.

1 Like

I’ve done the same, but have not heard back for a week.

1 Like

The fmu-v5 spec is F765, which is why you’ll see it in this, and a couple of others very shortly.
The Cube F7 boards are not based on the v5 spec - they’re an independent engineering effort. It does mean a little duplicated work in the bring up of the boards, but not a huge amount - particularly if the manufacturers contribute the hwdef.dat (which Phil has for instance).


Sorry, the work is busy and we did not reply to you in time. We have sent the board to the developer. Since your application was late, it was not selected, but I still have pixhack v5. If you need, Please you find a developer to apply together

1 Like

Sorry, I didn’t see your mailing address. Can you send it again?


1 Like

Thanks for the clarification James.

1 Like

@jaxxzer is on the dev team as the lead dev for ArduSub