i only have mp conected to the pix and on mp map if its not pointed to zero it wont even show on the map
if i go to the tab as if i was gona do a mission everything moves so its just odd
Hi Aaron, itâs just fine, if you let MP automatically choose the orientation it thinks matches your compass the best. So 270 would be fine. I checked it with my setup too. Seems to work perfectly. You can check that by simply pointing your aircraft towards a large distant tree or in parallel to a building etc. Then check if the aircraft symbol on the map shows the same orientation. Try that for different orientations (not only one). If that is working fine, you should be good to go.
ok thanks still going through pages of stuff trying to get this new setup ready to fly
Youâre welcome. Ask me, if you have any problems.
I have been flying with the CUAV FC and the Neo GPS. I have never looked at this setting before, and never ever had an issue. So arducopter is clearly dealing with the 270degree offset quite well
I just wonder if CUAV dumps FC like my V5 nano who not match quality control onto other sellers like http://www.thanksbuyer.com where I got my CUAV V5 nano incl. the GPS NEO V2 very cheaply from.
Be aware of this website. If you google they have a not very good reputation. http://www.thanksbuyer.com
But PayPal is still supporting them. I had to wait a long time for the delivery. ( hassle because of the virus and poor communication of the seller)
But now to the product:
The GPS has the compass not in the flight direction mounted. Not a problem because AC 4.0.3 is finding that out during compass calibration.
But the internal compass is also wrongly mounted. The internal compass is not possible it relates to the FC mounting direction.
So my internal compass redundancy is useless because of the wrong internal mounting.
I did over come this by mounting a second external GPS unit incl compass.
My calibration is now 2 GPS and 2 external compass units and it is working perfectly.
But extra weight to the aircraft.
Now I repeat my first question. Is CUAV dumping rejected FC cheaply like to http://www.thanksbuyer.com? Or are there bad clones on the market?
I donât know about thanksbuyer.[com]. I order all my CUAV products directly from them. I am in the USA and it takes 3-4 for them to get delivered using DHL. I have have zero issues with any of their flight controllers and I have about 9 of them.
That is what I would recommend. My first CUAV FC was a Pixhack v3x with GPS direct from CUAV. That FC is flying my TREX 600 with camera gear. No problems with the Heli setup and compasses.
I stumbled onto that website above and was seeing that very low price. After ordering I started getting to nowhere.Than I found a hint on the Internet that I should go onto ebay and find the same sellers name as above but with the word hobby behind. I did that and they at ebay answered my question immediately and the parcel arrived 2 weeks later. But the FC has those compasses wrongly mounted. I do not want to go on with this any further. Just to say now go and find the sellers for CUAV FC at Ardupilot.org and do not do what I did.
It will calibrate with excessively high offsets if the internal mag chip is oriented wrong. There is no real redundancy from the internal mag chip anyway. They are unusable in most cases due to local magnetic interference. We do not fly a single helicopter with the internal chips enabled - you will invariably get compass errors
CUAV only has two official stores - their own and their store on AliExpress.
We have used the V3x on our helicopters until this year when we switched to the Drotek Pixhawk 3 Pro, which is made in France. I am also using a custom-built linux-based autopilot running on a 64-bit A72 quad-core processor for one project. I require an I/O so have never even looked at the Nano.
My development focus will be on linux-based systems for the future, as ChibiOS is not suitable for our use and the market has been flooded with low-end STM32-based microcontrollers with no I/O. These are ok for hobby, but not suitable for commercial use. Since the divergence from the PX4 hardware specs I do not agree with ArduPilotâs focus of being able to run on any low-end unit that hits the market - it is bound to cause issues with quality and reliability. The specs on these low-end hobby-grade controls change with the wind. They are here today, gone tomorrow as everybody jumps on the next fad from STM32F4 to F7 to H7, yadda yadda.
I have found that running the code on a linux-based system where you have a real shell to interact with and diagnose problems in the subsystems is a much better long-term solution than microcontrollers. Linux can be ported to run on like STM32F7 with full-blown linux kernel with RT patches. But the F7 is woefully underpowered to do some of the things we are going to do on 64-bit multi-core A-series processors running at clock speeds in the GHz range and with memory in the GB range.
So I would say to expect âissuesâ with the fad-driven hardware development going on with STM32-based microcontrollers.
The V5 nano with the 2 GPS units is still on a timber board mounted for testing. I wanted that FC to replace an old Pixhawk 1 in my Hexacopter which is flying perfectly. I am hesitating now to do that because the V5 nano could be a cheap clone. Thanks Chris for your reply.
Itâs hard to tell if they are clones when not bought from factory authorized stores. I have a couple of nanos as I needed 6+ Dshot outputs and the v5+ cube only supports 4.
Both the v5+ and nano and excellent hobby/light commercial grade FCs
IMO there is never a reason to replace a unit that is currently working perfectly, unless the intent is to experiment or test.
I cannot say one way or the other on the V5 nano. It was not a control design that impressed me from the onset. The original V5 I was initially impressed with, but found it has issues in piston helicopters. There was never a px4-v5 build for it for the NuttX RTOS with ArduPilot. It was a non-starter for our purposes.
The V3x remains the best to-date, with a proven service record in my machines running NuttX. The Drotek Pixhawk 3 Pro is its equal, and also runs NuttX. The V3x is being replaced by Nora - another control I am not impressed with from the onset. Nora lacks an IOMCU and it is another non-starter (for us). They are making them cheaper but with a more powerful F7 or H7 cpu. You can put all the âredundantâ sensors you want on the FMU. But if the FMU locks up you are flying an uncontrolled brick. Which is not acceptable.
You need an IOMCU mixer, or emergency mixing with the radio controls, to use an IOMCU effectively. But it prevents uncontrolled crashes due to loss of the FMU.
It is hobby-grade stuff. Expect to have to fiddle with it. Expect less than 100% success rate in reliability.
1 Like
The funny thing is I looked specifically for the CUAV FCs without a IOMCU due to constraints with Dshot output. I have a few CUAV v5+ cubes that I can not use DShot with on my HEX, however with the Nano V5 I can. This is due to any FC build on fmuV5 with IOMCU has a hardware conflict on Aux 5/6
I do not fly professionally and this is just my Hobby for me. I am however looking forward to the Nora release due to the faster processor and upgraded IMUâs as well as IMU isolation. Nora can allegedly support 12 outputs running DShot