Hello pixhawk 2 comes complete kit to use my GPS to my pixhawk RadioLink diamond? my power module, my BLUETOO etc? to expect the new GPS is available, you’d know how long the shipping to Canary Islands (Spain)
On the http://www.proficnc.com/content/10-about-us page it is stated: “OPEN HARDWARE The Pixhawk 2 Schematics are open under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 HTTPS://GITHUB.COM/PROFICNC/PIXHAWK2.1”.
I supposed schematics at least should be available for reading by community. But it seems not the case. There are just two pdf files available on github:
- https://github.com/proficnc/pixhawk2.1/blob/master/IMU/IMU_REV_1A.pdf
- https://github.com/proficnc/pixhawk2.1/blob/master/PSM/PSM_REV_C.pdf
No FMU board and no carrier board, even as Altium sources. Moreover, PSM board schematics looks like incomplete in pdf file. There is no 3V3 source line and respective LDO.
How it could be considered “open hardware” in case of community is unable to see complete schematics of device?
Regards,
Dmitry
When the new GPS will be available ?
Two things…
- Shipping hasn’t started… Schematics will be fully published once the hardware ships.
- The so far released Pixhawk 2 schematics have been public for two years.
- As the original aurthor of most of this, I can license it how I want. And with the cooperation of all the authors, we have chosen to release schematics.
- If you have a concern, feel free to contact me… I’m not that hard to find.
Please read the cc-by-sa 3.0 license, and get to know the details within it.
I am a little tired of people blatantly breaching the license on my work, not attributing the work to me, not contributing back anything, then attacking without doing the research.
And you need to learn to search. The full altium project is there for the carrier board.
We are testing them now. I will post when they go on sale
Hello Philip,
( …wow! Mom, I can search! 
)
First of all, thank you for your hard work and for detailed response. Probably I wasn’t too much polite so I sorry that you are considering my questions as a personal attack. It definitely wasn’t the case in any way.
Definitely it is a solely right of authors to choose a license. And I really appreciate that you decided to go with open sources. My questions were not intended to convict any person, but to make things clear about sources. Even a minor note on your page would be able to eliminate questions in advance. Message kind of “we are going to publish all sources as soon as product delivery will be started”, even “we are going to publish some sources” would be ok.
You are right about Pixhawk 2 schematics but how I can guess a difference in schematics between 2.0 and 2.1? How I can see what is really has been changed in case a lack of sources?
I can feel your concern about blatant people who are breaching a license and not attributing their work to you, not contributing back anything and then attacking you without doing the research. Really. I never breached a license and I contributed my changes back: https://github.com/PX4/Hardware/commit/3c379b786647337b9d5836434e84525b21be827e
And I did my research on pixhawk hardware issue really well: http://diydrones.com/forum/topics/solution-proposal-for-pixhawk-imu2-related-bad-accell-health
To contribute my hardware fixes for Pixhawk1 I have spent some money for Eagle license. But I pretty much unsure I able to buy an Altium license. So I believe you could agree it is not so easy for any person in community to contribute some changes back to the Altium project sources even in case this person able to fix something and wants to do it.
You perfectly right it was my mistake and sources for carrier board are available in repository. It’s just not easy for community to see them w/o having Altium license.
With most kind regards and gratitude for your hard work,
Dmitry Prokhorov
Let me explain my point in a bit more details. I going to propose to some of my local customers to use Pixhawk2.1 in their projects. To be able to provide them a support I need to see hardware sources. For this moment it was the only reason I asked for sources.
Have a nice day
As you probably know there is a free viewer for Althium files. It is Windows only though I think and they will pester you constantly to buy the full version
( Not recommending Althium at all BTW, but FYI to help anyone that wants to see the files )
Personally I always recommend KiCad for OSH. It is quite powerful and 100 % free
Thank you for pointing me on Altium Viewer. So far I can see here http://www.altium.com/altium-designer-viewer they are providing a license for viewer just for 6 months.
@dipspb
You could also try this
Translate it to KiCad and redo the pcb. (Sorry @proficnc but I just don’t get the logic in doing OSH in Althium? ) KiCad now has a pretty good manual router
1 Like
Good morning, it would be possible to have the 3D design pixhawk 2 ( only external faces ) to be able to integrate it into our project?
Altium make a free version of Altium Designer, called CircuitMaker:
I’ve used it a bit, it’s pretty much identical, there are features missing, but nothing one can’t do another way.
I can’t remember having any problems opening Altium Designer project files in CircuitMaker either.
I can feel a wave…
1 Like
I haven’t tried the free one, what limitations are there?
Gentlemen,
Thank you very much for pointing me on tools that able to open or convert Altium projects. I believe developers may have had their own considerations while choosing Altium as a tool. And I pretty sure it would be nice for us to keep to the ‘Pixhawk 2 Getting Started’ subject.
Most kind regards,
Dmitry
1 Like
People use the tools that suit them. Altium is the tool that I have used for 18 years… I find it to be an extremely powerful tool.
The Pixhawk 2.1 is compatible whith Odroid XU4 ?
@proficnc
My reason for not using Altium is that it makes pcb development exclusive to the few that can afford the $3K to $10K ( or whatever the salesmen negotiate) that it costs. That is kind of offensive to me I’m sorry. The whole idea with OSH ( i thought) is that it is open to anyone to view but also to modify,
so I dont really accept your logic that people use the tools that suit them. They use what they can afford
@dpisb
Sorry if you think I am diverting the thread. PixHawk 2 claims to be OSH. It is in fact, but to me not in spirit.
@skyscraper I think I diverted the thread, not you. I can see your point and even share it. But working with open source things for many years I have learned one of most important idea for me: “Nobody owes me. In case I need something, why I don’t implemented it so far?”. And I learned to be more positive.
So I believe we can help Philip to make it truly OSH. We can spend our time to convert project sources to kicad or some other tool. And then ask Philip to check them and prepare for production. I know it will be challenging but we can do it.
Also I believe that beta stage of product isn’t a best moment to change a tool.
BTW, can we ask Altium to provide a public license that will be bound to pixhawk project only?
Nice day for everyone,
Dmitry
Thanks Dmitry
Yes, well said! The schematics are published, and others getting involved to actually move the project forward would be appreciated.
Unfortunately, the majority of contact I get regarding the schematics, is from people that want to profit with no intention of contributing back. That’s not the intention of OSH.
The argument that it’s not open unless you use kicad is nuts. But then, we had someone attacking Mission planner because it’s on Windows…
I’m keen to keep publishing open hardware (schematics at least…) but if I am attacked for not doing it in a specific way, that could well effect future directions here.
Philip