[quote=“Leonardthall”]It looks like something physically changed between the two flights on the log. This may have been a slight movement in one of the arms causing the yaw offset John mentioned (I would not be surprised if something is looser than it should be). However, what ever changed was enough to set the copter stability right on the edge. From here anything can make the difference, battery voltage, wind, airspeed, roll or pitch angle, temperature. In your case you had two instances, one in alt hold and one in RTL.
[/quote]
Now this makes sense. All along I’ve been asking why, if the copter was so unstable and on the edge, this condition didn’t show up during my testing? I did check the copter when it landed but I didn’t see anything obvious. It’s a shame I’ve now changed some things as it would have been a great test to do another flight and see if I could trip the same event.
[quote=“Leonardthall”]
I would also suggest that you will make the people helping you feel more appreciated if you spend less time suggesting code problems, or insulting comparisons with other systems, when your mistakes are pointed out.[/quote]
It works both ways Leonard. No one is a bigger fan boy of your work than I am. I’ve spent a lot of time and money supporting this project and your work. I’m not sure what more you expect.
When I ask for support I don’t appreciate being made to feel like I’m in an inquest. I know how trouble shooting works. I actually operate a tech support service which Tridge volunteers efforts to. To tell a user to go read the code when you know damn well I’m not a software engineer or to suggest that I should go learn how to read logs and do basic algebra is insulting and disrespectful. I believe that users deserve more respect than that.
I do read logs and I have worked out a lot by myself. I have enjoyed learning from your contributions and feedback. I never ask for assistance without putting in a lot of time trying to work things out first. I totally respect how busy developers are and the demands they are under.
I only suggested the code might handle things better after listening to how it worked. Tridge did mention to me today that one of the first patches he did was to the stability code which had issues. Is it so unreasonable to ask if it could be developed further? We also know about the barometer issue which thank goodness didn’t catch many people out given it existed in the first release of the Pixhawk. The code is typically the last thing to look at but it’s not perfect and you know that.
I’ve made the suggestion that perhaps the software could warn if the hover rate is too high and putting the copter in to a dangerous situation. There was no response. And personally I’d prefer to have an unstable landing than a stable crash but I understand Jon’s explanation as to why that probably isn’t a good idea. So I was just asking if there might be some way to let the pilot call for more thrust. If not, that’s fine but why give me grief for asking the question?
I also asked Tridge why my hover rate appears so high when the throttle on the Tx doesn’t indicate this. 80% is quite extreme and it just seems so odd that I wouldn’t notice that during previous tests given how much experience I have. So maybe after the first landing a battery came loose? It does behave like this if flown on a single battery. But me saying that the hover rate can’t be that high just gets ignored because there is a graph to show that it was at that rate. Well it might have been at that point at time but do you really think a 7.5 Kg AUW copter with 8 Tiger 4014-11 motors, 15 inch Tiger CF props and two 8Amp batteries is really going to have such a high hover rate? You fly big copters so you know what I’m saying is true. ECalc and Droidworx staff seem to think it’s ok.
So where’s the recognition that I followed your instructions to autotune the copter without load and then adjust manually to my preference? Where’s the comment about how good it was that I tested at length with and without load before putting valuable load on the copter? I did a LOT of things right. Here’s an opportunity for the developers to learn how things can go astray even with a fairly switched on user. BTW, I do have one of the most respected degrees in photography and a degree in computer science. So I find it hard to believe that I don’t have anything to contribute here.
Lastly where is the thanks that I’ve taken on what few people would and worked very hard to demonstrate how advanced this platform is and that it can be used successfully for one of the most demanding roles for multicopters? I could have just whacked a Wookong on it and had a lot of nice videos by now. That is a fact. If it bothers you I can’t help that. No one asked me to this, I just wanted to do whatever I could to contribute without being a software engineer.
If I’m annoying the developers so much I guess it’s time I just move on. It’s sad it didn’t work out and I’m very disappointed I’ll miss out on all the great work you are doing but such is life.
Lastly I would like you to know that I do appreciate your time and feedback. I have always found your explanations a bit easier to follow and more down to earth/logical. We obviously don’t agree about some things but that’s not a huge deal.
Cheers.