Servers by jDrones

Who are we attracting?


(Nathan E) #81

I’ll agree that the kits are cool and have the potential to interest people. I still think a more user-friendly interface should be of top priority to keep those kids from being scared away. I think a significant number of users are turned away by the complexity of mission planner and the documentation’s ties to it.

Bringing this back around to answer the original question, I think ardupilot isn’t attracting many new people because of Mission Planner’s learning curve. That relates to kids. They don’t want to watch a youtube video explaining everything – they learn better by clicking buttons and using everything available to them on the user interface.


( .) #82


This goes right along with that.


(Coby Leuschke) #83

Likely. You have GetFPV and ReadyMadeRC who seem to have gotten better at finding cheap sources of import parts and perhaps might help. You can already order what you need from them. Someone might want to ask them to create a kit like they do for racers. Maybe they do and I missed it. For a Mom & Pop like mine kits at the low end make little sense as we do not do scale/volume.

@lordneeko you may find it easier to sell the teachers on rovers as it’s less risk. And it ties back into @Naterater’s point about being able to click on the screen and figure out what the hell everything does. Easier to do that with a rover than a flying blender. Perhaps the carrot is to do a group build of a quad once they have proven they can handle a rover.

EDIT: And this is probably another area of thankless documentation work: Provide a proven STEM curriculum for ArduPilot training.


(mike kelly) #84

There are a million kits already. The problem is one that is properly balanced, and with correct parameter file, flies well with no tuning. A lot of tuning and design behind the kit. How do you differentiate that kit from all the others to a first time buyer?

I don’t think you get any solution with support. It is way way too expensive. That is what these forums are for and it would be easier with a standard reference build that you know should work if properly assembled.


(Fnoop) #85

Yes, yes, yes, absolutely. This is exactly what @Coby is trying to achieve and I think will be a really important project when ready. Something similar could be done with popular off the shelf frames as well like the Tarot 650, and particular motor/ESC combinations.


(mike kelly) #86

I am not sure you could ever do such with the Tarot 650 or any other like it. There are too many variables that affect the outcome and that is why people complain about Ardupilot being too hard.

The purpose of the reference build is to get one set of parts that when combined correctly just about guarantees a good experience without a bunch of iterations in tuning or changing around components.


(Fnoop) #87

I think the Tarot 650sport with a specific set of motors and ESCs could be a recipe/reference frame. It’s very well made and relatively easy to put together, and I’ve found it very easy to fly and tune. Loads of spares available and it looks very cool and professional when finished, with retracts builtin as a bonus.
Of course once you start hanging gimbals and other gubbins off it then the tuning needs altering a bit, but I don’t see any reason why the basic flying setup shouldn’t be easily made into a recipe.

An easy to follow recipe along with a BoM and tips for putting it together would have saved me weeks and a lot of swearing!