Looks great, thanks! It will be interesting to see how to ADIS IMU performs.
That’s a spec sheet that will generate some conversation!
I look forward to seeing this.
Looking forward to the release of new products, I would like to participate in the test
I would be available for testing !
I’m happy to see more robust, temp. compensated and high quality sensors on board!
The variation on consumer grade IMU and compass units is horrible. Have to toss out 10-20% units due not meeting the spec.
For example gyroscope in run stability on some units is so horrible that they will trigger “gyros inconsistent” in minute or two after reboot even if they are temperature controlled.
Very interesting indeed, solid spec there for sure, is the Pro pin compatible with the V5+ Carrier board ?
Recently took a look at the V5+ and there was a lot to like there with the metal construction and wide connectivity options.
@MadRC X7 PRO is compatible with V5 + pins.
@VDLJu Better and more stable flight controllers have always been what we want
@zhangsir Excellent teacher Zhang, I will definitely provide you with hardware.
I would also be interested in taking a look at this new model and testing if you guys are running a Beta
IMU specs look good.
Do connectors follow drone-code pinouts on this version and have you resolved the magnetomer interference present on the original v5 version?
Looking forward to testing it and seeing if we can run a tighter tune on the EKF.
A pity you copied the hardware form factor of Pixhawk2 which is its biggest weak point! Too bulky and connectors on top. You had it right with the previous pIxhack having side connectors instead and a rectangular box shape.
@Hugues You need to understand it, its size and appearance are different from pixhawk2. The internal hardware composition is different, even the connectors of their base boards are different. I don’t know what is your opinion? From your point of view, you used the keyboard to enter the font, and I also used the keyboard to enter the font. Did I copy you? What you need to know is that we have obtained a patent for appearance.
X7 PRO is for large professional drones, and Nora is for the mass market (side interface similar to pixhack).
From the posted picture it is hard to see how it is different than Pixhawk2 as it looks to be the same shape. In any case my opinion is that a cube requiring a carry board is not optimal for building large professional drones based on my experience where I build large pro drones in multicopter and plane versions. We are always looking for the most compact and practical form factor, which happens to be a slim rectangular box with side connectors.
As you said, you like slim rectangular boxes; but it is undeniable that the sandwich structure has also been recognized by some users, and we have not given up the long rectangular box and side interface (Nora uses a structure similar to pixhack); we took into account The needs of more users; not just one.
IMO, the V3/V3x series remains the best form factor for helicopters. Even on large piston or turbine machines there is limited spaced between the frames. The end connector format fits perfectly. Nobody likes a rat’s nest of wires sprouting out of the face of the controller’s carrier board. Might be more convenient than building a control with proper pin headers on the ends but lowest vibration is transferred from wiring to the IMU’s with end pin headers.
Sure, the anti vibration you introduced is a real improvement. My opinion is expressed only about your form factor.
I hope you did do that
It looks to me like the Nora controller will be a winner. I’ll be looking forward to testing that one in helicopters.