right POLL for all users:
1. How many AUX channels are you using (ex. CH5 and pan tilt on 6/7)
2. How often are you using them ? (ex. I can't stop panning !!! )
3. How many have servos connected ( just my pan servo which I love to pan )
4. What resolution you think is needed ? ( ex. think 100 clicks is enough)
5. Video tutorial for flashing ?
6. How much pain is the Arduino IDE for you ?
Advanced (answer only if you know what i'm talking about)
5. What latency is acceptable for your flying ? (ex. 20ms / less for helis)
6. Should the new fw refresh the channels ? (ALL - parallel / One by One - Serial / Pairs (1st 5 ch) + aux
7. how important is hopping on more than 4 channels
8. Do you use Serial PPM ?
9. RSSI ? (Analogue (sig strength seen by rf chip) / link quality (packet based) / both )
hopefully i didnt forget anything lol
Cheers
Mihai.
Excellent news, I`ve not had the time to get back onto Open testing for a while, but making some time soon.
1) Aux : 1 for OSD 2 for AutoPilot 2 for P&T ( normally )
2) OSD, AP and Pan all the time, tilt not so often
3) 2 for Aileron, 1 Elevator, 1 Rudder 2 P&T ( Pan being a large 360 degree GWS125 )
4) I agree 100 would be plenty even for 360 degree servo
5) That would be a good idea for noobs
6) It is OK for me, but I`ve not much experience, I can imagine a bit scary for a noob to understand
Advanced
7) (9) I don`t think hopping on more than 4 channels should be needed and 4 or less would probably make the hopping easier
8) (10) I use serial with multicopter, its 100x easier
9) (11) Both IMO
1. Only one aux channel atm, however, 4 more when I plug in my osd and openpilot makes a new release of their software with dynamic pid adjustment capability
2. Not too often atm
3. No servos connected to the Aux channels. Only one on my Tricopter.
4. Not sure of a suitable answer here. I guess more is better?
5. Not needed for me
6. No problem at all
5. Lowest latency possible for flying my multicopters
6. Wouldn't it be more efficient to only refresh the channels whose data has changed since the last refresh?
7. Hopping is important I think. On how many channels I don't know. How many channels do other systems hop on?
8. I don't atm. But will after the new OP software is released.
9. Don't use RSSI atm, but will when I install my DragonOSD. I guess the important thing is to maintain compatibility with existing OSDs. Outside of that I have no opinion
i dont know how much you will value my input but here goes....
1. 1234 then 567 are a must really...
2. A lot really... mode/osd/aileron or other...
3. 567 will have at least 1 servo normally maybe 2 dependent on airframe, and osd/mode switches camera gimble..
4. resolution... more is better??
5. the video tutorial... well after my recent f**k ups i was thinking of doing one now i know how.
6. IDE? if you mean your cool little programme that writes it for you... its ace!
B
5. for me flying multi's the faster the better really, for fixed wing stuff you can get away with it a bit i recon
6. dont know cant comment
7. dont know cant comment
8. nope not tried it...
9. RSSI is an awesome feature! but a packet quality rssi could be good? can you do both? or switch in the script?
well hope it helps a little?
simon.
your daily heads up on progress:
Currently in dev:
Packet optimisation: 4800baud; full servo resolution
Package transmission: per-demand packet sending (thx SouthPawPau for the idea)
RSSI: avg between analogue signal strength + packet loss
Serial PPM on I2c port as not used anyway
Question of the Day:
Q: What should I use to create the unique bind key so we won't have system conflicts between users anymore ?
- Date of birth
- PC ID (pc name)
- I want my own custom code that I input
PS: bring oon the pringles and red bull :D
I'm not really quite sure, but DoB would probably be sufficient, but sod's law dictates that you'd probably get a clash at some point.
Could you not use the Windows API GUID function and use that as the unique key bind? In Delphi it's Sysutils.CreateGUID with the corresponding Sysutils.GUIDToString, that is of course if you're still using Delphi to write the Config setup wizard.
Will you also be looking at the possibility of reintroducing the telemetry feature?
hmm havent thought of that :) I'll build up the main fetures and see how much time I have so no promises :)
Quote from: SouthPawPaul on July 04, 2012, 03:12:29 PM
Will you also be looking at the possibility of reintroducing the telemetry feature?
I actually want telemetry to fly my thermal glider LOS and have the barometric sensor send data back to the tx where I can add a custom Arduino module to process the data, or possibly add some more code to the tx firmware to control the onboard buzzer to give my a ground heard vario. It wouldn't be a "gimmick" for me.
I can buy a vario that does just that, but with the telemetry feature I can have a bash at a DIY solution.
when you lose signal the tx will start the Nyan cat song :))))
If I'll ever include telemetry it'll only be rssi data to preserve bandw. Bare in mind that now sent packet is about 2 bytes lol.
Quote from: thundead on July 04, 2012, 03:27:40 PM...Nyan cat song...
I actually had to look that up.
Wished I hadn't now!
or should I make it the startup Song ?
I think this is the best candidate for the startup tune
Charlie Schmidt's Keyboard Cat! - THE ORIGINAL! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J---aiyznGQ#)
Quote from: papa_lazerous on July 04, 2012, 03:48:37 PM
Now this is a cool start up tune https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wF71xjjF944&feature=youtube_gdata_player (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wF71xjjF944&feature=youtube_gdata_player)
it was fun.... but got a bit annoying after a bit... lol
i ended up shortening the tune ;)
simon.
Quote from: SouthPawPaul on July 04, 2012, 03:12:29 PM
Will you also be looking at the possibility of reintroducing the telemetry feature?
I would second this one.
I make use of back channel telemetry for my ground station. Wouldn't need anything fast. Maybe send 1 byte each packet and sequence through lat-deg, min,sec, long-deg, min, sec, alt, speed. That would give a 1hz or so complete update.
Can't wait for rev 4 :P
1. Use one aux channel for DragonOSD mode control
2. Not that often
3. None
4. 100-150 clicks should be enough easily.
5. May be helpful for some people but not really needed.
6. Not that much of a pain and my hardware often needs minor modifications anyway
Advanced
5. 20ms should be fine
6. I think if it refreshed all primary control channels all the time and left the others to be less priority
7. Not that important I don't think, on this band the pollution isn't that bad so 4 channels spaced well enough should be fine.
8. Yes, Use it with the Dragon OSD which then drives the servo's
9. A combination of both or able to select either would be best I think.
Thanks for continuing to work on this project. We do appreciate it.
I sent some pringles and red bull fund money your way ;D
@ghost cheers for the pringles :)
Heads Up on 4.0:
- 4800 baud done
- packet algorithm optimised
- tx now transmitting variable sized packets
todo:
- Failsafe
- RSSI
- GUI
- rangetest
- hophop
Cool, I`m going to jump back on the wagon with V4, new rx`s and tx here to rule out older gears problems
dont flash them with a 5v ftdi :D
Quote from: Coyote on July 17, 2012, 12:01:46 AM
Cool, I`m going to jump back on the wagon with V4, new rx`s and tx here to rule out older gears problems
Quote from: thundead on July 17, 2012, 12:03:51 AM
dont flash them with a 5v ftdi :D
Quote from: Coyote on July 17, 2012, 12:01:46 AM
Cool, I`m going to jump back on the wagon with V4, new rx`s and tx here to rule out older gears problems
no.... dont do that! lol :-X
Lol, that wasn`t me :)
Quote from: Coyote on July 17, 2012, 12:47:49 AM
Lol, that wasn`t me :)
shame i cant say that! :-[
riight going for a range test. fingers crossed :D
basic protocol, no hopping, 435mhz = 606m through the usual Abd granite :) so almost range x2
(http://s13.postimage.org/ffus1iy9v/rangetest.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/ffus1iy9v/)
Quote from: thundead on July 17, 2012, 09:05:54 PM
basic protocol, no hopping, 435mhz = 606m through the usual Abd granite :) so almost range x2
(http://s13.postimage.org/ffus1iy9v/rangetest.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/ffus1iy9v/)
Looking good, Was that to complete loss of packets or when it started to drop packets?
Sounds promising :)
Quote from: thundead on July 17, 2012, 09:05:54 PM
basic protocol, no hopping, 435mhz = 606m through the usual Abd granite :) so almost range x2
(http://s13.postimage.org/ffus1iy9v/rangetest.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/ffus1iy9v/)
Where did you land?
lol it was a ground range test mate hahaha
Quote from: thundead on July 18, 2012, 12:23:36 AM
lol it was a ground range test mate hahaha
Chicken !
Hmmmm Who's ready for an Alpha ? :D
i still need rf modules from flytron :(
Quote from: thundead on July 18, 2012, 10:51:56 PM
Hmmmm Who's ready for an Alpha ? :D
Goes without saying :))
so here it is: thUndeadMod 4.0 ALPHA
- 4800 baud
- smart packet management for max range
- one click failsafe as in my previous firmwares
- SerialPPM on pin 9 (please someone check and confirm working)
- Added sample Config program which is atm only a sketch but you''ll see what sort of stuff 4.0 will offer.
who wants to test and report back drop me a PM so I can give u the password :)
Mihai.
anyone manage to test this yet ?
I'm away on holiday for a week Mihai and then I start packing my workshop & house as I am moving in the very near future, so likely won't have much time for playing for some months as the 'new' place needs some TLC.
Cheers,
Nigel.
Not yet, havent flown in 4 weeks mate, must get a flight in first before testing time
keep in mind its a new protocol so I'd do a ground range test first before flying.
Quote from: Coyote on July 20, 2012, 09:43:33 PM
Not yet, havent flown in 4 weeks mate, must get a flight in first before testing time
Oh yes, ground testing first :)
I'm away for a week on holiday but will be happy to test it once I'm home :)
Ok here's the news on V4, I did a ground test this morning using the exact same setup as I used for the previous range test in the same location and well the results where disappointing to say the least! absolutely terrible performance.
But I re-flashed back to v3.6 FW and took my skywalker on an epic flight! I did 5.1km and back at over 1km altitude. After speaking with Mihai on the phone he asked me to share this with the forum so everyone knows where things are. As it stands there are still changes happening, but I will let Mihai tell everyone what is happening. But v3.6 is the FW to use, if you get bad performance then you are doing something wrong....
thanks very much to papa for testing out the fw. quite a record as well :D
Right so this is where the fw stands and it's going to be my last fw for this system.
- based on 3.6 final
- Will redo the GUI to be noob proof
- will add link quality rssi mode
- hopping will be limited to max 6 channels
Any other requests now is the time.
Cheers,
Mihai.
Quote from: papa_lazerous on July 21, 2012, 08:15:01 PM
Ok here's the news on V4, I did a ground test this morning using the exact same setup as I used for the previous range test in the same location and well the results where disappointing to say the least! absolutely terrible performance.
But I re-flashed back to v3.6 FW and took my skywalker on an epic flight! I did 5.1km and back at over 1km altitude. After speaking with Mihai on the phone he asked me to share this with the forum so everyone knows where things are. As it stands there are still changes happening, but I will let Mihai tell everyone what is happening. But v3.6 is the FW to use, if you get bad performance then you are doing something wrong....
it has landed :D
http://www.fpvuk.org/forum/index.php/topic,7115.0.html (http://www.fpvuk.org/forum/index.php/topic,7115.0.html)