Hoverfly GPS Accuracy



That would be amazing to have! Can't wait to see these coming to market. With as quickly as manufacturers hopped on the brushless gimbal craze, there has to be something like this in the works from the big dogs.

Maybe that's the secret inside the synapse from freely that hasn't been released yet.
 

octocine

Member
This sounds great, but honestly I would be happy to have any gps that actually worked! My HF gps works great at times, but at other times is completely changes my elevator and aileron inputs, which is terrifying. I'd love to have a working Return Home function, but have not been able to make it work consistently. Half inch accuracy seems like a distant dream. I can only hope....
 

Aerovideo

Member
This sounds great, but honestly I would be happy to have any gps that actually worked! My HF gps works great at times, but at other times is completely changes my elevator and aileron inputs, which is terrifying. I'd love to have a working Return Home function, but have not been able to make it work consistently. Half inch accuracy seems like a distant dream. I can only hope....

I agree, I hardly ever fly my GPS based HF quad as it has a mind of its own sometimes, not as bad as yours but scary quirks none the less!
 

Hopefully some of the bugs have been worked out, and won't be present in the upcoming firmware release. Spoke to Ben a couple days ago, and it sounds like they have been working very hard on the gps code.
 

ChrisViperM

Active Member
Would be cool, but if that is all so simple, why do they need then WAAS in air navigation....?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wide_Area_Augmentation_System


There is a lot more involved in GPS navigation than the promise of a few kickstarter-nerds:

http://www.kowoma.de/en/gps/errors.htm


By reading their "advertising" it looks like you just have to mount that "super-GPS" on your copter and you are golden....but the whole thing is based on Real Time Kinematic :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_Time_Kinematic

When reading under "Practical considerations" in this article, it is obvious that this system has a few serious limitations....

Some more reading:

http://www.novatel.com/an-introduct...vanced-gnss-concepts/real-time-kinematic-rtk/
http://www.navipedia.net/index.php/RTK_Systems



Chris
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Aerovideo

Member
Would be cool, but if that is all so simple, why do they need then WAAS in air navigation....?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wide_Area_Augmentation_System


There is a lot more involved in GPS navigation than the promise of a few kickstarter-nerds:

http://www.kowoma.de/en/gps/errors.htm


By reading their "advertising" it looks like you just have to mount that "super-GPS" on your copter and you are golden....but the whole thing is based on Real Time Kinematic :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_Time_Kinematic

When reading under "Practical considerations" in this article, it is obvious that this system has a few serious limitations....

Some more reading:

http://www.novatel.com/an-introduct...vanced-gnss-concepts/real-time-kinematic-rtk/
http://www.navipedia.net/index.php/RTK_Systems



Chris

Great job on your research there... kind of a buzzkill though ;) Seriously though, good job.
 

Would be cool, but if that is all so simple, why do they need then WAAS in air navigation....?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wide_Area_Augmentation_System


There is a lot more involved in GPS navigation than the promise of a few kickstarter-nerds:

http://www.kowoma.de/en/gps/errors.htm


By reading their "advertising" it looks like you just have to mount that "super-GPS" on your copter and you are golden....but the whole thing is based on Real Time Kinematic :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_Time_Kinematic

When reading under "Practical considerations" in this article, it is obvious that this system has a few serious limitations....

Some more reading:

http://www.novatel.com/an-introduct...vanced-gnss-concepts/real-time-kinematic-rtk/
http://www.navipedia.net/index.php/RTK_Systems



Chris


Definitely some great information about current systems in place. I wonder what they are creating that can miniaturize the current tech. It's possible that they have devised a method to bring that type of accuracy where others have been unable to yet. I don't know that it's probable, but it is possible...
 

Aerovideo

Member
A buddy of mine has a DJI Naza and I was blown away with the position hold and the altitude hold, do they just have better GPS gear/barometers?

He let go of the sticks with the thing a couple of feet off the ground and it just sat there, even with the prop wash/ground effect.
 

I've heard both ends of the spectrum with the naza. Some just sit there locked and don't move, but then some fly away to crash or never been seen again.
 

Aerovideo

Member
I've heard both ends of the spectrum with the naza. Some just sit there locked and don't move, but then some fly away to crash or never been seen again.


Yeah, I've heard the same... I'm definitely concerned about the fly away stuff! YIKES! I posted a question over in the DJI thread to see if the V2 Naza still has the flyaway problem.
 

I was considering one simply because of how solid the position hold is supposed to be. I sent team blacksheep an email and got this in response.

If you don't use the GPS or you can switch to Manual at any time, then that's not a problem. I have experienced one fly-away, which resulted in a total, but because it happened too fast and with a brand new quad we built for a customer. Personally I never fly with GPS, so I have never had any problems.

That was enough for me to say no thanks. I'll stick with hoverfly and hope that future updates will increase the positional accuracy. I fly almost always in manual, but I want to know that gps functions will give predictable results.
 


cbpagent72

Member
I think you need to first figure out how many Hoverfly systems are in use compared to DJI Naza and Wookong. I would bet that the number is very low so it really wouldn't be a fair comparison.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk 2
 


I have limited experience with the Naza systems - flown other people's rigs. From what I understand after talking with experienced users, most Naza fly-aways are due to the Naza having the wrong home position recorded in the system.

For example, Joe Newbie, a guy that is new to the hobby and is excited about his brand new toy, takes his Naza based multi for a flight in the front yard. He does everything right the first time and lets the GPS get a good lock and record the home position there in his front yard. Then he takes off and flies around for a bit to the amazement of his neighbors. Joe decides that he is ready to brave the local flying field. He can't wait to fly around this open field and let this bird really stretch its legs. In the rush to get in the air, he forgets to let the flight controller record a new home position. He takes off and flies around a bit. He gets a bit too far out and decides to try that fancy RTH feature. He flips the switch and off it goes, headed towards the last home position - his front yard. Oops. But surely it wasn't Joe's fault. Must be that faulty flight controller (sarcasm).

That's just once scenario. There are certainly plenty of examples where a DJI rig crashed because of a faulty DJI flight controller / firmware. But the GPS function on DJI's systems is certainly impressive.

All that being said, I fly Hoverfly because I feel like I get better video footage when I fly in manual mode. And Hoverfly flies really well in manual mode. There have been a few occasions where I wish I had GPS functionality, but I've gotten by fine without it. I do look forward to Hoverfly improving their GPS system.
 

Aerovideo

Member
I agree, I like the way my HFP flies in manual mode as well. Plus they're so easy to setup. I just wish I could put my dusty GPS board to use :) I too look forward to the GPS improvements they're working on.
 

I have both the NAZA M ver 1 and 2. Ver 1 had warm up problems, stability issues but GPS was rock solid. Ver 2 has corrected those issues. It is not plug and play however and requires gain changes for different wind conditions to get HFP quality of flight. It is also not as "buttery smooth" as HFP and does quirky things every so often so your confidence level is lower. I have never had a RTH issue and position hold is always within a few feet even in windiest conditions. In calm conditions it will hold within 6 inches in all directions. I have not purchased a HF GPS so can't make any direct comparisons but so far feedback and high price make it seem in less attractive. I do use GPS quite a bit for shots so HFP is ending up on the shelf more and more these days. We are all big fans of this board and the engineering team is the best so I have high hopes I will eventually be flying HFP full time again soon.
 

workshop

Member
Maybe HoverFly has too many processors? The single Atmel FCBs seem to be able to nail GPS. I wonder what the programming challenge is with the HFP platform that makes GPS so iffy?

I have two GPS boards ($900) left after selling the rest at pennies on the dollar. I still do not use the GPS feature out of concern for my expensive camera gear. There seems to be a 50/50 opinion on the beta forums about 4.8.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Top