SMALL - espritmodel.com SMALL - Telemetry SMALL - Radio
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Yesterday, 01:38 PM
Registered User
Joined Aug 2014
451 Posts
Hi Scoobers. Well I don't worry too much about calibrating the accelerometers too much. But if you do, make sure the quad is on a level surface. And I mean level and flat. Where a ball won't roll away level. Now center all trims except the throttle. Now calibrate the accelerometers.

Even doing this might not be enough. As the CG (center of gravity) might be a little off. If you are using a 500mah battery and/or a wide angle lens, no doubt it will be. Anyway while hovering about head level, adjust the trims until the quad is as still as you can get it. You can't get it perfect since prop wash and other factors will cause a bit of drift. You know you have everything well set when you can rotate and it stays put. It might go up and down when you rotate (that just takes practice to keep it right there). But it won't move forward, backwards, left, or right.

Another thing, I have noticed this especially with older motors. That is as the battery voltage lowers (later into the flight) it will be off a bit (sometimes like two to four clicks on the trim off). So some fine changes during the flight is normal. That is why I don't worry too much about calibrating the accelerometers or CG too much. As long as they are in the ballpark I think time is better spent just adjusting the trims instead of burning up flight time on other things.
BillW50 is offline Find More Posts by BillW50
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Yesterday, 02:30 PM
Registered User
Joined Nov 2014
2 Posts
Thanks, much appreciated. I'll have another go at it tomorrow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillW50 View Post
Hi Scoobers. Well I don't worry too much about calibrating the accelerometers too much. But if you do, make sure the quad is on a level surface. And I mean level and flat. Where a ball won't roll away level. Now center all trims except the throttle. Now calibrate the accelerometers.

Even doing this might not be enough. As the CG (center of gravity) might be a little off. If you are using a 500mah battery and/or a wide angle lens, no doubt it will be. Anyway while hovering about head level, adjust the trims until the quad is as still as you can get it. You can't get it perfect since prop wash and other factors will cause a bit of drift. You know you have everything well set when you can rotate and it stays put. It might go up and down when you rotate (that just takes practice to keep it right there). But it won't move forward, backwards, left, or right.

Another thing, I have noticed this especially with older motors. That is as the battery voltage lowers (later into the flight) it will be off a bit (sometimes like two to four clicks on the trim off). So some fine changes during the flight is normal. That is why I don't worry too much about calibrating the accelerometers or CG too much. As long as they are in the ballpark I think time is better spent just adjusting the trims instead of burning up flight time on other things.
Scoobers is offline Find More Posts by Scoobers
Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 02:40 PM
Registered User
Joined Feb 2014
312 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by tedbyers View Post
I, too, will get an H109S when it is released. The vendor I go to, in Canada, for all things Hubsan, is expecting them in the first quarter of next year; so it is still a few months off if he is right.
One thing you guys will learn pretty quickly in this hobby is that the written specs mean next to nothing - especially on an unreleased product, stuff is hyped up by semi-pro reviewers on forums, and most of these companies delivering "value" are delivering little aside from crappy quality control. Maybe if you put a $70 Mobius on it, it doesn't matter. But if you put a $500 gopro, 3 axis gimbal, fpv kit, etc the last thing you want to do is put it on an unproven and untested product.
Witoldc is online now Find More Posts by Witoldc
Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 04:17 PM
Registered User
Joined Oct 2014
249 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Witoldc View Post
One thing you guys will learn pretty quickly in this hobby is that the written specs mean next to nothing - especially on an unreleased product, stuff is hyped up by semi-pro reviewers on forums, and most of these companies delivering "value" are delivering little aside from crappy quality control. Maybe if you put a $70 Mobius on it, it doesn't matter. But if you put a $500 gopro, 3 axis gimbal, fpv kit, etc the last thing you want to do is put it on an unproven and untested product.
What makes you think we're unaware of the nature of marketing hype?

If you think all these quads are crap, why do you bother with them. There are some that are good, and some, mainly knock-offs, that are garbage. My experience with Hubsan quads is entirely positive. THAT experience leads me to believe they are more likely to at least get close to their published spec than is, say, WLToys. And, their published spec is what makes that model interesting. If anything, it is a far more ambitious target than any other I have seen (at least in my price range).

At the end of the day, the only test that matters is your own.
tedbyers is online now Find More Posts by tedbyers
Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 04:36 PM
Registered User
Joined Aug 2014
451 Posts
Hi Ted. I believe what Witoldc means is that high end quality that professionals use, you still need to spend thousands. Like sure, you wouldn't want to use a cell phone camera to film a major motion movie or something.

Having said this, I remember when years ago we RC pilots could easily spend thousands of dollars worth of RC stuff. Some would spend that much on one airplane alone. And we didn't have FPV or even cameras that we could mount on our crafts.

Nowadays you could do FPV for 200 bucks or less. Or a cheap video with a craft for 50 bucks or less. This was unheard of years ago. And for those of us that doesn't need high end equipment, this is a great deal.
BillW50 is offline Find More Posts by BillW50
Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 05:30 PM
Registered User
Joined Oct 2014
249 Posts
Hi Bill,

i understand.

But, I am starting to believe that the gap between what the pros use and what consumers use is shrinking. As an example of this, I know a consultant that up until this year had a fleet of multirotors that he used to carry insanely expensive equipment for 'remote sensing' applications, feeding the data into GIS software. This fleet was comprised of the very expensive multirotors used by the pros. This year, some of that fleet is being retired and replaced by quads you or I would purchase either for FPV racing or for aerial photography. He remarked that these little things were proving to be remarkably versatile. These quads, fully equipped for aerial photography would be about the same cost as a Blade 350 QX or Walkera X350 Pro, similarly equipped. In addition to using these for his consulting work, he also uses them for recreation.

And, I am convinced that there is a measure of elitism among some 'pros'. For example, I have seen reviews by such 'professionals' who did side by side comparisons of the Blade and Walkera 350 class quads with the best of the DJI quads of the same size, and even though, going by the objective measurements they made the Blade or Walkera quads out-performed the DJI quads, they claimed that the DJI quads were better. They instantly forfeited credibility as their 'conclusion' was NOT supported by the data they had just collected and presened and that they alleged justified their conclusion.

The way technology is improving, and shrinking, I suspect we may even live long enough to see quads the size of the Hubsan H107D used 'professionally'; well, except by certain elitist professionals.
tedbyers is online now Find More Posts by tedbyers
Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 05:54 PM
Registered User
Joined Aug 2014
451 Posts
Yes indeed Ted. The first computer I was exposed to was the ones used on the Apollo flights. It was fantastic at the time and it was only about 12x12x12 inches. Although nowadays I am sure you can do the same in a tiny chip.
BillW50 is offline Find More Posts by BillW50
Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 10:56 PM
Should Know Better But Doesn't
New Zealand, Auckland
Joined Oct 2013
773 Posts
The 109S would be a more valid option if Hubsan hadn't baited the community for probably over a year now, with no product nor solid stance,

Even their presence on forums has disappeared.

There is still a difference between hobby and "Pro" gear...but the gap is shrinking quickly. And there will always be fanboys in either camp
hamsterrorist is offline Find More Posts by hamsterrorist
Reply With Quote
Old Today, 12:43 AM
Registered User
Joined Oct 2014
249 Posts
I am not so sure that Hubsan baited the community with the 109S. Rather, I suspect some marketing people got ahead of themselves and started promoting it before the engineers were happy with it. This happens all the time in IT. When Microsoft first announced windows NT, they claimed it would take only a year to complete. It ended up taking four years. It was, in fact, one of their finest products in their history up to the time they released it, but still, the marketing folk decided on the one year time frame, which turned out to be hopelessly optimistic. And, the vast majority of marketing folk in IT appear not to have learned from that mistake.

To give Hubsan the benefit of the doubt, I'd prefer to think that that is a case similar to that in which MS found itself wrt WNT. (I am not saying 'believe' as that is too strong a word).

BTW: I don't doubt a difference between hobby and pro gear. Rather, I have observed that the gap is not supported in specific cases where one product (such as the Blade and Walkera 350 class quads) called hobby gear by some, performs as well as, or better than, comparable pro gear, such as the DJI product.
tedbyers is online now Find More Posts by tedbyers
Reply With Quote
Old Today, 01:53 AM
Ain't crashing often anymore
mikefromgermany's Avatar
Germany, Berlin
Joined Jun 2012
3,531 Posts
I'm on the preorder list for a 109, too.
Even if I highly doubt the advertised flight times will become reality, it will offer some real bang for the buck compared to its competitors - not sure if that's a valid expression as the 109 still is vapourware

My Hubsan experience is quite good also, dating back to the first two pre-production X4 samples banggood sent me 2012. A few hiccups quality wise they had, but still an overall quality product line they have.

Now I got the topic back on track - Hubsan X4.

Back to business.

-mike-
mikefromgermany is offline Find More Posts by mikefromgermany
RCG Plus Member
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Discussion The Hubsan X4 youxif Multirotor Talk 75 Yesterday 03:24 PM
Discussion Hubsan x4 6axis scousethief Mini Multirotors 295 Jun 21, 2013 08:22 AM
Discussion Hubsan X4 Mini Quad dc9guy Mini Multirotors 32 Feb 04, 2013 11:14 PM
Discussion Hitec X4-80 eighty 4 port chager review search Timewarp Batteries and Chargers 4 Jun 22, 2012 05:20 PM