Thread Tools
Aug 28, 2007, 03:37 PM
Registered User
Ok, I'm a little confused now. What are the five outputs from the AttoPilot?

Back to triggering a camera when a waypoint is reached; from the previous thread that would be defined by a txt file on the micro SD card. Can the "on" time for that trigger also be set from that file? An example would be to reach a waypoint and have the camera triggered for 15 continuous seconds to take pictures of the area.

Thanks
Vince
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Aug 28, 2007, 03:57 PM
Smashing Planes since 1982
Tahoe Jmfc's Avatar
These items are all FUTURE ideas, lets all focus now on what is needed to get the simple system running and tested as Dmgoedde has mentioned, and keep these ideas on the sidelines for a bit so we can focus on the main goal, a "simple low cost 3 axis autopilot" Then maybe later we could work on the development of an advanced system for the power users once this first system is running perfect and is ready for the market.

Thanks for the links also to the various OSD's
Last edited by Tahoe Jmfc; Aug 28, 2007 at 04:05 PM.
Aug 28, 2007, 04:06 PM
Multicopter/FPV/UAV/HAM
_helitron_'s Avatar
Hi guys, wrote just a short comment to this theme in the old thread

https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/show...&postcount=116

To trigger the camera via the autopilot was an excellent idea of course.

Cheers,

//Erwin
Aug 28, 2007, 05:28 PM
Stupid gravity!
docphi's Avatar
Not necessarily through the autopilot. You'll need an extra two channels on the receiver end though.



Quote:
Originally Posted by _helitron_
Is it really necessary to route pan/tilt through the autopilot ?

//Erwin
Aug 28, 2007, 05:38 PM
Multicopter/FPV/UAV/HAM
_helitron_'s Avatar
Exactly what I meant docphi , pan/tilt servos are directly connected to two spare channels of the R/C receiver without any connection to the autopilot.

//Erwin

Quote:
Originally Posted by docphi
Not necessarily through the autopilot. You'll need an extra two channels on the receiver end though.
Aug 28, 2007, 06:23 PM
Registered User
Rockeyes's Avatar
I suppose its about time we stepped back a bit and wait until the units arrive and start testing, but I am pondering on the unit to rx interface method. Although I can see the logic, I can also see a couple of problems that may well require the use of a link / loom.
As I understand it, four channels required normal flight control plus one for Aux giving the ability to switch from manual to auto and No6 being a spare. So if the RX sits on top of the unit thus plugging into each other would this not be restrictive to the size, shape and connection layout of the RX? Would it still be possible to access any spare channels on a larger receiver?
Last edited by Rockeyes; Aug 28, 2007 at 07:49 PM.
Aug 28, 2007, 06:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmgoedde
Right now I'm addressing the main problem of "simple low cost 3 axis autopilot.
Gentlemen... Just want to point out that this is the proper way to hijack a thread.

Love it!
Aug 28, 2007, 07:26 PM
Stupid gravity!
docphi's Avatar
LOL! Yes, of course. I was stuck on the fact that the beta unit shows a 5 channel rx attached. It's like being a kid in a candy store. I'm just jumping the gun before even getting my dirty paws on a unit.


Quote:
Originally Posted by _helitron_
Exactly what I meant docphi , pan/tilt servos are directly connected to two spare channels of the R/C receiver without any connection to the autopilot.

//Erwin
Aug 29, 2007, 12:52 AM
Multicopter/FPV/UAV/HAM
_helitron_'s Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by docphi
LOL! Yes, of course. I was stuck on the fact that the beta unit shows a 5 channel rx attached. It's like being a kid in a candy store. I'm just jumping the gun before even getting my dirty paws on a unit.


//Erwin
Aug 29, 2007, 01:00 AM
Multicopter/FPV/UAV/HAM
_helitron_'s Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockeyes
As I understand it, four channels required normal flight control plus one for Aux giving the ability to switch from manual to auto and No6 being a spare. So if the RX sits on top of the unit thus plugging into each other would this not be restrictive to the size, shape and connection layout of the RX? Would it still be possible to access any spare channels on a larger receiver?
You're right Rockeyes but it's not absolute necessary to connect the Rx in that way, short adapter cables between Rx and autopilot are also possible of course to get access to spare channels.

//Erwin
Aug 29, 2007, 05:29 AM
I love the idea you have here, it looks like you really know what you are doing.

Are you accepting pre-orders now?


c
Aug 29, 2007, 10:26 AM
Registered User
dmgoedde's Avatar
Thread OP
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockeyes
I suppose its about time we stepped back a bit and wait until the units arrive and start testing, but I am pondering on the unit to rx interface method. Although I can see the logic, I can also see a couple of problems that may well require the use of a link / loom.
As I understand it, four channels required normal flight control plus one for Aux giving the ability to switch from manual to auto and No6 being a spare. So if the RX sits on top of the unit thus plugging into each other would this not be restrictive to the size, shape and connection layout of the RX? Would it still be possible to access any spare channels on a larger receiver?

Betas will have short adapter plugs provided for physical flexibility in mating to any Rx, plus you would then be able to swap channel inputs (not stuck in order 1,2,3,4,5)

Again, I'm striving to make the first hobby autopilot that is very simple to use , effective without fuss, and a neat clean installation. I pondered wether or not to just "provide" a Rx with it, or even if I wanted to integrate a small 4ch Rx in the package, like the Berg stamp4.

right now for betas I have the block which you can use if it suits your Rx, but you can also employ the provided short servo extensions for flexibility.

I got you covered!
Aug 29, 2007, 10:28 AM
Registered User
dmgoedde's Avatar
Thread OP
Quote:
Originally Posted by _helitron_
You're right Rockeyes but it's not absolute necessary to connect the Rx in that way, short adapter cables between Rx and autopilot are also possible of course to get access to spare channels.

//Erwin
Helitron - those short servo extension adapters will be provided with each beta!
Aug 29, 2007, 10:38 AM
Registered User
With the rapid adoption of 2.4 gHz radio gear and the incompatability of the various systems, receiver integration would be difficult. When almost everyone was on 72 MHz that would have worked great, an off the shelf working package.

Vince
Aug 29, 2007, 10:38 AM
Registered User
dmgoedde's Avatar
Thread OP
Is it hijacking a thread if I started the thread? The though below sort-of ties into the discussion going on...

Future-ish question for all of you: how would you feel if the there was a future version of this autopilot that DID have a tiny 4 channel high sensitivity Rx literally integrated inside the package with place to insert your specific crystal?

For people wanting a simple autopilot 3 servo control flight, it would REALLY cut down on clutter...having basically what looks like a normal-sized 10 gram Rx that just happened to have GPS and IMU plug and a block of 5,6, or 7 servo outputs?

For more advanced users, they could either buy the unit that doesn't have integrated Rx, or they could use the integrated model and happen to have an additional Rx in the plane to use channels 5 and up, just that the additional Rx probably wouldn't have any servos plugged into channels 1-4?

I am not spending time on anything other than getting the betas made and firmware top-notch, but do want to put some of these ideas out there as they come into my head so the discussion can start.


Quick Reply
Message:

Thread Tools