The DJI "Flyaway" Myth - DEBUNKED.

[Paul K]

It is hard to compare DJI to car manufacturer , first if there is a recall the problem is already detected by safety specialists and foully part or device is 100% identified ,but with DJI and Phantom ,the issue is ,this product is fairly new and still in developing stage
,DJI is trying to fix it with new firmwares as we go and major thing is to proof if it is product defect or operator error

 

[thongbong]

What do people think was the cause of these flyaways, the Naza M or firmware or all the above?

Do you think the current firmware address's this problem? (I said problem not issue, so there DJI) Or might this be why they are putting some distance between themselves and the P1. Even though it looks like the FC40 is still being produced, in a high volume, I think they P1 in any version number has been put to bed. Is that correct? There is that Droneguy attorney who setup the website to lobby the FAA, he might be able to help with this. I will pm him and see what his reply is.

Thank you for all the effort in the above post, that is what makes this forum such a great resource.

No one really knows what caused the flyaways besides DJI. When mentioning the P1, it is important to note I'm referring to the original launch P1, not P1.1.1 or P1.2 or any augmentation of the original P1. The proof is on how many versions of the P1 they manufactured. That's a different model every 3-4 months!!!! Why would they keep on mechanically improving on a model that did the exact same thing as the last? On the outside, the P1 looked exactly the same, performed exactly the same but mechanically inside, the other versions of the P1s had changed. DJI knows that it wasn't a firmware problem and a firmware update would never fix the problem. They knew of the flyaway problem but would ultimately blame the consumer for user error and a large number of pilots bought it, usually the ones that never flew the original P1 and had never had a true flyaway.

I believe the FC40 is using the augmented version of the original launch P1, the P 1.1.1, this has different mechanics from the original--Naza-m v2, two antennas and whatever else they did. The FC40 P 1.1.1 is not prone to flyaways as the launch P1.

Another issue that could cause a false flyaway is a bad crash that knocks the Naza loose. If the Naza is loose or vibrates from not being correctly secured to the main board, it would cause the pilot to loose control or not have full control. Been there, done that too.

The latest debacle had to do with the h3-3d gimbal. They launch products without fully testing them and develop mechanical parts to patch it up.

 

[Paul K]

You are absently right about DJI production strategy ,as so many companies today ,who are in rise to get there product on market before everybody else and it ends up launching the product without sufficient testing ,and the first customers are there GAMMA testers.

 

[lake_flyer]

If this be true Dji has libility i think to correct the issue or? maybe buy up all the old units. i really don't know what i am talking about, but ät least here in the US used items still matter and car companies are required to fix recalls on vehicles that have been resold.

Cars are a regulated industry with minimum safety and emissions standards which the bulk of recalls fall under. There is no drone equivalent. That even the warranty period is unclear with DJI should tell you just how much they give a ****.

I was just thinking of that as an example. Are there examples of other things, like walmart TVs, or computers?? I guess as I think about it that I just have wishful thinking. Well, there is always what happened with Packard Bell. The lack of attention to detail killed the company. They could have just done a little better, like dell, gateway, compaq and hp, but because the machines had some many real issues it put the company out of business.

Can you think of any examples where a products ability to function is warranted to whoever has it? and thank you for taking the time to answer me.

I own stuff that I can transfer to a new owner and the warranty just transfers. With Dell eg. you can do a serial number transfer on line, no problem, same with Presonus (studio equipment) and NIkon Pro, and even my Sage fly fishing rods carry their lifetime warranty to a new owner. Maybe not with the typical consumer stuff, I don't know.

But what you say about companies going belly up, was the reason I didn't go for a Vision2+ but for a P2 (and a FC40). I won't say DJI has "bad products like Packard Bell" had, but things like bad management or financial housekeeping or product support, kills a company even quicker. I just don't want to end up with a totally integrated product of which the camera/gimbal alone is worth a naked P2, while the company is long out of business. When that happens, with my P2 and FC40, I can just go for any camera or gimbal (already did) and mod with 3rd party stuff to keep operational. We won't see software updates anymore but that's about it.

As far as fly aways concern:
My take at it is that in most cases it is pilot error. A lot of people will claim it flew away while in fact the Phantom just switched to Atti temporarily because of bad GPS reception or a compass (none)calibration. When you don't have a clue about what the hell you're actually doing (like a lot of the typical folks who buy a V2+ with all the bells and whistles but never flew a RC model in their entire life), when it switches to Atti suddenly, you have the feeling it doesn't respond to your inputs anymore. But it still does, just the behaviour is different. In Atti, the P2 and the PV2(+), (not sure if this also counts for FC40) will not rise as fast as in GPS. In a forward motion the vertical speed is not more then a few feet/sec. So if the quad was in full speed GPS mode, forward motion, the sudden switch to Atti will feel as if the Phantom won't rise at all and it doesn't stop when you ease the pitch sticks. It feels strange or even scary, the first time you encounter this, even after 30 years of RC flying experience. But there's nothing wrong with the Phantom, it's just behaving like it should. You just have to recognise it during the flight, that's all.

And things like a bad battery contact, wet compass magnet, broken solder joints etc, in the end, all are pilot error. As the responsible pilot you are supposed to check, recheck and check again if everything is ok. If it isn't, don't fly. Any sign of something not working properly, GROUNDED until fixed. Simple as that. Don't blame the product for that.
A flying machine is as air worthy as it's pilot.

VRS is a different thing.......The 9" props are terrible. 2 feet/sec max descend is not workable, my FC40 comes down like a rocket and never had VRS. I experienced VRS yesterday when coming down with 1 feet/sec in very calm weather. It was hovering about 30 feet up and very slowly descending. It suddenly dropped 6 feet like it was sucked into a vacuum tank, fast like a gunshot. Not falling but actually shooting down with maybe 20m/sec. I saw it through the goggles and couldn't believe it but I could see it on the video. Bwamm...2 meters lower.

But different topic, sorry, although I think the VRS thing is something to really worry about and the fly away horror stories are just fun to read for 'drone' haters, but not a real big issue. Otherwise we should see thousands of flyaway video's.

A lot of fly aways happen with Visions because it attracts the real noobs, because it's an all in one package, not because it's a bad product. And please, V2+ owners, don't be offended, It's just that DJI aims the V2 at that kind of users hence the Phantom Mode which we all immediately switch to Naza.

But that's all my humble opinion.

Cheers
Jan