A positive post from me.... for once...

[OldManInWva]

Not sure how many of you use Litchi, but after my fiasco with DJI and their much lacking customer service I realized that maybe something positive could come of the whole thing...

After a little thought I figured I'd send a app suggestion to Litchi and see if they thought it would be a good idea for a future update.. and their response was a yes..

Here's what I sent them, then their response...
================================
FEB 20, 2017 | 12:35AM UTC
Original message
Roger wrote:

Howdy guys...

I recently lost a P4 and in dealing with DJI about the cause it came to me that they will use info in a flight record to deny or substantiate a claim... but this important information is NOT available on either the Go app or the Litchi app...

We all know that the Barometer altitude readings are flawed at best so if somebody was put into a position of not being able to see the aircraft and had to rely on the altimeter settings to land they'd most likely kill the drone...

Here's where YOU guys can make a difference.... it seems that the VPS, when properly calibrated can produce an altitude reading in meters... How accurate is this?? I have NO clue since I no longer have a P4 (in the river).. But if the VPS which is active below 30 meters can be used to help a pilot NOT kill his aircraft then why is it not on the apps??
A VPS reading could easily be added, or set up in a way that it starts showing on the screen when the bird gets close enough to the ground to warrant EXTRA attention... like maybe 10 to 15 ft... Maybe even ad a user selected AGL altitude to send an alarm signal to the speakers or screen... A VPS reading would NOT be foiled by varying atmospheric pressures like the barometric altimeter and I've seen a 30 second flight straight in the air to 50 feet and back down show a 14 ft difference from take off to landing of the reported altitude.. NOT good for a bird that costs $1200 or more.

Was going thru my head when DJI told me that I was flying too close to the water when it stopped all data... They referenced the VPS as an altitude reporting... Wow.. It's not on the app I told them...

Soooo... Think about it, I have used your app several times in my short lived 32 flight UAS pilot career and it appears that you guys listen to the pilots and want to give them the USEFUL tools to fly safely.

Thanks for your time...

Roger Randolph
West Virginia USA




Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots

 

[OldManInWva]

Litchi responded...
FEB 20, 2017 | 11:01AM UTC
Litchi replied:
Hello,

I believe this is a very good suggestion, and we will try to make it happen in a future update.
You are correct that the VPS altitude is much more precise than the barometer one.

Thank you for the suggestion.

Kind Regards,
Litchi
Online help at Help - Litchi


Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots

 

[GrammatonxXXxCleric]

Thats good news. We'll see if they do it. I'd like that feature as I only use Litchi. I like seeing it on DJI go but don't use that for my flights.

 

[wa5tef]

Yes! Great idea. I agree that DJI has no customer service. Thanks for posting this.
Jim
WA5TEF

 

[GMack]

Anything would be better than the system now. Mine is often off 45 feet due to barometer matters.

I wish DJI had an engineer explain these things rather than their hired tech support who may know far less and speculate on what they do. With all the gear they have on board, it really is inexcusable to land and show -50 feet. Cheap electronic tape measures using sonar (Which the birds have in addition to VPS cameras.) can do far better. Even a compendium of 17-18 satellites and their GPS data could possibly do better if they incorporated all the info right. Very sloppy engineering, imho.

 

[AlecW]

Seems like a good idea but some of this can be avoided with flying style. Personally (and this may change) I don't go low when I'm far away and keep the bird much higher than any trees etc. I tend to only fly low when the bird is close to me and can easily see it, I don't even look at altitude in those cases.

Sometimes you just have to work with what you have even if it's not optimal.

 

[dwallersv]

Litchi could gain a much larger market by including features that are useful to ordinary pilots, and if the feature set is significant and valuable enough, really give GO a run for its money (so to speak).

One example: Litchi just added ground-relative altitude setting for waypoints. This is a fantastic feature, and for those of us programming missions (most Litchi users), it's a wonderful addition.

However, why not add a feature reporting AGL in the on-screen telemetry during flight? If the user is properly and fully cautioned as to the limited accuracy of the source data (Google Terrain), this would be an incredibly useful addition. Also, why isn't absolute GPS altitude reported in the display? Again, after ensuring the pilot understands the accuracy limitations of this value?

There's plenty more that can be done for the non-mission pilot to make it more than worth spending US$30 as a complete replacement for flying the bird, whether you perform missions or not. It's a trivial costs when you're already spending >$1000 for the AC itself, probably a few more hundreds for batteries and props, often another few hundred for a tablet, etc.

 

[AlecW]

The problem with GPS altitude is that's is just bad and can be way off.

 

[dwallersv]

Seems like a good idea but some of this can be avoided with flying style. Personally (and this may change) I don't go low when I'm far away and keep the bird much higher than any trees etc. I tend to only fly low when the bird is close to me and can easily see it, I don't even look at altitude in those cases.

Totally understand... But how nice would it be if there were additional features that, once "tried" successfully over and over, resulted in gained confidence in flying more challenging missions without worrying about a crash you couldn't have avoided when planning because the information and/or features to avoid it weren't available?

The tech in the P4 right now is pretty amazing. It is substantially underutilized by both GO and Litchi. Much can be done to make Litchi superior enough to GO to attract many more casual pilots to it for just manual flying and photography.

 

[AlecW]

I'm not disagreeing in any way. Just saying right now I'm trying to fly and not crash within the scope of what's available to me. Pretty much I don't trust the AGL number when it's low and use my eyes.

 

[dwallersv]

Oh, I don't either!

I was pining for more/better features in Litchi (and GO too, I suppose) that more fully-utilized the technology available in the drone.

At a very crude level, the rumored new features coming in the next GO 4 major update strongly suggest the AC can do much more than it is currently being used for.

For instance, imagine Litchi fully using the very accurate ultrasonic rangfinders for actually controlling AGL -- i.e. a feature where you could set precision ground-following altitude below 30 ft.

If this can be done, and it really works well and reliably, it would be a game-changer for my confidence in programming low-altitude missions.

 

[John Locke]

Also, why isn't absolute GPS altitude reported in the display?

Even if GPS was accurate to MSL (which it's not), I'm not sure how relevant that is to flying. What's important is the elevation AGL. I really don't want anything on my screen that's not relevant to flying safely.

The answer lies with DJI installing a laser range finder someday.