Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DJI FPV

dji.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 162 posts

Re: DJI FPV

#121

Post by 05 »

eigenvalue wrote: post #118
05 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that Skydio isn't immune to thin branches - AFAIK no current tech can reliably detect them at distance sufficient for avoidance at high speeds. There are Youtube videos demonstrating Skydio crashes caused by these (and similar low visibility obstacles). Also note that while Skydio has technically superior avoidance tech (360 view vs forward only on DJI drones), it failed to capture non-negligible consumer market…

I’m surprised there aren’t lower tech ways of detecting thin branches besides doing real-time analysis of the live video feed. Like some kind of primitive proximity detection using radar to augment the image based approach, and if there is any doubt, taking quick evasive maneuvers.

High res radar seems pretty energy intensive and doesn't scale down to typical drone size (especially considering the new registration requirements for over 250g drones). Dry branches have low radar signature but are still fully capable of catching props. Low torque motors paired with large props optimized for flight time and for smooth cinematic flight (remember, it's foremost a flying camera) aren't capable of super-fast braking either.

Re: DJI FPV

#122

Post by cma »

somehnguy wrote: post #74
magnat wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Low res analog video -> high res digital video Major benefit of analog video is a progressive degradation of quality as a signal gets weaker and almost instant reacquisition after a complete dropout. I'm curious to see how DJI competes with that on a digital video. > ~5 minutes fly time -> ~20 minutes fly time For FPV racing that's rather a downgrade. Ideally you'd like to land with almost empty battery right after…

>Major benefit of analog video is a progressive degradation of quality as a signal gets weaker and almost instant reacquisition after a complete dropout. I'm curious to see how DJI competes with that on a digital video. The good news is that you can find that out right now. DJI HD FPV has been available for over a year, this is just their first drone offering in the category. The short answer is that it degrades very…

> They have what they call 'focus mode', where the edges of the video lose quality before the middle (where the data matters the most).

If the latency is low enough it would be nice if they could incorporate eye tracking into that in the future, and move around the high quality region with your eyes. And maybe feed it from a gimballess 360 camera so you have full freedom to look around. Stereo cameras would also be nice, maybe with some differential compression between eyes to keep bandwidth down (would need a gimbal for that most likely, to keep line between cameras horizontal).

Re: DJI FPV

#123

Post by shorts_theory »

eigenvalue wrote: post #99

The first-person view seems like it would be a total blast to try out-- basically every kid's dream toy. I would have given anything for something like that when I was 12 years old. But from a pragmatic standpoint of using the drone to capture video footage, I feel like having robust "self driving" capabilities (in particular, obstacle avoidance and smart target tracking) is more interesting. I was blown away recentl…

I really like Skydio's product but they've priced themselves out of being a competitor to most of DJI's drones. Of course, all the hardware for their autonomy engine (Jetson TX2 with six cameras) isn't cheap. I'd still love to see a cheaper version (maybe $400?) with a less sophisticated autonomy engine compete with Mavic Mini. If they could open-source the design and allow for custom flight/autonomy code, it would be a superb value proposition.

Re: DJI FPV

#124

Post by nitrogen »

wepple wrote: post #50

I’d love for someone to build an overIP bridge for this, so I can sit on the couch at home and fly through the Grand Canyon. I’d happily pay a reasonable sum for it. I wonder if it could be done using a Stadia controller and chrome cast?

sit on the couch at home and fly through the Grand Canyon

And ruin it for everyone who actually spent the effort to go there in person.

Re: DJI FPV

#125

Post by nitrogen »

Do these things come with instructions for how not to use them? I got pretty sick of the jerk who kept buzzing people's heads with an FPV drone last time I was at the beach.

Re: DJI FPV

#126

Post by tamu_nerd »

Very cool! I wonder how DJI justifies the R&D costs of this drone when it (and their existing lineup) could possibly be banned overnight by the looming UAS regulations?

Where does this drone sit with regard to the current set of regulations? It will certainly at least need operator ID markings, yes?

Re: DJI FPV

#127

Post by tamu_nerd »

huhtenberg wrote: post #51

Anyone's got it yet?

Joshua Bardwell (a prominent FPV YouTuber) has a review video up. It looks very cool and performant. Unfortunately one of his units broke an arm after a relatively common looking crash during his review.

Re: DJI FPV

#128

Post by sneak »

Dave_Rosenthal wrote: post #4

There has been a huge divide in the drone world between high performance first person view (FPV) drones capable of acrobatics and the "tripod in the sky" type drones that companies like DJI have popularized. The former has been very DIY and the latter have attracted companies to build integrated solutions. This new drone from DJI brings an truly staggering amount of innovation and integration to the FPV space: - Low…

The product is amazing, but I'm sad that the first amazing integrated fpv product out is coming from DJI. It makes perfect sense, but I hate giving them money as each DJI purchase is a positive reinforcement for their abhorrent approach to consumer privacy.

I'll probably get one, but continue to complain loudly online that every DJI product, including the offline ones, requires an account and email address and registration and the transmission of your serial number for it to work - including their little handheld, no-internet, record-to-sd-card cameras. :/

Re: DJI FPV

#129

Post by meheleventyone »

throwaway6734 wrote: post #67
meheleventyone wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got into it a few months ago Joshua Bardwell as the sibling mentioned is a great source of info: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCX3eufnI7A2I7IkKHZn8KSQ The main thing anyone starting needs to realize is that it takes quite a bit of time to get used to how Quads fly in Acro/Rate mode. I started on a simulator (Liftoff) with an XBox pad and that was super punishing as gentle and precise control is needed. Switching…

Recs for a cheap radio that is easy to connect to a pc? I also had the same result when trying to use a gamepad

After research I went with the Radiomaster TX16s. There are several specs and I went for the mid-range version that has Hall effect gimbals for the sticks. You can get more console controller style radios as well but I fancied the bigger screen and a bit more space.

Re: DJI FPV

#130

Post by diydsp »

05 wrote: post #121
eigenvalue wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m surprised there aren’t lower tech ways of detecting thin branches besides doing real-time analysis of the live video feed. Like some kind of primitive proximity detection using radar to augment the image based approach, and if there is any doubt, taking quick evasive maneuvers.

High res radar seems pretty energy intensive and doesn't scale down to typical drone size (especially considering the new registration requirements for over 250g drones). Dry branches have low radar signature but are still fully capable of catching props. Low torque motors paired with large props optimized for flight time and for smooth cinematic flight (remember, it's foremost a flying camera) aren't capable of supe…

Maybe mirrored props could form a LIDAR?! :)
Post reply on HN