Live data from Hacker News

DJI Mavic 3 Pro

dji.com

91–100 of 169 posts

Re: DJI Mavic 3 Pro

#91
post #79

DJI seems to be the one company that requires sideloading the Android app. DJI makes great products, but there's really few companies who I would trust less to give unvetted access to my phone. I know the Android app sandboxing should help a lot, but there's enough unknowns & potentially lurking security holes that I really wouldn't want to trust them. They also are 100% the most likely company on the planet to self-…

I’m in the same camp. I got my son a Mini 3, which is a stellar quadcopter in its own right, but the DJI ecosystem is a spectacle to behold for some good and many bad reasons.

One issue could be that they don’t communicate compatibility between devices very well, so it’s very hard to know if buying one thing will lead to being very limited and locked in — even within the DJI ecosystem. People often find themselves needing to buy more equipment to accomplish seemingly trivial things. For example, the controller we got can’t install apps and it doesn’t work with a multitude of other quads DJI sells. Why not? Are they good reasons or bad? Where can I find clear explanations? I’m sure the controller is very resource constrained, but can’t I just opt into bad performance if I don’t mind? Is the controller incompatible with other quads due to radio protocols, or is this a choice intended to force eventual upgrades?

Without being able to tell with certainty, sometimes it begins to seem a little manufactured and nefarious.

Otherwise, the fact that their protocols are all proprietary and I can’t use the controller with custom quads is very frustrating. I have a Radio Master TX12 that I can’t use with any DJI products, and a DJI controller I can’t use with any custom quads already built or that I could ever build.

That’s all crazy. Sure, tight integration means better performance, but the extent to which it’s closed off is unreal.

Although the Mini 3 is a genuinely awesome device, I don’t think I’ll buy DJI again. I think I’d rather buy into open VTX hardware and use my own camera to record footage. It’s a huge compromise in convenience and upfront cost, but if you care a lot about the hobby it’s perhaps well worth it. The flexibility afforded is enormous.

Re: DJI Mavic 3 Pro

#92
post #12

Never found the idea of owning a drone appealing before, but this thing does look pretty great.

Start with a used Mavic Mini. Seriously.

They're like $200, and will teach you what you want in a drone. That way, when you go to spend real money on one, you'll be able to make an informed decision.

If you can't spare the $200, I'd argue you probably shouldn't be diving deep into this hobby. You certainly shouldn't be spending $3k on this one.

Re: DJI Mavic 3 Pro

#93
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's some interesting research around toroidal propellers which move the same amount of air, but create far less turbulence and so make a less annoying noise. However, they're not going to get significantly quieter until the energy density of the batteries gets significantly better (a lot of what you're moving with a drone is your energy storage). There's always a hope that someone might invent a really silent pro…

Zipline has built an interesting asymmetric design that's remarkably quiet. Mark Rober featured it in one of his recent videos. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOWDNBu9DkU&t=831s

It does a similar sort of thing - asymmetric offset propellors shunt the frequency of what gets emitted way down. It still emits a similar amount of energy, but the direction of emission changes, and with the lower frequency, there's a lower perceived sound. Toroidal props actually have less sound coming off them, and at a lower frequency. I've got some ideas about how you'd potentially then have a greater spread of frequency by creating an offset toroidal, but I suspect the efficiency goes down, and I've got better things to do with my time than model sound profiles of weird, hard to manufacture (other than printing) prop geometries.

Related note - the offset bit is similar to how car tyres work by having patterns in the tyre which spread the frequency response generated by each, so they don't have a multiplicative effect.

(I can get really boring on applications of acoustic design but I'll cut off there)

Re: DJI Mavic 3 Pro

#94
post #8
post #3

Every device manufacturer tends to fib a bit on battery life vs. real world, however, 45 mins of flight time is impressive. Even if its 30-35 mins fully maxed out that can give you a lot of time to creat content and explore

Tangentially: I wonder if a really long-flying quad copter can be made using a regular ICE + generator as a source of electricity. Carbohydrates are still more energy-dense.

I assume the issue is not the energy density but the support density.

I have a 3DR Solo and it can carry up to 1 lb of extra weight for 20 minutes or so on a full charge, and run for 30ish minutes while only carrying its gimbal.

The battery in the 3DR Solo weighs about 1.3 lbs itself, and the frame is by no means lightweight. Assembled it weighs at least 70% more than the Mavic 2 Pro that I occasionally get to use at work.

To fly my drone, the 3dr solo draws an average of 14.2 volts at 15 amps (so close to 200 watts on average) but up to 800 watts at peak.

You would need an ICE and Generator combo that can put out an average 200 watts of constant power but that can peak at 800 for short periods that weighs less than 2.3 lbs including fuel that runs for more than 20 minutes to equal that 1 battery.

For instance, this is one of the most well known and light RC ICE machines:

http://www.mecoa.com/hp/vt/21.htm

It weighs 9.5 oz and runs for 45 minutes on 6 oz of diesel (probably not at maximum output, but still.)

So you're at roughly 1 lb (assuming 1/2 oz of screws and tubes to connect the motor to the fuel and both to the frame.

However, there is an issue here. This motor is rated at .35 hp. 1 hp is roughly 746 watts of power. That means max rev, full bore, this 1 ICE only has enough power before conversion losses to hover my 3dr solo in calm winds.

So, let's find a bigger motor.

https://hobbyking.com/en_us/ngh-gt17-17cc-gas-engine-with-rc...

This one is much better. 1.8 hp at max revs, so 1300+ watts. But, it weighs 1.87 lbs.

Add in fuel and you're at the max, so good to go, right?

Well, the next problem is that even though we have an engine, we don't have a generator to convert from fuel to electric.

You would also need some supercapacitors or batteries to store the charge, some system to integrate the control of the motor into the drone, more mounting materials.

And, you are already over the weight limit. That doesn't mean it can't be solved, for instance you could use a hexacopter or octocopter to increase how much carrying capacity you have.

Basically, you can do it, but there are better ways to do it. You would have to design an ICE RC Drone from scratch accounting for all of the intricacies and difficulties of using combustion engines in a drone and controlling them safely just to get what will probably be a slower, more expensive and more fragile drone that breaks down more often and needs frequent servicing intervals.

Re: DJI Mavic 3 Pro

#95

I'll probably keep my Mini 2 until someone has the semi-legal cojones to put a 4G transceiver in a drone. Now that would be some great fun.

Why? The range is like 9 miles so it is hard to get the device out of range of the radio on the battery charge.

Re: DJI Mavic 3 Pro

#96
post #5
post #3

Every device manufacturer tends to fib a bit on battery life vs. real world, however, 45 mins of flight time is impressive. Even if its 30-35 mins fully maxed out that can give you a lot of time to creat content and explore

I find that DJI fibs about their transmission range, but not battery life.

I agree. I get fairly bad range in my small city, even with line of site. I get serious lag at around 2km. In places with less interference, it only bumps up to around 2.75–3km. It’s advertised as having 10–15km range or something.

On the other hand, 3 batteries in a Mini 3 is pretty much guaranteed to keep it in the air for 90 minutes. It’s very impressive. Our custom quad manages more like 20m per flight with twice the battery capacity (though, twice the weight as well).

Re: DJI Mavic 3 Pro

#97
post #58

When will these compact drones become less noisy? I know there are new propeller designs being researched to be much less like a swarm of bees is flying around near you, but don't know how far off they are to retail commercialization. It just makes it hard to stomach flying a drone in a pristine environment knowing you are disturbing all human and non-human animals nearby.

To some degree it's inescapable with the small props. The higher end DJI models have enormous props which are better for noise as well as endurance. 16" props on the Inspire 3. The natural extent of this progression is to have one or two very large 2-4 blade rotor (for low disc loading, high endurance, lower rotor speed and noise), with a small auxiliary rotor for yaw control if only using one lift rotor. Yes, the na…

I've not actually measured the volume of various props - I can, and should! - but based on my memory I don't think it's quite as simple as "smaller props make more noise".

For FPV stuff, I've flown everything from 25mm to 9" (prop size). The ones that seemed quietest were 2.5"-3", very light, and designed for performance.

I think it has to do with the pitch of the noise and the "idle point" of your motors.

Smaller props turn faster, and the faster they're turning the higher the pitch of the noise they produce. At some point it borders on inaudible. Even if it's technically producing more decibels (It might be! I've not tested that.), it isn't as disruptive. Larger props turn slower, producing less noise and at a lower pitch.

"Idle point" is what I'm calling how much throttle you have to give it to hover. For my favorite 5" freestyle FPV quad, that's 18% (+/- 2% depending on temperature and humidity). It's acceptably quiet if I'm just hovering or slowly moving around, but sounds like an angry weedeater if I'm flying aggressively. The idle point for my 2.5"-3" quads is probably around 25%; my 7" long range build is 12%.

The more throttle you give it, the faster the props spin, the louder and higher pitched it is.

Re: DJI Mavic 3 Pro

#98

Spy drone or not, why can’t US companies design and manufacture better products to compete with DJI?

we gutted most of our manufacturing and outsourced it to china decades ago. we Let our entire non military manufacturing industry die on the vine so there isn't much of a culture of supply chain left. blame harvard business school. The cumulative damage of their Alum to the american economy is astronomical

Can we stop with this nonsense myth? The US is the second largest manufacturer in the world. Does manufacturing make up as large a share of our economy as it did in the past? No, of course not, that's a normal progression to a service economy, which is why the US is so wealthy.

Re: DJI Mavic 3 Pro

#99
post #35

Ukrainians need this for their counteroffencive. They name Mavic 2 as their favourite drone.

is the primary use of drones in the Ukraine war for recon? I know they're also using them to drop grenades and fly into targets. I'm sure every military in the world is watching drone use very carefully. An FPV flying RPG warhead in a dense urban environment sounds like an absolute nightmare to defend against.

Re: DJI Mavic 3 Pro

#100

Spy drone or not, why can’t US companies design and manufacture better products to compete with DJI?

DJI is a vertically-integrated beast with CCP ties; it won the monopolist position in 2015 against venture-backed 3D Robotics. Skydio, the largest US entity, really only exists as a protectionist hedge. Consumer products mean low prices, the opposite of what America does well.

> Consumer products mean low prices, the opposite of what America does well.

This is actually sad. Ford could drive down the cost of automobile down to $4000 while its workers could earn $5 an hour. America used to be the industrial behemoth what could manufacture and innovate better, faster, and cheaper. What's interesting is that there was a powerful country that would mock the US for producing things cheap but not necessarily crafty in late 19th century and early 20th century. Yeah, that was Britain. We all know how history went.

Post reply on HN