Collision avoidance on the Inspire 1 coming sooner than you think?

White Airwolf · Mar 2, 2016

Now that the Phantom 4 has it, it's only a matter of time vefore the Inspire gets it.
Question is, will it be a new machine or an add on kit?
Hopefully it's the latter as I don't want to spend another 4 grand on an improved Inspire when mine is perfectly good thank you very much, except for lack of collision avoidance features.
I would think the FAA and MOT in Canada, if they had any brains, would mandate this feature to be mandatory as it would make flying a whole lot safer.
Personally, I think this feature will be required on all drones sooner than later.

pixl45 · Mar 2, 2016

FYI, it's not MOT... it's TC, as in Transport Canada

White Airwolf · Mar 2, 2016

pixl45 said:
FYI, it's not MOT... it's TC, as in Transport Canada

It means the same thing, Ministry of Transport, Transport Canada. Just a matter of Semantics.

The Editor · Mar 2, 2016

White Airwolf said:
Now that the Phantom 4 has it, it's only a matter of time vefore the Inspire gets it.
Question is, will it be a new machine or an add on kit?
Hopefully it's the latter as I don't want to spend another 4 grand on an improved Inspire when mine is perfectly good thank you very much, except for lack of collision avoidance features.
I would think the FAA and MOT in Canada, if they had any brains, would mandate this feature to be mandatory as it would make flying a whole lot safer.
Personally, I think this feature will be required on all drones sooner than later.

I don't wish to burst your bubble but - no it won't!
The collision avoidance relies on an additional two cameras who's images are combined to build a 3 dimensional image of the world in front. In order to do this an additional processor is required to manipulate the data in real time (The Inspire processor just isn't up to it)
Any additional 'add on' would have to house both the cameras AND the processing engine to crunch this data.
Since the only accessible port is via the gimbal connector this would have to sandwich between the gimbal connector and the existing X3/X5(R) which would reduce ground clearance to non workable dimensions.
Couple this with the additional weight and power requirements and you have a very short flight time.
The Inspire 2 however is almost certainly going to have all of the P4 toys and then some.........watch this space.

pixl45 · Mar 2, 2016

White Airwolf said:
It means the same thing, Ministry of Transport, Transport Canada. Just a matter of Semantics.

Semantics... um, maybe...except that Transport Canada is it's actual name. Maybe we should just start referring to the FAA as the "American Airplanes and Airspace Department". Just semantics, really.

Predator · Mar 3, 2016

Just sell your inspire and buy a P4 Toy

now noob proof you wont hit any large obstacle but you will hit power lines...

pixl45 · Mar 3, 2016

Predator said:
Just sell your inspire and buy a P4 Toy now noob proof you wont hit any large obstacle but you will hit power lines...

The noobs will be lured to a false sense of security and still mess them up by coming up under overhangs and tree branches.

Predator · Mar 3, 2016

pixl45 said:
The noobs will be lured to a false sense of security and still mess them up by coming up under overhangs and tree branches.

I agree! i rather be stressed flying my i1 and keeping far away from potential danger vs thinking ahh i got FRONT "collision sensors" I'm safe... Yeah right try to pull a reverse tracking shot on a P4 the sensors are useless. Do a slider shot your sensors are useless... Case closed.

Luis Morales · Mar 3, 2016

The Editor said:
I don't wish to burst your bubble but - no it won't!
The collision avoidance relies on an additional two cameras who's images are combined to build a 3 dimensional image of the world in front. In order to do this an additional processor is required to manipulate the data in real time (The Inspire processor just isn't up to it)
Any additional 'add on' would have to house both the cameras AND the processing engine to crunch this data.
Since the only accessible port is via the gimbal connector this would have to sandwich between the gimbal connector and the existing X3/X5(R) which would reduce ground clearance to non workable dimensions.
Couple this with the additional weight and power requirements and you have a very short flight time.
The Inspire 2 however is almost certainly going to have all of the P4 toys and then some.........watch this space.

there is an unused canbus port in the AC controller. and removing the nose its not that hard. basically same as in the matrice. and its the port were you connect the guidance in the matrice.

The Editor · Mar 3, 2016

Luis Morales said:
there is an unused canbus port in the AC controller. and removing the nose its not that hard. basically same as in the matrice. and its the port were you connect the guidance in the matrice.

You makes a good point but we are talking about an aircraft that DJI officially won't even let you swap a motor on.

Then there is the lack of processor power in the Inspire.
The Inspire 2 however will be a very exciting machine.

Luis Morales · Mar 3, 2016

The Editor said:
You makes a good point but we are talking about an aircraft that DJI officially won't even let you swap a motor on.
Then there is the lack of processor power in the Inspire.
The Inspire 2 however will be a very exciting machine.

yeah.. the matrice does not have the processing power either, thats why the guidance is a separate system with its own cpu

you are right on the modifying thing thought.

the P4 is awesome but i would not call it very exciting, the only frontal sense and avoid does nothing for me, if i am flying and in in control i would prefer to have sense and avoid in places that i am not seeing!! not where i am seeing!!!

The Editor · Mar 3, 2016

Luis Morales said:
yeah.. the matrice does not have the processing power either, thats why the guidance is a separate system with its own cpu you are right on the modifying thing thought.

the P4 is awesome but i would not call it very exciting, the only frontal sense and avoid does nothing for me, if i am flying and in in control i would prefer to have sense and avoid in places that i am not seeing!! not where i am seeing!!!

Absolutely - side and rear and top avoidance are far more important IMHO.

Phatzo · Mar 3, 2016

White Airwolf said:
Now that the Phantom 4 has it, it's only a matter of time vefore the Inspire gets it.
Question is, will it be a new machine or an add on kit?
Hopefully it's the latter as I don't want to spend another 4 grand on an improved Inspire when mine is perfectly good thank you very much, except for lack of collision avoidance features.
I would think the FAA and MOT in Canada, if they had any brains, would mandate this feature to be mandatory as it would make flying a whole lot safer.
Personally, I think this feature will be required on all drones sooner than later.

sorry but learn how to fly. that is the most safest way to be in the air. puting that mandatory is the dumbest idea. everything can fail - you know DJI - what do you do then if you CAN NOT fly manually which only half true since DJI hold gps and position and hight automatically. if you learn how to drive automatic in a tesla really knowing how to drive is FAR away from you. start with a LADA (russian car) stick shift, no power stiering and forget ABS acually ALL comfort things. when you know how to handle that- you can say you are probably good to go for a little drive on the country road. later you can then sit in a 86 bmw or 190e benz or similar and start going with that.
no offense meant but people have to LEARN how tod do things to KNOW what to do when these go wrong. i started off with an octo i built myself and had no assistance in anything. i had my close calls and my bad days. then i built my hex and had some fun and training and a crash or two. before i flied on the simulator 20+ hours before my first REAL life flight- that was my LADA time and the checked the benz and the bmw to know what comes at me.

mandatory should be ground school with mandatory simulator flyghts and lessons you have to achieve and pratice before actually going out and maybe hurt, damge something or kill someone because you did not know enough about the physics or craft specs or did not have a preflight check list that says: make a sight survey and check places to land for emergencies etc.
this post is not aimed against you - i am guessing you are activly flying or having 333 or something. if not then i am asuming you are a responsible thinking person. but saying that a feature that is one more part on a craft that can brake and is not even or real help or use besides "dogding" something that is in front of it should be mandatory is just plain useless. if it were around by 360degrees then it might worth thinking about but even then i would say ine has to LEARN how to fly and not rely on automatic **** that fails sooner or later. stand up for what you do and take the consequences or let it be and do not touch it.
my 2c
sorry for any offense. non meant just got carried away a bit by the first post.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

fitz · Mar 4, 2016

Phatzo said:
sorry but learn how to fly. that is the most safest way to be in the air. puting that mandatory is the dumbest idea. everything can fail - you know DJI - what do you do then if you CAN NOT fly manually which only half true since DJI hold gps and position and hight automatically. if you learn how to drive automatic in a tesla really knowing how to drive is FAR away from you. start with a LADA (russian car) stick shift, no power stiering and forget ABS acually ALL comfort things. when you know how to handle that- you can say you are probably good to go for a little drive on the country road. later you can then sit in a 86 bmw or 190e benz or similar and start going with that.
no offense meant but people have to LEARN how tod do things to KNOW what to do when these go wrong. i started off with an octo i built myself and had no assistance in anything. i had my close calls and my bad days. then i built my hex and had some fun and training and a crash or two. before i flied on the simulator 20+ hours before my first REAL life flight- that was my LADA time and the checked the benz and the bmw to know what comes at me.

mandatory should be ground school with mandatory simulator flyghts and lessons you have to achieve and pratice before actually going out and maybe hurt, damge something or kill someone because you did not know enough about the physics or craft specs or did not have a preflight check list that says: make a sight survey and check places to land for emergencies etc.
this post is not aimed against you - i am guessing you are activly flying or having 333 or something. if not then i am asuming you are a responsible thinking person. but saying that a feature that is one more part on a craft that can brake and is not even or real help or use besides "dogding" something that is in front of it should be mandatory is just plain useless. if it were around by 360degrees then it might worth thinking about but even then i would say ine has to LEARN how to fly and not rely on automatic **** that fails sooner or later. stand up for what you do and take the consequences or let it be and do not touch it.
my 2c
sorry for any offense. non meant just got carried away a bit by the first post.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree 100%.

But in the long run we would both be wrong, we live in an age where people expect, count on technology to replace their incompetence.

We can not control the irresponsible, but if we can reduce the amount crashes they have with a bit of technology, it's a win win for everyone.

andrew259 · Mar 4, 2016

What's the timeline on any inspire 2?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Phatzo · Mar 4, 2016

andrew259 said:
What's the timeline on any inspire 2?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

hopefully a year or two lol

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

gruvpix · Mar 4, 2016

Yes while I was intrigued as to the new avoidance system on the P4, I wouldn't even trust it anyways, or trust it enough to fly it at a wall to see what happens. 'Collision avoidance' is last on my list of desired features for a drone, as even if it worked perfectly (which it won't), I wouldn't fly any differently or recklessly. I think it's just encouraging people to become more reckless and rely on the failsafes, when in reality it only senses obstacles right in front of the drone and not to the side or behind... Meaning really it doesn't offer a whole lot more 'safety' than an Inspire or P3 operated by someone with common sense. Yes I realize common sense is uncommon these days.

Khyber · Mar 4, 2016

I just got my inspire 1 pro this week...let's hope it's a while before inspire 2.. hard enough pill to swallow buying the i1 pro as it is!

pixl45 · Mar 5, 2016

gruvpix said:
Yes while I was intrigued as to the new avoidance system on the P4, I wouldn't even trust it anyways, or trust it enough to fly it at a wall to see what happens. 'Collision avoidance' is last on my list of desired features for a drone, as even if it worked perfectly (which it won't), I wouldn't fly any differently or recklessly. I think it's just encouraging people to become more reckless and rely on the failsafes, when in reality it only senses obstacles right in front of the drone and not to the side or behind... Meaning really it doesn't offer a whole lot more 'safety' than an Inspire or P3 operated by someone with common sense. Yes I realize common sense is uncommon these days.

DJI also makes a collision avoidance add-on option for the Matrice -- and it faces all four sides, though not top as far as I saw.

DrMrdalj · Mar 5, 2016

There are rare industrial use cases where "collision avoidance" can be useful - but arial cinematography is not one of them. Matrice is experimental test-bed and industrial special-use platform, and even with all possible add-ons it still can not reliably autonomously fly itself. P4 collision avoidance is just marketing gimmick - way for lamers to tap-fly and for aircraft to selfguide itself without instantly hiting first obstacle...

For me, as a pro user, P4 sensors redundancy and sensors error correction is much higher on my wish list. Next to that P4 has some kind of dust-proof and weather-resistant motors, while weather-profing of Inspire is also high on my wish list... So, there are advantages of P4 which are much more obvious and simpler to implement in next Inspire, then any AI and self flying...