kjmarsola@gmail Posted at 2016-3-24 14:04
The props are visible in this video.
What is your experience with the props getting in the view, w ...

Well I flew my P3A an hour ago, got 3KM straight out, no loss of signal. No loss of video. Full bars.

Yup, that's p3a for you. A bargain of a bird.

Props come less into view in the Phantom 3. If anybody bought into the "motors are placed higher to get the props out of camera view" story they are chumps. From the moment the first launch video came out where a blown up shot of the p4 was shown, I realized why the motors were higher. The motors had to be higher in order to mount them using both the top and bottom shell in conjunction with each other. By mounting the motors in this fashion, two layers of plastic hood the motors in place. And there is the added benefit of having the motor mounting aid in keeping the top and bottom shell together which eases the amount of work that arm end retaining screws previously had to do on their own. Therefore only one screw does that job now instead of the overstrained two screws on the phantom 3. After cracking two phantom 3 shells in that location I used zip ties in that location for prevention. But the phantom 3 motor mounts were still only one piece of plastic which, in spite of later x bracing addition by DJI, still cracks at times. Regardless, propellers out of camera view, if it happens, it does only at very slow speeds which with a phantom 3 can also be achieved. Look carefully at the pictures below and one can see why the motors sit higher. It's all about strength and less susceptibility to cracking. Not so much keeping props out of camera view. And I find it incredible that all those "credible" reviewers never once commented on this drastically superior item on the phantom 4. Credible maybe. Observant, not really. Bunch of talking heads. They might as well be reviewing the saltyness of sea water. Anyway, look at the pics and one starts realizing why the motors are higher. But keeping out of camera view, nah, only at slower speeds. Like we did with the phantom 3, 2 or 1.

A close up photo of the phantom 4 motor mounting. When one looks at this it becomes glaringly obvious just why the phantom 4 motors sit higher. Notice also the massive clips holding it in place. It isn't just the screws this time. And again, the screws come from the bottom and through the top shell. Keeps the shells together and two pieces of plastic hold the motors now. By design alone, plastics quality to be determined, this is a far, far stronger design than the phantom 1, 2 and 3. But DJI won't give themselves credit on this  because, after all, phantom 3s are still for sale. I will reiterate that I feel the phantom 4 is a much better drone. But hampered by drastically inferior FPV range. If the phantom 3 advanced and pro is a bell 206 Jet Ranger, the phantom 4 is an Aérospatiale Gazelle. But with a distance string attached to it :-(

DroneSpeed Posted at 2016-3-23 15:57
The FCC demonstrates that the P4 remote has 20% LESS power than the P3 remote.  https://fccid.io/SS3 ...

If I had a P4 on hand, I could strip it apart from the hardware to the software an provide details to the claims.  
Granted the FCC reduction of %20 power output demonstrates a concern, but you still need to get deep into the hardware to prove that would be a flight reduction.

I knew the Phantom 3 Standard was limited in range, but after making my own changes, I have increased the range to almost match the pro/adv models.  
So it really boils down to isolating the source of the issue.  Is it software (app or firmware), hardware, or user configurations.

I am sure DJI has done a slew of tests, but even with other tech product releases, they had issues. Sometimes you need someone to hack into it to find out if there are any flaws that require attention.

So a more technical dissection is required to isolate and prove the problems.

It might be a very simple solution, but without a concrete tear down and tests performed, will the solution present itself.

Battery endurance may depend on the outside temperature too. Electricity is being produced via an electro-chemical process, which depends on temperature.

I flew my P3A once inside a city in a park, during working day rush hour. I got "weak signal" warning at about one kilometer. I also piloted it once standing on a mountain top, it is a different story, - no weak signal at all.

DroneSpeed Posted at 2016-3-23 13:28
Battery out put, and flight routes not objective? Is the FCC data not objective? Would you only "exc ...

Power output is only one aspect of the strength of a communications link.  Look at the amateur radio operators that operate of 5W and get all the way around the planet.   It's lots more than amplifier power.

DJI could have tweaked the Lightbridge protocol, the antennas, the receivers, the antenna placement and hell, the cable placement and either improved or worsened performance.  By harping on transmitter output power you make it clear that you do not understand the basics of the technology.

Unfortunately, since it IS rocket science, it's not easy for ill equipped amateurs to come up with a decent understanding of how well a product like this is working.  It's possible that the P4 is deficient.  It's also possible that various posters do not understand how to set up an actual experiment and are biasing results.

It's complicated.

I got my new Phantom 4 yesterday, haven't flown it yet, but I'm very impressed with the product. What do you guys think, should I return it and wait for DJI fix this up? I can't believe there's been no statement from DJI. Is the distance really less than the P3? The specs page says that it can go 3.1 miles! "FCC Compliant: 3.1 mi ( 5 km ); "

connorschulte@g Posted at 2016-3-24 10:35
I got my new Phantom 4 yesterday, haven't flown it yet, but I'm very impressed with the product. Wha ...

I would begin with a series of test flights to determine if your bird does as you expect it too.  Start with small tests, and move to more extended one such as the range concern.  

Without a P4 myself, I cannot say there is any issues, but so far I believe this to be an awesome new product.

connorschulte@g Posted at 2016-3-24 15:35
I got my new Phantom 4 yesterday, haven't flown it yet, but I'm very impressed with the product. Wha ...

It all depends. If you are coming from the phantom 2, you will be all smiles. If you are comimg from the phantom 3 standard, again, all smiles. Now if you are comimg from the 3 advanced or professional, it's different. For a few days you will be all smiles about the speed and inherent strength of the fuselage. But the moment you start to venture into longer than newbie distances, boom, the problems begin. You might even milk up to 80% of your advanced/pro range on a good day, but I do stress "milk." There will be plenty more red warnings than you saw with your advanced or pro. Amazing bird, sub par lightbridge performance. But then again, most guys I run into flying DJI are mostly 400 foot radius up down, left, right stop, go, fliers. So it depends where you fit in.

Airwolf, onya mate. The fact is that the problem DOES exist. Actual P4 owners ARE experiencing the problem/s. I am not a P4 owner but I have read personal experiences all over the place. I have seen actual videos on the FB DJI Owners page that clearly expose the range problem. It was pretty shocking. I would be mightily pissed off if I spent that much money (especially down here in Australia where it is more expensive overall) on a product that has evolved from so much user testing and R&D  (since the first Phantoms) that it should almost be a perfect product by now yet does not meet up to claims by the manufacturer. Never mind about the OP's connection to Apple. That is not the point. The point is that in the OP's opinion there is a problem and it is not being acknowledged or addressed. I am a big fan of DJI and touch wood all of the products I have used have performed flawlessly, including my P3P which still amazes me in what it can do.

I think by reading the posts over at this side of the world (This Forum) coming from RCG, you have to put out what is known to be fact. First you have (had) two issues. Battery performance and Radio/Video range. From reading this once it was declared that users did not properly condition their batteries, that seems to have disappeared. The fact that other forums have reported 4 minutes more flight time than a P3 series all but confirms that this is indeed not a issue. This is for given safe flight time, after the proper conditioning and calibration of the batteries mind you. If one took a brand new DJI battery out of the box and charged it for the first time and then foolishly flew it down to 0% on any of the first flights you have in common sense degraded that battery and now you will never know what it could have been. If you have done that on more than one occasion you have more than likely deteriorated it again and again. So then we move on.....Range... I own a P3P, Range on it is ungodly at no time should anyone "need" that range, granted it's there for the brave few, but all in all, something over powered, and that is a good thing, as we don't always fly out in the boondocks over bodies of water.  Finally it is very simple to understand, if just one (and the reports are it's hugely the highest percentage) are having zero issues and are indeed traveling at least equal to if not greater than the P3P series then any and all statements of deteriorated range due to a reduction of transmit power are just moot. Simply if most are not experiencing any issue, then obviously that is not and cannot be the cause. These are simple facts and no one with any level of knowledge can dismiss the given facts.

HOWEVER...I do not dismiss range issues nor flight times. Even in the early days of the P3P we had EXACTLY the same reports.  I know not of any manufacture that can actually guarantee flight times. The general rule on the P3P now is posted 23 minutes, actual around 18-20. Depending on settings.  Reports on the P4 are posted 28, actual 23-24. Noting that exactly the same time frame from the P3, 3-4 minutes off. Not exactly a big observation and had anyone done their homework they should have not only known but expected no more.

And not sure where the Math geniuses think a P4 is twice the price (Or hardly close.) When the P3P hit the market it was $1250, the P4 is $1400 US prices. Given the additional hardware and features, the extra (JUST $150 BTW) seems hardly worth mentioning, so the P4 is pretty much Exactly the same price as the P3P was and that is Apples to Apples (we are talking 4K to 4K light bridge systems), not factoring in some absurd price reduction over a year later with a new model release on top of it.

The P3P had it's issues, if you were a pioneer then you had to deal with them as well. Anyone not expecting the P4 to not have issues out of the box obviously hasn't been in the hobby long and certainly hasn't done their homework and researched the aircraft and DJI as a whole. I have been flying RC over 25 years, those of us at this age call the new club out there "Credit Card Pilots" Please prove us wrong on that and think with your brain and not your wallet. And once again some knowledge for new or prospective buyers, the old adage of R/C: IF you can't afford two, you shouldn't buy one. IF you can only afford one, then your better off with none!  Safe flights guys, but this looks to be if anything a firmware issue, and at most a QC issue at some level. IT will be sorted out, trust me, they did and do for the P3, the P4 will get ironed out as well. To think the problem isn't being addressed is beyond my scoop of thinking, it's just plain nieve.

Airwolf Posted at 2016-3-24 12:09
So funny to see the ones going after the messenger, all sorts of put downs and belittling statements ...

It's not about that. I pointed this out because we are looking at the wrong spot I think. This is most likely due to either some hardware error or firmware not that it has 20% less power because that should not have so big impact on the range. I'm not saying there isn't a issue I just try to figure out what the reason is.

It doesn't really matter wht

it doesn't really matter where the letter came from or who. it really doesn't.  the only thing we care is that we are paying top dollar for these drones and not receiving any upgrade but downgrade.  I don't own a p4, I own a p3 but of this is true, I would be very upset and would not upgrade. All these people want is their range back. it is not DJI's responsibility to make us follow the rules. it is our responsibility and I think dji should simply just stop with the still restrictions and let us manage how we fly our quads. This is just a hobby it's not like it's something huge that everyone is dependant on. just a hobby.

edbighi@gmail.c Posted at 2016-3-24 10:15
It all depends. If you are coming from the phantom 2, you will be all smiles. If you are comimg fr ...

Good point. I'm upgrading from a Phantom 3 standard.

Repaid1 Posted at 2016-3-24 12:41
I think by reading the posts over at this side of the world (This Forum) coming from RCG, you have t ...

Begins clapping. {:2_30:}

Well said.

frank@lokalhost Posted at 2016-3-24 09:48
It's not about that. I pointed this out because we are looking at the wrong spot I think. This is  ...

It would be nice to know WHY the power was reduced 20% wouldn't it? I mean a real engineering discussion of the change, why it was needed and why it does not affect range (which is promised to be the same as the P3 Pro with the higher power transmitter). The thing that makes me dubious is DJI's response to this issue which has been denial followed by hostility. Now they are communicating secretly via e-mail. I don't like this at all.

I want outside to fly the phantom 4 about an hour ago. Sort of stoked cause the previous flight was a fluke where I had it as far as 1200 meters without too much trouble. Only after that I would lose connection completely. Anyway, as I come outside, I see a phantom 3 professional flying over my parking lot. The pilot was nearby so I called him over. He as doing the typical up, down, left right newbie stuff. So I gave him a few pointers and told him how to follow me up a mountain and that reception is no problem at certain places. We proceed up to where I had flown earlier in the day. When I got about 800 meters away, I started losing connection. Sometimes for 30 seconds. Eventually I gave up and pressed go home. The phantom 3? No problems. So, words of wisdom. Don't fly a phantom 4 near a phantom 3. He managed to get 1.8 kilometers in spite of mine still transmitting.

Got 1500m from a CE version today with all bars still at top. Keep in mind that this is 75% less transmit power than the FCC version. Was flying 20 meters from the wifi router inside the house so it was not radio silent. Didn't glitch at all on my way out there but I had to turn around as som rain was inbound and I didn't want the phantom to get wet.

I'm far less worried about the Apple Exec and how he handles his personal affairs than I am with DJI and making the P4 worse than the P3.

Geebax Posted at 2016-3-23 18:56
If you really do work for Apple, which I seriously doubt, I should think Apple would kick your sor ...

"I am an executive at Apple"

Internet to reality translation:

"I am an assistant manager at my local apple retail store"

frank@lokalhost Posted at 2016-3-24 15:05
Got 1500m from a CE version today with all bars still at top. Keep in mind that this is 75% less tra ...

Fantastic,  it's nice to hear that your P4 is performing that well.

kjmarsola@gmail Posted at 2016-3-24 20:22
Fantastic,  it's nice to hear that your P4 is performing that well.

Will test more some day without rain but I don't have a p3p to test it against. This is the extremes of what I will be flying in since I will be using it I 3-400m range max but I just wanted to check what all this range fuzz was about.

Does anyone with the CE version have range problems or is this only on FCC models?

Then you're fine. Like I've said before, by design it is a far stronger shell. As for the lightbridge, anything is better than WiFi. I've always viewed the phantom 3 standard as the phantom 2 vision plus plus. So the phantom 4 is a welcome upgrade. If only, if only, that lightbridge was as ballsy as the phantom 3 advanced and pro's.

frank@lokalhost Posted at 2016-3-24 15:34
Will test more some day without rain but I don't have a p3p to test it against. This is the extrem ...

Interesting, now that I think of it, hardly anyone with a CE  P4 complaining too much about the range.
Could it be possible that all the  FCC P4's are built to CE specs?

kjmarsola@gmail Posted at 2016-3-24 20:39
Interesting, now that I think of it, hardly anyone with a CE  P4 complaining too much about the ran ...

Could be some sort of bug that's causing it to use the CE transmit power yes then the measured ranges would make sense. Is the hardware on these models the same and then the transmit power is chosen by location/firmware? If the weather forecast doesn't go as it says tomorrow I will see if I can get 2.5-3km or so just to verify that the range is as advertised on the CE version.

Mine is CE. I live in Gibraltar, Italy and Austria so that's all I can get.

And the FPV is crap compared to my old p3a

Have a look in the 100km/h speed record thread. He flies out to 3.5km with CE power.

Repaid1 Posted at 2016-3-24 11:41
I think by reading the posts over at this side of the world (This Forum) coming from RCG, you have t ...

Great Comment.

WetDog Posted at 2016-3-24 09:28
Power output is only one aspect of the strength of a communications link.  Look at the amateur rad ...

This was exactly the point I was trying to make as well.   Very well put.  

&To the poster who believes DJI should be giving a technical explanation on how they've tweaked their technology, (the Tx power, Based only on a single FCC filing difference between iterations.) especially when you more than likely aren't aware of the hundreds of other variables that could've changed.  I think it's pretty easy to say why a company in a competitive emerging market would not give out technical details like that.  Could you imagine Apple, Google,   etc.  Offering a technical explanation every time an FCC filing for a spec on a new product didn't match up with the spec on the previous iteration?   

Sometimes when people make an expensive purchase they simply expect too much.  Yes 1000$ should get you a sweet drone, and responsive service, but a personal explanation from an engineer on a spec change that more than likely you are not knowledgeable on how that could factor in with other variables is just not realistic,  and there is literally NO COMPANY on this planet that operates like that Tech or otherwise.  

If you are buying a product that is cutting edge technology,  and was just released this week,  and you can't handle any bugs or issues (even ones that could ground you for a few days), then you shouldn't be buying the product.  You don't have the stomach to be an early adopter.  That's the nature of complex consumer electronics, and being an early adopter.  If you have a need for a product, and you can't be without it for a week, you want no learning curve,  and need a product to just work out of the box no matter what no questions asked,  or you expect that when there is a possible bug the CEO should issue a statement of fault, or have an engineer personally update you on their testing/development:  THEN YOU SHOULD BE LOOKING FOR AN ALREADY PROVEN PRODUCT.  The fact that this has to be addressed so frequently is kind of sad

GadgetGuy Posted at 2016-3-24 03:51
Actually, the P3P FCC ID# is  https://fccid.io/SS3-WM3231503
which proves that the P3P's power outp ...

.598 Watts is indeed less, but not "paltry".  I posted this in another thread on the same subject.

"The difference between .746 Watt and .580 Watt is 1dB.  Every 6 dB doubles the distance, a 1 dB reduction will theoretically drop the distance by 20%,  3 miles down to 2.4 miles."

kevinm058 Posted at 2016-3-24 12:21
"I am an executive at Apple"

Internet to reality translation:

Assistant manager is still pretty good

And its funny how CE folks on 16db can still go all beyond 2 miles, a 1db drop is a none issue in power.

Michael M Posted at 2016-3-25 09:42
Assistant manager is still pretty good

He won't be for long.

grangerfx@gmail Posted at 2016-3-25 01:44
It would be nice to know WHY the power was reduced 20% wouldn't it? I mean a real engineering disc ...

Can't agree with you more!

Mad_Angler1 Posted at 2016-3-24 15:44
And its funny how CE folks on 16db can still go all beyond 2 miles, a 1db drop is a none issue in po ...

You are correct,  a 1 dB drop in TX power is not significant. We RF engineers have a saying, "a dB here and a dB there add up".  The problem may instead be on the receive side of the equation where RX sensitivity is inverse to the bandwidth of the transmitted signal.  If the transmitted bandwidth of the P3 is less than the P4 Light bridge then the receive sensitivity of the P4 will be less than that of the P3, maybe by as much as a few dB. The comparison needs to be between to Light Bridge systems running different TX power levels. All of this assumes that the antennas and feed line losses are the same in each system.