Nidge
 Second Officer
Offline
|
I don’t wear a tinfoil lined hat nor do I subscribe to the many internet conspiracy theories, but something just doesn’t sit right with DJI’s lack of transparency on these type of reports.
I have many multirotor and fixed wing models employing many different GPS enabled flight controllers, - Naza V1/V2, Pixhawk, APM, Wookong, A2, Vector, etc - , and flown in what some may consider harsh RF and electromagnetic environments and never had an issue. I also have a Spark which is still on the .0700 firmware and again no issues to date.
Many of these reports have many similarities. The owner was flying in a rural area away from any visible interference sources. First they are alerted to a YAW error, then a Compass error, then loss of GPS-P forcing the craft into ATTI mode, then no response from the controller and the Spark making an abrupt change in attitude and flying off. Once the user has submitted the black box data to DJI tech support more often than not a warranty claim is upheld and the user furnished with a replacement BUT there is never a reason given as to why the Spark failed in the first place.
Without the much needed transparency needed from DJI urban myths are permitted to abound resulting in many losing all faith in their investment. It is not sufficient for a DJI rep to simply copy and paste some tenuously linked paragraph from the manual as some sort of explanation, it requires an honest response and solution based upon the evidence obtained from the autopsy of the data provided.
|
|