PleasureFlight Posted at 2016-5-12 11:25
Hello mdazel, I am relatively new with the p3p and until I read your post, I thought that I was lo ...

There is a procedure to revert fw.  With the RC turned off, just place 1.7 .bin file (not the zip file - Aircraft FW) on a formatted (I always format in the aircraft) Micro SD card (with nothing else on it), insert into the aircraft body where the micro SD always goes, turn on the aircraft (again RC OFF) and wait till it completes the normal cycle, listening for the sound coming and watching the LED on the top of the gimbal.  When that is done, you can check the log file created to see if it was successful. You can download the 1.7 firmware from the DJI site...

Assuming it was successful, you then turn off the aircraft, turn on the RC with your display attached.  At the home screen of DJI GO app press and hold the Academy symbol (upper right) for 5 to 10 seconds.. let go and you should see a screen with the current firmware level.  Touch it and you and go backward to any level listed.  Just make sure you keep them paired.. So if backing up to 1.7 on aircraft, it is 1.5.7 on RC..  Here's a video link if needed..  You may need to relink the RC and Aircraft afterward and there are videos for that as well...



Let us know if this helps your distance issues..

bfd300 Posted at 2016-5-12 09:45
Ty I am FD right across the drink from them.....I love my job............I will put my phone on AP m ...

Otto..

Thanks for your service as a firefighter..  :-)

amadeus Posted at 2016-5-12 19:47
I wish to remind you that the check of the controller output power is not enough to exclude a possib ...

Hello there, I concur your thoughts on this .. and that is why to me it is clear that although the test video from DJI in message #147 shows a test that has nothing to do with mine or it`s findings .. as the OP said my output power was reduced from 24mw to 14mw.. not my range was reduced .. that was just the end result of losing the amp on that side or output .. it is most definitely test data of the systems transmit and receive components on and running .. a screen shot of version of firmware .. it was not the same test .. so it could not or would not have the same data results .. as a system up and running .. vers a RCs output .. range is a combination of transmit output power and receive sensitivity capabilities .. but the range  on the bird side was not part of our testing resalts for the RCs output and had nothing to do with what the RC outputs on it oun .. the department test our birds all the time and the all supporting equipment .. my test was a matter of fact on one RC of mutable RCs tested .. the average output reduction was 50% from the one output closest to the edge of the RCs board .. not a combination of mutable components .. so I will not point the finger of blame to any data because it is just that data .. nothing more nothing less .. I love all the data being exchanged and look forward to it continuing .. and the next upgrade to fix any possible unforeseen results or glitch that may have or have not occurred .. but in my case the end result was our third party antenna system needing change to allow passthrough from antenna to RC from that output .. then to bird .. thank you for ringing in with your data ...!!! ;-)

mdazel Posted at 2016-5-12 22:41
Hello there, I concur your thoughts on this .. and that is why to me it is clear that although the  ...

Wait stop..  First, you are the OP (so this isn't "as the OP said")... and I'm assuming "mutable" is supposed to be "multiple", which implies you are seeing the same thing across multiple RC and Aircraft... yet, you have not shown one single "measured" output on a meter that indicates you are now at 14mw (in a stock configuration).  Your ending statement seems to indicate you had to make a change to your 3rd party antenna system, which I've said from the beginning, could be at issue.  So once again, I am asking.. please ... provide some visual evidence of the 14mw coming off a stock RC (or one that has had the 3rd party system taken off).  That mod you have involves so many additional places where connections can be faulty or additional hardware potentially interfering..  

imagesbyjas Posted at 2016-5-12 22:58
Wait stop..  First, you are the OP (so this isn't "as the OP said")... and I'm assuming "mutable"  ...

Hello there, well you will have to just stick to the data to have a positive input in this thread in my opinion .. telling me who I am .. that you know how to spell or trying to prove to me that you are smarter because of that .. is not flight data .. as far as typos or autocorrect you can't control mine nor should you waste our time trying too .. in my opinion .. what you are doing is attacking me for it ..  or with it .. but I must tell you I will NOT let the developers know that it is upsetting you to the point that you are breaking the one rule I put on this thread / post .. share data nothing more nothing less .. not tell someone that they did something wrong or you would or could do it better .. by pointing the finger of blame .. you have been ask to look at and share data because any thing els is not data from using the equipment .. but an attack or cross examination of a pilot sharing data from his or her equipment or flight .. just-say-in...!!! ;-)

This thread has been going on and on, I too would like to see evidence of what you are claiming since nothing has been changed. I do see that you had modified your RC.
If you are able to edit your thread to state that, then it would be more of a fair statement.

mdazel Posted at 2016-5-12 23:24
Hello there, well you will have to just stick to the data to have a positive input in this thread i ...

Just sayin' ... First, my only point was to clarify you were the OP as your statement ("as the OP stated") seemed to imply otherwise.  Second I didn't correct spelling to prove how smart I am.. I did to in fact clarify that we are talking about more than one machine on your side (please go back and read how I wrote it).  Third, you are asking for data, which I have posted and also guided others on questions so please do not question my motivation in this.  I want to find out as much as anyone IF there is some change, but you request data yet do not show yours. You started the thread with a declaration of a decrease of 10mw (in your configuration) that occurred after the 1.8 fw..  Just like you want data, I think others do as well and that is all I am asking (not attacking), just asking.  Show us the meter reading showing 14mw..  Heck, I'd even be somewhat satisfied seeing in the modded mode.. That could also be a checkpoint to compare to a stock configuration.  Have you also checked with the 3rd party manufacturer of the modded range extender?  That would be a data point.  As the person who started this thread with the post you made, I also think that besides requesting information that you back up the claim by showing some form of direct data (the meters) that would provide ALL of us with the confidence in your data results.  

Asking people if they think their flights are shorter or longer or the same as before or after one fw or another is speculation, gut feelings, etc... call it whatever you want, but it doesn't mean that they are at 14mw (or any other number other than it should be).

Again, I am not writing to attack you.. why should I... I would like to know if what you are seeing has a basis, be it DJI, the mod, etc..  but without more details about what happened in your shop, anything else does not add any solid data points that can be acted on short of saying to DJI, "Some people think they are getting less distance than before 1.8 came out.. can you check it please" ..

DJI-Ken Posted at 2016-5-12 23:52
This thread has been going on and on, I too would like to see evidence of what you are claiming sinc ...

Hello there, as I stated .. the RCs were tested by qualified techs .. and without anything attached .. no moded  antenna via a 30db trap (also know as ImmersionRC_RF_Power_Meter_And_30dB_Attenuator_35Mhz_5_8Ghz_.html ) on the RF meter .. scrutinizing the test and or its results won't change the findings .. or will it strengthen your position in any way .. the RCs are checked and rechecked on regular schedule and results logged so it is what is ..  the RF meter showed a drop from 24mw to 14mw on the total output on more than one RC .. that is a reduction of 50% from what it was .. and it was on type A and C type RCs after the update to 1.6.0 RC firmware .. nothing more nothing less ...!!! ;-)

mdazel Posted at 2016-5-13 10:43
Hello there, as I stated .. the RCs were tested by qualified techs .. and without anything attached ...

That is interesting, can you please test again with a stock radio on 1.5.8 that has not been tempered with and then a stock radio on 1.6 and please provide a video of the entire process.

DJI-Ken Posted at 2016-5-13 11:24
That is interesting, can you please test again with a stock radio on 1.5.8 that has not been tempe ...

Hello there, no need .. did that already .. when we first tested .. said that .. but the problem is you cannot accept the findings without video prof of us doing the testing .. and are trying to change them somehow and that can't happen no matter what we do now after that test has been completed  .. "tampered with" .. I see that finger of blame is coming out .. and that just puts resolve out of reach .. and we see what you are focusing on .. the way that the test was done .. not what can / we do about this issue .. that's why I do not respond to the premise that any one is doing anything wrong .. and call just someone ringing in with their story as data .. it is communication and that is the key to any success  .. and me telling them to tell their story over again a different way will not change what they experienced in any way .. it just shows them that I do not want their data as they presented it to be posted or shared .. the way they said it .. it gives the impression that I don't believe them .. on and on and on see what the finger of blame can do .. stop the flow of doing .. some kind of good .. or working together as partners for a common cause .. resolve of the issue .. by changing the direction or focus of the thread .. to how it was done not what happened...!!! ;-Oh_mY

mdazel Posted at 2016-5-13 12:24
Hello there, no need .. did that already .. when we first tested .. said that .. but the problem is ...

I'm still not understanding your claim, and I looked through the entire thread and didn't see where you posted a video showing that you feel the power has been reduced. I did see a DJI reply with this video. and your reply to the video is below as well.
So I'm not fully understanding what you are trying to say.

"Hello there, In my opinion you have taken a lot of time to work with the pilots in this thread by compiling all the data to present to us via this video post .. I wanted to give you and DJI a big THANK YOU for that .. and yes I believe that you're working with us should be a sign of just how much you are willing to do for us as pilots and customers .. it is a great feeling to know you are listening and taking the steps you are in this thread / post .. to the skeptics out there .. I hope this will open the door to start a new meaningful partnership .. so we can continue this sharing of all data without the finger of blame .. getting in the way of resolve .. now as I said in this thread .. as I looked at all the data gathered and presented here .. there is not one singular symptom .. but many individual symptoms making up the list gathered in this thread / post .. and in my opinion .. there are some things in the upgrade that may need tweaking .. it is clear that you have .. keeping your product line .. and their capabilities .. as the leader in this fast paced technology .. in the equation for the upgrades .. so we all are reaching maximum performance from our equipment from DJI .. I urge all to continue to work together exchanging data only .. without pointing the finger of blame .. as this fast past technology evolves into all it can be via us working together as true partners with that common goal .. just-say-in...!!! ;-):

DJI-Ken Posted at 2016-5-13 12:38
I'm still not understanding your claim, and I looked through the entire thread and didn't see wher ...

Hello there, ok ok so here it is: it is not my claim it is a fact from a testing session of DJI birds and RCs after upgrading firmware .. I did not feel anything .. it was a matter of fact of what happened .. that is not something anyone feels .. you have lost focus on exchanging data .. and want to tit for tat .. or mince words of this or that so we are not contributing to the database in the thread just mudding up the waters with repeated word games of how not what.??. you are not bait and I am not a fish ..??..
UPDATE: other pilots testing this .. it is not a claim .. it is a fact ...!!! ;-)

link: click-it .. check-it .. http://forum.dji.com/forum.php?m ... mp;page=1#pid395133

mdazel Posted at 2016-5-13 12:58
Hello there, ok ok so here it is: it is not my claim it is a fact from a testing session of DJI bir ...

Again, your thread title says firmware 1.6 lowered your RC output from 24mw to 14mw. All I am asking is to show your findings.
This thread is 5 pages long and all I ask for is a video showing why you made the thread title. I'm a DJI employee and I am here to help you, nothing has change with firmware and if you are saying it did, I'm just asking to show your findings.

I agree there , I would like to see the finding .. Because if it does have substance , then dji are overselling there stated product or could just be a bug in the latest firmware released that dji needs to sort .

Ken I would also like to see dji post a video testing the same thing and show us your finding if you say nothing has been changed .

mgtkilledkenny@ Posted at 2016-5-13 15:34
I agree there , I would like to see the finding .. Because if it does have substance , then dji are  ...

DJI-Paladin posted that video in post #147.  It shows the spec for the RC and the meter reading on an aircraft at 1.8, remote at 1.6 and app at 2.8...  It is the same video that DJI-Tim posted but has the section of the specs also attached. It shows "live", the meter, the RC, the display device, and the aircraft all there in one short video.

mdazel Posted at 2016-5-12 23:58
Hello there, ok ok so here it is: it is not my claim it is a fact from a testing session of DJI bir ...

it is indeed a claim.  it is not a fact until it has been proven by reproduced results and a process of peer review, which, for whatever reason, you seem reluctant to allow.

imagesbyjas Posted at 2016-5-13 20:54
DJI-Paladin posted that video in post #147.  It shows the spec for the RC and the meter reading on ...

Hello there, that test is NOT the same .. in any way .. and to say it is or was .. well is just NOT a valid statement IMO .. we can see the difference from an in line meter on the output of the RC like we showed at the start when it was said the test was done at the wrong frequency .. to a video of a custom cable coming out of an RC showing a combined test result of the RC and bird working in conjunction to produce results from / with custom parts installed to do the test and video shred while saying .. that I tampered with the RCs by using a proven third party antenna system that worked perfectly to achieve needed performance levels necessary to safely use the equipment for the intended task .. that was not being used during our test at the point that showed the 50% reduction in output from 24mw to 14mw .. in our testing on type A and C .. RCs .. without any modifications to the stock RCs running 1.6.0 and earlier firmware versions to verify the data .. nothing more nothing less .. we did test all components so as to be absolutely sure of what was causing our issue and did that .. and it was said using any modification made our test void and should be done over..  the video I posted shows the test flights after our work around that would in itself imply our findings were in fact accurate .. and in the comments we list the details .. that is on the first page at the start of the thread .. the end resolve that keeps our birds in-service safely .. is our only agenda .. with the cause and temporary fix reported in the intent or interest of safety and helping others .. treating us like we are idiots .. because a few of you won't aspect all the stories (data) of many pilots having many problems (issues) after the upgrades are all wrong for this reason or that .. and to imply that this test dis-proves my test .. that was on a RCs outputs of type A and C RCs is a bit insulting to some .. and hurtful to others .. but I just look at it the same way I do a politician standing on a stage wearing a green jacket as they tell you they would never under any circumstances were a green jacket .. you are not bait and I am not a fish...!!! ;-Oh_mY

mdazel Posted at 2016-5-14 00:19
Hello there, that test is NOT the same .. in any way .. and to say it is or was .. well is just NOT ...

@mdazel..

I have gone back over this entire thread.  There is not a single video or link you've provided that has shown your setup at 14mw.  The first video (very nicely done btw and beautiful countryside) is just that.. flight and countryside and there is nothing in it that I can see that remotely says there is an issue.

You posted pictures of a meter that shows a max and min at a certain frequency, but doesn't show 14mw being measured live..  

You have posted numerous links to issues posted in DJI Facebook forums.  Most of these issues are related to totally different things (e.g. having to reset an IOS device to get visual image back - which Apple actually stepped in and supplied the info for), and yes, other issues..  No one is denying some people had some issues with 1.8..  Honestly I was terrified to do the upgrade given some of those links - yet my fw upgrade on all devices went as smooth as silk..  All those other issues are being addressed in those specific threads, along with recommnendations, and in my opinion should be just that ...  addressed in a specific thread about a specific problem and not to group them all under one "umbrella" thread.

No one (that I've seen) said you tampered.. but you are, in fact, running modded RCs and Aircraft (I think you had the dual battery mod but not sure)..  If your business needs that extra power and length, then that is a choice you, of course, have to make.

So if I am reading this response accurately, you are saying: "that was not being used during our test at the point that showed the 50% reduction in output from 24mw to 14mw" and  "in our testing on type A and C .. without any modifications to the stock RCs running 1.6.0 and earlier firmware versions to verify the data" ..

Those statements (again if I am reading and interpreting them correctly) are saying you saw 14mw on basically stock equipment on inline metering (and 24mw on the same equipment with earlier fw)..  All people are asking for is for you and your coworkers to repeat those same tests one more time and video it showing something similar to what DJI-Paladin did..  That is the ultimate data point to completely bolster and support your assertion that the RC is now putting out less..

These requests are not attacks, they are not personal, no one has used the word "idiot" that I recall, but your repeated refusal to basically do what you've already done but with the added benefit (to all) of recording it just seems illogical at this point.  Whether you see it that way, choose to repeat and video the tests, (or not) is totally up to you.... but do not fault others who are asking for that.

Hey mdazel, unless you show a detailed video of your findings or "data" (as you say), no one will take you serious. In fact you are now trolling this forum, until you've redeemed yourself with the proof of your claims.

Mr.buGSy Posted at 2016-5-14 06:48
Hey mdazel, unless you show a detailed video of your findings or "data" (as you say), no one will ta ...

Hello there, you are not bait and I am not a fish .. I see you have your green jacket on .. oh IMO you can't speak for everyone .. so let fellow pilots make up their own mind .. just-say-in ...!!! ;-)

click-it .. check-it link: http://forum.dji.com/thread-51366-1-1.html

click-it .. check-it link: http://forum.dji.com/thread-51873-1-1.html

click-it .. check-it link: http://forum.dji.com/thread-52106-1-1.html

click-it .. check-it link: http://forum.dji.com/thread-52105-1-1.html

Hey, I'm a software engineer, I don't know how to fish :/

Yes I've seen them mdazel. But none of them have done sophisticated tests like you. It would be very useful to see how you and your buddies are performing the tests. Just saying (^_^)

mdazel Posted at 2016-5-14 07:49
Hello there, you are not bait and I am not a fish .. I see you have your green jacket on .. oh IMO  ...

Only the first link carries a similar discussion, the other three are different.. the second link is about a Standard which is a totally different set of software, range, hardware (for RC and Aircraft), etc.  The last two are not related to distance.  In that first link, DJI already responded there as well that there was no reduction in power output, again speaking to the frequency used to do the test. There is someone in that thread that is now saying that even returning to an earlier fw does not make a difference.  

However, for those of us who may not be as educated, there are also images showing totally different output readings from the image in this thread..  I'm trying to be technical here, but shouldn't ALL the new power outputs for a given frequency be the same?  That is meant as a serious question. If that method of testing is to provide reliable output, and assuming the firmware is at the heart of "reprogramming" the RC, one would expect that each RC would have the same output as another??

Just to keep things on the up and up (not just to keep it alive).  There is another thread on a very similar topic which shows very similar meters being used to test..  They are "showing" a before and after on those meters.  The thing that I am curious about (and addressed above) is that given the same tested frequency shouldn't the resulting output be the same (talking about the max output).  I don't know what could be influencing the meter readings (as it appears that these are wired inline meter) but again, and not being an expert, one would think that the outputs would be the same, yet their after fw is different than the 14mw being stated here, and their pre-fw max number is higher than the meter reading in this thread..  Very confusing how what should be the same on devices can vary so much..

DJI-Paladin or DJI-Ken..  I think one of you mentioned something about the freqency being used was incorrect.  So tired..  but in fairness I did want to point out someone else is "testing" as well, and I think you commented in it as well..

http://forum.dji.com/forum.php?m ... &fromuid=259877

Thanks all..

Hello there, another pilot testing this issue and posting .. http://forum.dji.com/forum.php?m ... 66&page=1#pid395133

mdazel Posted at 2016-5-15 01:33
Hello there, another pilot testing this issue and posting .. http://forum.dji.com/forum.php?m ... 66 ...

@mdazel..

I already referenced that thread in my post.  Not sure we need duplication.  What I (personally and some others) think is to have you show the video we've been requesting from your shop, or perhaps your thoughts as to why the power readings from these inline meters don't seem to align with each other.  

imagesbyjas Posted at 2016-5-14 13:26
@mdazel..

I already referenced that thread in my post.  Not sure we need duplication.  What I (per ...

Hello there, I posed it in message #179 top link .. and you posted it again .??. was that ok .??. but that was you .. ok I get you now .. you are so transparent in all your post to me .. you just don`t get it .. I have no interest in playing your word game of tit for tat .. all the questions you have been asking have been answered over and over again and you know that .. and now you have acknowledged that you have seen that .. I see you are wearing your green jacket .. (see messge 176)...!!! ;-)

mdazel Posted at 2016-5-15 02:58
Hello there, I posed it in message #179 top link .. and you posted it again .??. was that ok .??. b ...

I specifically posted the message showing the meters, not repeating the entire thread heading (which I felt actually more illustrated your point).  I have little to no desire to play word games.. None of the questions regarding your doing a repeat of the test showing a video have been answered..  Nor have you answered my (seeking your direct experience) on why the meters are showing different numbers for the same frequency.  I actually did that so you could perhaps explain based on knowledge.  It's your choice, as always, to provide us direct information or not.  I still, by the way, have no clue what a green jacket has to do with anything.  Again, you take anything directed at you as an attack.  My suggestion not to duplicate was based on keeping a long thread perhaps shorter, but of course you took it personal.  

Hi there,

My P3P can only achieve a max of 500m upon that it shows RC signal weak transmission ... I am in the CE region ... Range should be at least 2km. But after new update, I can only reach 500m ...

Any help to make the range further will help as 500m is too short ... Thanks.

keongwee85 Posted at 2016-5-15 11:43
Hi there,

My P3P can only achieve a max of 500m upon that it shows RC signal weak transmission ... ...

Your range won't be at least 2km if you are flying where there is a lot of interference.
If you want extreme range, you have to fly over the ocean, out in the desert etc.
Fly in an urban environment and you'll get a lot less.

Noted. Will try it out when I am in ocean or with big open space.

I tot if I am flying from roof (highest point of the housing area) I should be able to get greater range.

keongwee85 Posted at 2016-5-15 10:59
Noted. Will try it out when I am in ocean or with big open space.

I tot if I am flying from roof ( ...

Labroides is correct about conditions for "best case scenario" and interference (even on roof top) coming from urban areas can lead to shorter flight (been there and done that)..  Try elevation as well.. Not sure what height you were at for the 500m, but try going to different altitudes (in stages - repeat flights) to see if there's any difference..  Hope it helps..

it was at 100m elevation ... and i have clear view of my drone... i was actually flying above a golf course with housing development surrounding it ..

keongwee85 Posted at 2016-5-14 21:59
Noted. Will try it out when I am in ocean or with big open space.

I tot if I am flying from roof ( ...

Hello there, thank you for ringing in and sharing your story (data) .. I will say IMO you should call DJI support immediately for help .. before flying your bird again .. in this thread that could help you .. we fall short in the flesh .. defending our points of view .. there has been little or no shared resolve because of it .. so call DJI support before you fly again .. or if you can put it on the bench or have someone you know that is a technician take a look at your RC and bird on the bench that is an option .. the bench can help you find the cause .. to do a work around .. as we did .. or fix a / the part if one has failed .. you need to do that before you fly again IMO .. your choice your bird .. you have said 500m is the limit of good or effective communication signal between your RC and bird .. that is a range of 0.310685596118667 of a mile .. that tells you you have a complete communication fail between RC and aircraft to achieve safe flight .. you have an issue with communication signal between your RC and bird that is unacceptable to achieve safe flight .. YOU / it must be addressed before you risk .. PP .. HBs or BI .. with your faulty equipment .. with an unsafe flight .. risking total loss of control of your bird / aircraft .. IMO .. PLEASE let us know how your story (data) plays out .. you have helped all by sharing your issue...!!! ;-)

I have a lot of issues with range of my P3P.

I'm litteraly beside the bird and it don't receive a strong signal from my remote.  I have less issue with my video though.
I'm in open space, and no houses, wifi or anything causing interferences that I know in the area and still ... sometime the bird is flying at 10 m and loss RC signal but I can fly it at 5km no problem... the problem occur mostly when I'm near.

Look at those 2 photos ... 1 showing me and the birds how close we are ... and the other my screen shot showing how poor is my RC signal ... if found it to abnormal not ????  What you think ...

That render me impossible to use the Map Pilot that I've just bouth because it need a strong RC connection in order to work and for now I'm screw with that poor signal.

I don't know if it's linked to the new firmware because I had only a fee occasion to fly with the old one since I get the bird since start of april.

Me and the bird

Look at this poor signal

Tintin007 Posted at 2016-5-16 05:22
I have a lot of issues with range of my P3P.

I'm litteraly beside the bird and it don't receive a s ...

Hello there, thank you for sharing your story (data) in a location like that our birds could fly as far as the battery would allow .. 5 to 6 miles was the norm round trip before the firmware upgrade .. not anymore .. hope they did not do it intentionally like the third party battery and HDMI output .. and it gets fixed next upgrade .. we will see .. you have helped by sharing your story (data) let us know how your story plays out...!!! ;-)

mdazel Posted at 2016-5-15 17:04
Hello there, thank you for sharing your story (data) in a location like that our birds could fly as ...

If they did it on purpose, that would be great and fair to tell us because I'm getting hired to do some job and now I'm stuck because I can't complete any plan mission because of this poor signal ... but the strangest thing is in some situations, the signal holds and I can do 5km no problem but like today that was crap and I lost my day draining 4 batterie trying to get my geolocated plan map complete but hadn't been succesfull so the whole trip to this place was a waste of time, money and patience since.

Is there a way to get a repport of the flight with the signal strenght recording because I would like to send those data to DJI just to see if they found it normal .. duh!!!  BUt I can't figure out how to get those datas

Tintin007 Posted at 2016-5-16 06:18
If they did it on purpose, that would be great and fair to tell us because I'm getting hired to do ...

A couple of points..  First, flight data...  Here's how to get to the very detailed logs kept by the aircraft.  If on a Mac, it isn't as easy so if you have a Windows machine handy you'll find it an easier task. It will be helpful data to be able to provide to DJI, although if you do have to send it in, they can extract it as well.

http://support.dronesmadeeasy.co ... tom-3-and-Inspire-1

Second point that I pulled out of your comment.  You're saying at other times you're seeming able to fly distance fine (5km is about 3 miles) so I'm thinking your issue is not that the Aircraft and RC have been rendered much less powerful as a 3 miles flight is pretty darn good.  :-)  There may either be something intermittent going on inside or perhaps in the area of the short flight (See it was at the beach though).  Hope the flight logs help..

I am a youtuber with a footprint of 170,000 views and counting. I routinely make tutorials on DJI Phantom modifications dating to phantom 1, phantom 2, phantom 2 vision plus, now phantom 3. I have logged in excess of 1500 flights between last 2 phantoms alone. I fly all across americas on my travels and I am calling shenanigans DJI. I am absolutely appalled that I even have to spend my time talking about it. I had a DJI phantom 3 professional with FPVLR boosted kit with bird side amplifier setup and saddle batteries. This exact setup can fly 9 miles round trip just in battery capacity alone. With adequate aftermarket battery and upgrading my saddle batteries I can easily fly 5-7 miles out and back. With all due respect DJI... what in the flying.... funk. I mean seriously. This morning I woke up early, drove for half an hour, unpacked my phantom... and while clicking through things I saw "calibrate IMU". Ok I clicked calibrate IMU... and it bloody went into installing 1.6 firmware. I had 1.4 and it was flying very well thank you very much. Like an idiot I spent half an hour trying to cancel it to no avail. It finished and left me with a "lost signal" message. I kept rebooting and changing batteries and nothing. Came home in complete disbelief and still nothing. No gimbal control, no access to anything but video signal was perfect. After opening up phantom and remote control (which by the way you guys did a number on quality of your screw connections...), changed out wires for my long range setup... nothing... still "lost signal". Go on dji website... download 1.8... force it via sd card... BAM... problem fixed. Don't you dare tell me that it was not a firmware issue. I took my phantom out in the field and flew 9 miles in circles with perfect signal and control. Brought it back, flew 3.3 miles out trying to go for 4.5 miles out (mind that I fly in middle of nowhere in the countryside)... and at 17432.2 ft it bloody tells me I have reached maximum altitude while being 396 ft up. Ok great... I set it to 120 meters after all. And then it went into return to home mode before I could even hit cancel. I hit my rth button to cancel it out while scrambling between my fatshark goggles and app, canceled out the thing and then it tells me low battery. What in the flying funk? 65% battery... as in sixty freaking five percent. I returned to my launch point, landed with 40% battery in complete disbelief. Since when did reaching altitude ceiling stopped allowing flying at max altitude forward? Why in the world can it not fly at 396ft while flying forward? More importantly why did it say low battery when I clearly specified my low battery alarm to be at 30% and critical battery at 20%?

I had none of those issues with 1.4 firmware. Guys... DJI.... that is just embarrassing. I mean seriously... first you force me to deal with your transgressions when you decided to add a lever for gimbal tilt control on phantom 1 by upgrading motherboard but removed cam bust port for OSD... then you pretty much made entire phantom 1 obsolete... gave us phantom 2 and made that obsolete... ok technology moves forward... I understand but then after phantom 2 vision plus you just went into overdrive. I should not be forced into upgrading my firmware every time I fly. I am off grid 99% of the time and I can't upgrade on satellite internet. And then when I am connected... I don't want to suffer indignity of coming out to fly and have my phantom locked out due to some pathetic firmware glitch. Do you not test aircraft with beta firmware? I mean seriously guys... one minute my phantom works... then it does not... then it works again and then it does not. Upgrading to 1.6 firmware broke my phantom. Upgrading to 1.8 firmware fixed phantom but broke the app. For crying out loud guys...

I have had it up to bloody here with this nonsense. If I am hiking for 7 miles while carrying my phantom on my back... in a 35 lbs hard case... I want my phantom to work on location. I don't want to deal with this nonsense darn it. I mean even pix4d was botched... would not write out p4d files. Get your act together boys and girls.

I am about to go into beta from esri drone integration into arcgis... and I am very afraid... I don't want yet another glitch to ruin my day. ONE OF YOUR GLITCHES COST ME A $3000 PHANTOM.  I had a brand new phantom 2 vision plus with quickrelease and a zenmuse gimbal and hero 4... all crashed because of... you guessed it.. app issue. Suddenly alternatives are beginning to look very appealing...

yarik83 Posted at 2016-5-16 07:39
I am a youtuber with a footprint of 170,000 views and counting. I routinely make tutorials on DJI Ph ...

Hello there, thank you for ringing in and sharing your story (data) it sound just like my story .. hopefuly .. your experience and large following will save you from some of the nonsense that this thread has going on in it .. but I digress .. so thanks again .. you know now that I think about it .. the light bulb in my head is on .. LOL .. I think I have seen some of your video work and youtube videos .. good form .. I must tell you .. thank you for all you do for sUAS flight and that work as well .. safe flights...!!! ;-)

yarik83 Posted at 2016-5-16 07:39
I am a youtuber with a footprint of 170,000 views and counting. I routinely make tutorials on DJI Ph ...

Yarik,

Won't speak to any of your other issues with DJI, but 1.8 on the aircraft is paired with 1.6 on the remote control (and at that time, 2.7.1, 2.7.2 and 2.8 for the DJI Go app)..  If you scan the forums it appears the load sequence on this firmware set caused issues for more than one person.  Sounds like some of your issues started when you updated RC to 1.6, but the Aircraft was still at a lower level..  RC 1.6 fw expects to see 1.8 on the aircraft otherwise things began to happen to some not dissimilar from what you're describing.

For a lot of the posts (and you sound a lot more experienced than I) the sequence being highly recommended by a number of folks is load the aircraft first via the micro SD card (only way to load the aircraft) and to make sure the RC power is off..  Then make sure you're at the current app level on your portable device, then finally upgrade the RC (with the aircraft turned off)..  After that (depending on what level you were on) you will possibly need to upgrade battery firmware as well.

A number of folks also noticed the frequent message about max altitude reached.  That stopped for me at 2.8.1 (IOS app) ...    As for the other things like battery power reading, etc..  don't know and can't recall seeing anyone mention it.  Sounds like your distance was good though at 9 miles?