As previously mentioned in a post by our NIDGE associate: He has worked at NASA earlier and tested the interference of radio frequencies and found that high-frequency radio radiation does not generate a permanent magnetic field and therefore does not interfere with the compass.

I'm an electric machine mechanic, and I also wrote in the past that if the radio stations (which are all over there) would bother the quadcopter, they would have hundreds of falls per day. This is not logical and can not be explained by physical laws.

Now during our holiday I had the opportunity to try to be right or not?
We were at a lookout tower, which is also a radio station. It is full of the upper part with different strong antennas, and in the vicinity was a second mobile phone radio tower. In every round I flew between them, at a height with the antennas.

The only thing I've ever seen is that when you're on the move, the rotor was a bit pulsating, but there was nothing wrong with it. ESC (which is a high-frequency device) may have been affected by radio broadcasting, but the compass did not affect it. It was always in the green range.

Yes, and finally: I did not calibrate the compass (because she did not ask and was ok) and the holiday was 120Km away from my place of residence ...
Here is one flyght log.: http://www.phantomhelp.com/logviewer/8N375GBT3YWX45VKPVKB/
Here is the evidence video about this:

Excellent. Really interesting.

Nice interesting shot and facts

Great work! Thanks for sharing!

dji TO88 Posted at 2018-8-6 18:22
Great work! Thanks for sharing!

>> I'm an electric machine mechanic, and I also wrote in the past that if  the radio stations (which are all over there) would bother the  quadcopter, they would have hundreds of falls per day.

A very strong high frequency radio signal may not directly affect the compass, but it can cause problems with any of the electronic systems within Spark (including the electronics associated with the the compass). That does not mean it always will. I would stay away from transmission towers.

Yes there are radio signals everywhere, but when you are close to an antenna tower the signals associated with it may be much much stronger than what you encounter at most locations. Radio signal strength reduces according to an inverse square law - signal strength declines rapidily according to the square of the distance from the antenna. If you are a few hundred meters from the antenna the signal is much much weaker than if you are close to it.

marlowe Posted at 2018-8-6 20:38
>> I'm an electric machine mechanic, and I also wrote in the past that if  the radio stations (which are all over there) would bother the  quadcopter, they would have hundreds of falls per day.

A very strong high frequency radio signal may not directly affect the compass, but it can cause problems with any of the electronic systems within Spark (including the electronics associated with the the compass). That does not mean it always will. I would stay away from transmission towers.

You are right, I did not even suggest that everyone should fly near the towers ... It is certainly safer to distance. I wanted to show that Spark is not too sensitive to these and this is not the cause of the compass that leads to flyaway. I think the compass factory failure or the firmeare bug is causing it. Many people think of an external reason, interference, radio signals are disturbed, and if Spark is not defective it is difficult to disrupt it. That's what I wanted to show you.

Interesting.  There's two places I've flown a few times that have similar towers close by and whenever I get near them my Spark starts sending out several errors so I've made it a practice to just stay away from towers when possible.

Great work! Thanks for sharing!

You are very brave to do fly like this - thanks for taking one for the team and thanks for the info!  I've always second guess my flights when there are any towers nearby

Bender1031 Posted at 2018-8-7 08:40
You are very brave to do fly like this - thanks for taking one for the team and thanks for the info!  I've always second guess my flights when there are any towers nearby

Ever since I joined this forum, I read many flyaway cases and it became clear to me that these are not the cause of interference, as many people think. I think that because of its low price, a weak compass has been added and this weakness is being treated poorly by the newer firmware.

If I read a new case, it always says to the owner: "I just updated the firmware and got the latest DJ GO app"
That's the mistake!

For me 00.00701 is the firmware
and 4.1.15 (mod) for DJI GO app

and as this post demonstrates, it works perfectly.
This constant update mania is being forcing by the DJI, although there has been no real change since the 701 firmware. The app. current versions are just changing for Mavic.

So, do not fix what has not been wrong!

Have a nice flight!

StarFishUK Posted at 2018-8-6 13:01
Excellent. Really interesting.

Thank's!

nice one  

Great Video , Lets say you Lucky in going against all standard drone gps Flight warnings ....

Nice Video..

nice one   

maddox Posted at 2018-8-8 06:19
nice one

Thanks to everyone, the praiseworthy words!
I hope to help you understand that Spark is the cause of the error and not the keypad. That's why they give up and replace.

Unfortunately I do not know what to do, but I'm of the opinion that there were not so many Flyaway events during the old firmware ...

Jakab Gipsz Posted at 2018-8-8 06:34
Thanks to everyone, the praiseworthy words!
I hope to help you understand that Spark is the cause of the error and not the keypad. That's why they give up and replace.

you are welcome  

Jakab Gipsz Posted at 2018-8-8 06:34
Thanks to everyone, the praiseworthy words!
I hope to help you understand that Spark is the cause of the error and not the keypad. That's why they give up and replace.

Thanks !

So Radio Antennas don't create Interference according to You...

I’ve only just come across this post and I feel I must make an amendment to my honourable mention above. As much as I’d love to have worked for NASA (I once accepted an invitation to JPL in Pasadena) my 25 year involvement in the Space Program, prior to my ill health retirement, was with a different organisation with one less “A” in the acronym. Prior to this I was a Radio Officer in the merchant Navy aboard the QE2.

Now that’s cleared up big KUDOS to the OP for a great video, both visually and technically, disproving  the bad science that frequently gets posted in these forums. I enjoyed the video just as much on its aesthetic qualities. I don’t so much criticise your average Spark User for the propagation of the bad science, after all it is a consumer product much like any other piece of consumer tech, but I do take exception to the DJI reps in this forum using the same bad science in attempts to dismiss many issues that should be covered by the standard product warranty.

Regards

Nidge.

Nidge Posted at 2018-8-9 04:36
I’ve only just come across this post and I feel I must make an amendment to my honourable mention above. As much as I’d love to have worked for NASA (I once accepted an invitation to JPL in Pasadena) my 25 year involvement in the Space Program, prior to my ill health retirement, was with a different organisation with one less “A” in the acronym. Prior to this I was a Radio Officer in the merchant Navy aboard the QE2.

Now that’s cleared up big KUDOS to the OP for a great video, both visually and technically, disproving  the bad science that frequently gets posted in these forums. I enjoyed the video just as much on its aesthetic qualities. I don’t so much criticise your average Spark User for the propagation of the bad science, after all it is a consumer product much like any other piece of consumer tech, but I do take exception to the DJI reps in this forum using the same bad science in attempts to dismiss many issues that should be covered by the standard product warranty.

Thanks for the clarification. I was looking for a comment about the experiment, but I did not find it. For this reason, I relied on my memories, which is, therefore, not very accurate.
Regards!

Cool, thanks for sharing!