labroides@yahoo Posted at 2016-2-18 08:23
"Meh "flyaway" is not defined phenomenon.
As the OP says he called it how he saw it.
Obviously your ...

Please point out where in the log it show's RTH initiated. Oh it's not there
Your speculating.
The log show's that he'd just flown behind a similarly sized building and maintained good signal and did not initiate RTH. Explain that without using the words "if" "possibly" "maybe" or similar.

These the same logs that Ken from DJI says Healthy Drones log has no similarity to how DJI analyse them (well that still baffles me!)

I'm not saying you're conclusion is wrong I'm just saying that (currently) you and others that jumped the same way have no way of being so damn sure it's right. You're obviously a smart bloke it'd be awesome if you balanced that with a little bit of temperance.

mike.wildlight Posted at 2016-2-17 22:49
Any investigator, amateur or professional should always assess each case on the facts at hand. Pre ...

While I agree there's a lot of speculation, we've been given the evidence available & asked for comments, which is what most people are doing based on the information available & past experience.

Also, sorry to pull you up on this, but you say "for example: one fact that seems to have been overlooked in this instance is that before flying behind the second building the aircraft flies behind an identically shaped first building and maintains "good" signal the entire way."

You are in fact speculating, since the maximum height flown was 120m, which could well explain why the first building didn't block the signal.  Also, it would depend on the speed past & distance from the obstacle as to what would happen with the signal/response from the aircraft.

We still haven't been given the RTH height by the OP & everything points to what's been said.  Nobody's been derogatory towards the OP either, other than the use of the word "flyaway", which is understandable IMO as it implies a fault with the Phantom.  As said by others, most of what people shout out as being flyaway turn out to be user error.  I think I've read about 2, maybe 3 genuine unexplained flyaways since I started reading this forum in June last year.  Many more have claimed a flyaway only to be shown and/or admitted to having made basic errors.
We might well all be wrong, but on a balance of probability?...

mike.wildlight Posted at 2016-2-18 09:49
Any investigator, amateur or professional should always assess each case on the facts at hand. Pre ...

"For example: one fact that seems to have been overlooked in this instance is that before flying behind the second building the aircraft flies behind an identically shaped first building and maintains "good" signal the entire way. Just because it did on the first doesn't mean it will on the second but it is still evidence to be considered, it does weaken the validity of the hypothesis that RTH initiated a building collision."

This is a good point, however the vagaries of radio propagation also come into the equation. There could have been reflection from other buildings, or that section of the flight was faster. It is still highly probable that the aircraft crashed on RTH, otherwise if it flew in any other direction, it should have regained signal again.

One of the problems here is that while some owners do not read the manual, and others religiously do, there is really no material published that imparts knowledge of the problems in flying in these circumstances. Looking at the issues raised on this forum shows that there are many nuances of the flying art that are not published, and this is one of them.

No one tells you that if you fly behind a building, hill or whatever that you may lose signal, and if that happens, a whole new set of circumstances comes into play. You are quite correct, we should not be critical of the OP in this regard, as it is a reasonably understandable mistake to fall into.

The one rule that applies here very strongly is the one about not letting your aircraft fly out of visual range. But the very technology in these aircraft encourages you to do so, because the camera lets you see quite clearly where you are flying. Or so it would seem.

Radio communication is a very difficult technology, but one thing can be relied upon, if you can't see your aircraft, then the radio probably can't either. I think this is a subject that DJI could address as one of their tutorials.

nigelw Posted at 2016-2-18 09:52
While I agree there's a lot of speculation, we've been given the evidence available & asked for com ...

Hi Nigel,
I'm always happy to be pulled up when I miss things (happens a lot!), and even happy to have robust discussions.
In this instance I didn't actually speculate one bit.
* It is a fact that log shows it flew behind the first building,
* It is a fact that log shows it maintained "good" signal whilst doing so.
* It is a fact that at the time of data loss the signal was "good"
* It is a fact that just because it flew behind the first building without issue doesn't mean it did or would fly behind the second without issue.
Your speculation that it may have done so at the maximum recorded altitude is a possible explanation for this. However, the log shows that max height was reached 1min into the flight and from 3min in altitude did not change from 64.5m (ish) to the last record (in healthy drones) at 5min. There is nothing that I can see that demonstrates that the drone did not descend further after this though so your speculation could still hold if 64.5 m was enough to clear the first building and the drone descended after that.

I have State Farm, $30.00 per year covers crash, theft etc.  zero deductible 100% replacement cost. Homeowners kicks in if you crash into someone, then I have an umbrella policy I have had for years that kicks in after homeowners hits the limit. Well worth the money people!  That being said, have has State Farm for many years with house cars, motorcycle and other toys insured by them, but I would think the cost would be similar for others?

Can you explain how this would be possible regardless of what the logs might say.....

* It is a fact that log shows it flew behind the first building,
* It is a fact that log shows it maintained "good" signal whilst doing so.

I would say that it is not quite as straight forward as that.

Here's a brief chart listing the attenuation of 2.4Ghz radio signals through materials of which most high rise buildings are commonly composed...
These numbers reflect signla loss though ONE LAYER of each susbstance or component....just one.
2.4 Ghz attenuation

What I BELIEVE "may" have happened is that (and this might account for the signal fluctuations)....the signal was BOUNCED off of an adjacent building (or two) and just enough signal was returned to the Remote for some log entries.
Signals can also bounce off water to some degree.
But I do not believe it's possible to directly communicate between a Phantom and the RC directly through a high rise building.

Anyone have evidence otherwise?

Same thing here.

http://forum.dji.com/thread-36014-1-1.html

Dji offers 25%, Best buy insurance offers the US 149 premium back.

Dji CEO publicly admitted fly away problems.

mike.wildlight Posted at 2016-2-17 17:49
Any investigator, amateur or professional should always assess each case on the facts at hand. Pre ...

thank you for your thoughts.  

the initiation of RTH is NOT immediate after signal loss it is a minimum of 3 seconds loss time. In 3 seconds the drone can easily traverse the building's width and possibly regain as it hit open area thus giving another 3 seconds etc.

If it was set to rth and home point is on other side of building where did it go then if not into the side of the structure?

If you look over the gist of posts by myself and  a few others we are at issue with him blaming the aircraft and calling it a "FLYAWAY"
That is how new users get wrong impressions about these and allow rumors and stories to expand in forums about something that is not true or as you say is only "speculation".

let us not forget  the OP ASKED for our thoughts. I think he meant all , not just those agreeing with him his speculation.
Nor did he lay out rules about what qualified as thoughts. I gave him my thoughts.

you defend his opinion to call it so, I do not!
that's my reason for  posting.

lets agree to agree on how great these things can be and agree to disagree on the rest!

good luck and have fun flying!



"sigh"

take care and have fun flying

kirk2579@aol.co Posted at 2016-2-18 14:29
thank you for your thoughts.  

the initiation of RTH is NOT immediate after signal loss it is a m ...

Let's be fair about this, the word 'flyaway' is no longer part of the title and it is not contained in any of the OP's posts. He appears to have realised that what happened was not a flyaway and has amended his title and post.

All that really remains is to see if he recovers his aircraft and informs us where, then we can all launch 'I told You So' posts.

Geebax Posted at 2016-2-17 22:39
Let's be fair about this, the word 'flyaway' is no longer part of the title and it is not containe ...

When I posted originally it was titled as such

since then I responded via the board to response's

I did not see nor was I aware of the modification.

Thanks for alerting me to this fact. I agree then that my concern with the original titled post has been addressed.

awesome and thanks OP for helping.

to OP
keep looking or post some signs maybe someone found it and you may get lucky!

let us know if you do, take care

Wim.berends68 Posted at 2016-2-18 10:53
Same thing here.

http://forum.dji.com/thread-36014-1-1.html

I don't know where you get your information from but I think almost every single RTH failure has been from user error.
Actually I don't know of one single case of a P3 fly away. If anything gets screwed up the aircraft automatically goes into ATTI mode and you are expected to know how to fly in ATTI mode. So if there's a problem and it goes into ATTI mode and you see your aircraft floating away in the wind and you are unable to fly it back to you because you don't know how to fly in ATTI mode than that is not a flyaway.And where did you see that DJI CEO ever said anything like that.

Cessna172 Posted at 2016-2-18 11:08
Can you explain how this would be possible regardless of what the logs might say.....

* It is a fac ...

Not trying to explain them and don't seek to or need to. They simply are.
I never said the aircraft had direct communication, just the logs show it went behind the building and the signal strength was logged as "good" whilst it did so.

Your explanation is a plausible reason for why but no one will be able to offer evidence to the contrary or in support because all we know (from the logs) is that it the signal got there and was "good" (according to Healthy Drones).

Wim.berends68 Posted at 2016-2-18 13:53
Same thing here.

http://forum.dji.com/thread-36014-1-1.html

"Dji CEO publicly admitted fly away problems."

That sounds highly unlikely.
Care to give a source for that .. or at least some context?
As it stands your post is meaningless without some supporting info.

mike.wildlight Posted at 2016-2-18 15:26
Not trying to explain them and don't seek to or need to. They simply are.
I never said the aircraf ...

I just copied this photo from Google Earth, taken approximately where the OP had registered as his home position, there is a lot on the horizon between where he was and the drone. The end tower in this shot is still not complete, although I expect it would be now:

Geebax Posted at 2016-2-18 14:38
I just copied this photo from Google Earth, taken approximately where the OP had registered as his  ...

That's a very cool idea. Logical place to stand for a long flight in that area is on the top of that sand bank but who knows?
Good Stuff

Geebax Posted at 2016-2-17 23:38
I just copied this photo from Google Earth, taken approximately where the OP had registered as his  ...

cool idea and thats one of the main things I love here.

Folks think of so many things and show how to use tech in so many new and amazing ways that recently was only science fiction reading.

so much to be learned.

mike.wildlight Posted at 2016-2-18 17:09
That's a very cool idea. Logical place to stand for a long flight in that area is on the top of th ...

I could not get a Streetview of the actual spot because the Google car did not go into there, but as near as I can work out, he was at the end of that short road on the left of the sign. Given the age of these views, that hill may not even be there now. but there is a pretty dense collection of buildings between him and the aircraft, thos lower level buildings in front are also high.

DJI-Ken Posted at 2016-2-17 16:54
Agreed, I have a Trackimo and have been using GPS trackers on every aircraft I've had.

Hi DJI-Ken (and sorry opp for your loss and jumping this thread)

How/ where do you attach a trackimo to say a p3p? Think they would be a great idea...

Thanks

Bhu

mike.wildlight Posted at 2016-2-18 00:34
Hi Nigel,
I'm always happy to be pulled up when I miss things (happens a lot!), and even happy to ...

I can't get into the ins & outs of the finer details about speculation so we'll just leave it there (life's too short) other than to say there will always be speculation without the full facts.  And we don't have them.

However, the rest of my comments still stand, in that everyone has replied as requested by the OP, without any undue mud-throwing (so far).

dji-p3p1 Posted at 2016-2-16 21:14
Manually plotted approx route you took, overlayed on to a snapshot video that labroides posted:

Ye ...

Nice lay out of the flight path!  Good deal

CaveDrone Posted at 2016-2-18 20:48
Nice lay out of the flight path!  Good deal

Thanks CaveDrone. Anything to try and help.  

This thread is getting quite active/hot, lots of people very passionate about it. Shows there is a lot of people that care.  And it would be interesting to know what actually happened.

I really hope the OP finds his P3 with not too much (or hopefully nothing) damaged.

mike.wildlight Posted at 2016-2-17 15:37
Meh "flyaway" is not defined phenomenon.
As the OP says he called it how he saw it.
Obviously your ...

I don't think the Meh is allowed on this forum

Bhujang Posted at 2016-2-18 17:40
Hi DJI-Ken (and sorry opp for your loss and jumping this thread)

How/ where do you attach a track ...

I had a photo of mine but deleted it.
But here's how it's mounted.
http://flyingag.com/trackimo-mount-for-phantom/

DJI-Ken Posted at 2016-2-18 14:49
I had a photo of mine but deleted it.
But here's how it's mounted.
http://flyingag.com/trackimo-m ...

Ok thanks for that.  

Looks like human error

DrACE Posted at 2016-2-19 00:02
Looks like human error

Unfortunately I think ALL RTH failures is caused by human error.

Meirzri I am sure we all want to know.
Any luck finding your drone yet?

Very interesting thread and as a drone owner of 1 month now this is a great learning opportunity (although very sorry for your drones demise).   I have taken mine out now 1/2 dozen times and have not gone out of sight and have stayed away from high winds.  I will try some more longer and more difficult conditions once I feel confident that i know exactly  how the drone is going to handle.  One question; is it possible that lack of compass calibration could be a contributing factor?  Does a compass calibrate operation show up in the logs?  Just trying to learn from the pros!

brian.thekoster Posted at 2016-2-18 17:16
Very interesting thread and as a drone owner of 1 month now this is a great learning opportunity (al ...

There would be a warning come up of compass error in the logs.

waynelongop Posted at 2016-2-18 09:01
I have State Farm, $30.00 per year covers crash, theft etc.  zero deductible 100% replacement cost.  ...

just called State Farm and added  "personal article"  coverage for my P3P and accessories.  $40 for the year and includes up to $1,500.  Zero deductible and covers loss due to theft, fire, vandalism, loss, crash.  Does not cover normal wear and tear or deliberate damage.  I described the eagle taking off with a forum member's P3 and they said that would be covered.  Theft by an animal other than a human is still theft! {:2_27:}

You most probably lost radio signal and at the same time gps signal.. As soon as it landed someone took it...

Bhujang Posted at 2016-2-18 17:40
Hi DJI-Ken (and sorry opp for your loss and jumping this thread)

How/ where do you attach a track ...

an alternative to the Trackimo is the Marco Polo RF Tracker.  OP would have found his bird in short order.  I've ordered one.

Not A Speck Of  Posted at 2016-2-17 12:35
Bnwitt, your question has already been answered (VPS is not obstacle avoidance), but I'm curious:  ...

Not A Speck Of,
nope just my ignorant assumption.  I'm a newbie.

chrisp8756 Posted at 2016-2-16 14:45
I also am sorry to hear about your drone. This is the reason I've insured my drones in case somethin ...

Who do you have your P3 insured by? Ive tried to find insurance companies to insure my P3A and I cannot find anyone who is willing to insure it!

leanlinao Posted at 2016-2-18 19:08
You most probably lost radio signal and at the same time gps signal.. As soon as it landed someone t ...

Yep, that's almost certainly what happened...


Why would he lose GPS?

Buy Low Posted at 2016-2-19 03:09
an alternative to the Trackimo is the Marco Polo RF Tracker.  OP would have found his bird in shor ...

I researched that too, but for me the less expensive/ way it works Trackimo was a better solution for me.

Like someone said, let's stick to the facts:

- Last known height: 64mts
- Those buildings are at least 20 floors (from pictures, not counting the penthouse due to the irregular shape), arquitectural standards says every floor is at least 3mts height, giving a min height of 60mts above street level.
- He had signal issues while flying near the buildings of the Ashdod's Marina, the only time not showing signal errors were flying above the sea and while flying in straight line.
- At top speed the P3 is able to cross those building in less than 3 seconds.
- He flew behind several buildings before stopping on top of the pond (and also behind the building).
- He flew in straight line at top speed while going behind the buildings. This is simple math, the distance is about 260mts (Google Earth), and he did the path in 21 seconds (5:00 was the last known height in point J, 5:21 was the last signal), so about 11mts/s (wich is top speed in PGPS).
- P3 starts RTH procedure if RC signal is lost for MORE than 3 seconds.
- P3 was in range, so getting out of the "signal shadow" of the building would have ended up giving back video/rc signal and control to the user.

This could be awfully wrong, so i put it aside from facts:
- According to Google Earth, the HP is between 5 - 7mts above sea level, the pond is between 17 -19 mts above sea level and the street/depts are between 10-12 mts above sea level.

So, UNLESS something in the user configuration is awfully wrong* OR in the last 3 seconds some really weird compass error** got into the drone spiraling out of control, the P3 just started RTH procedure and crashed into the building.

*: Something along the lines of "land" on signal lost that would have ended into landing in the pond. "Hover" would have given plenty of time to even drive to the place and get control due to the 75% battery left (about 10 minutes of hover time at least).
**: Not really, compass errors doesn't come out of nowhere.

DJI-Ken Posted at 2016-2-19 02:07
Unfortunately I think ALL RTH failures is caused by human error.

We agree, just a matter of whether that human is sitting at a DJI computer writing code or in a field with a joystick
Remember, according to the DJI P3 promo video "Our key goal was to remove any and all challenges that someone might face when flying for the very first time"; "The innovations we have applied to the Phantom 3 make this all possible"; "perfection at every level"; "never become disoriented or lost"; "it will always come home"

LordNeo Posted at 2016-2-19 05:17
Like someone said, let's stick to the facts:

- Last known height: 64mts

Agreed 100%. If I was gong to fly behind a building I would set my RTH height accordingly or set it to hover.
As long as you have a good compass and IMU calibration and RTH settings and follow the manual instructions, any loss of an aircraft is pretty much going to be user error.

R&L Aerial  Posted at 2016-2-18 23:14
I don't think the Meh is allowed on this forum

Oh dear, I'll have to delete a chunk of my posts and just about all of my thoughts!