How to Exceed Max Altitude for Mountain Flying?

[maxfaxdude]

Barometer with little hole found on Mavic teardown video at 4:30.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[WolfgangStiller]

I would NOT recommend disabling the barometric altimeter unless you realize the response of the Mavic will be unpredictable with the Mavic getting false altitude information. There's no telling how the firmware will react. I too would be interested to hear how this works but no way would I personally risk this.

 

[cobra46]

I would NOT recommend disabling the barometric altimeter unless you realize the response of the Mavic will be unpredictable with the Mavic getting false altitude information. There's no telling how the firmware will react. I too would be interested to hear how this works but no way would I personally risk this.

The elevation control may get very wonky during flight regimes where the firmware is relying on accurate pressure change data. For example, it may apply power expecting to see less pressure. When it detects no change, it may keep the power on until it reaches it's elevation limit. On the other hand, it may use a combination of GPS and pressure data and fly just fine but then the GPS may prevent what you're trying to do in the first place.

I would still like to hear the results from someone gutsy enough or rich enough to try it.

 

[DJ Kim]

Wow. I would love to not have any artificial limits to fly confined. And I would absolutely consider a workaround solution if it doesn't disable any sensors onboard.
I don't know about other people, but I'd rather have all the sensors and data that I can get. If anything, I'd see to add more sensors to get additional data if possible. Not disabling something. I can use every data point that I can get and make use of them.

Now if 500m Limit can not be worked around without compromising the safety and the integrity of the flight, then my choice would be to make peace with the limit.

I may look to get another brand drone that would fly with all sensors and not having artificial limits if I must fly.

I don't need to fly that bad


Sent from my iPhone using MavicPilots

 

[larkin]

No one has tried this because they are of the same mind as you. You know, 500m up is pretty high.

Sent from my XT1650 using MavicPilots mobile app

 

[AlanTheBeast]

I bet the hole is quite small and therefore whatever is used to trap the current pressure inside wouldn't have to be all that strong nor rigid.

A 1mm hole would only require 4 grams of force to hold back the pressure going from sea level all the way to 18,000 ft. So holding back pressure going from say 8,000 to 11,000 would be negligible.

I would like to see the results of someone trying this.

I'm not the drone police at all but don't forget we still have that pesky VLOS rule to deal with and I don't think you can see it traveling very far up a mountain side.

The LOS rule means we can't fly more than about 300 - 400 metres away. Indeed, with background clutter even less. (Why did DJI paint this thing matt-grey-brown anyway?).

I'll probably order the orange skin soon - that'll help in clutter at least and allegedly makes it less interesting for birds. Of course will make it invisible in the fall here....

 

[cobra46]

We should paint them like a WW2 fighters so anti drone people can't find them in the sky.

 

[Helo]

What happens if you plug the pressure sensor and while in flight you lose signal or hit RTH?

 

[tcope]

The LOS rule means we can't fly more than about 300 - 400 metres away. Indeed, with background clutter even less. (Why did DJI paint this thing matt-grey-brown anyway?).

What about the pilots of the manned aircraft that report drones 1 - 1 1/2 miles away from them? You calling them liars? I'd love to see a drone flier charged with flying beyond VLOS and calling one of those pilots as an expert. Those pilots actually reported the "sightings" to the FAA and they are a matter of record.

 

[maxfaxdude]

I've done a partial tear down on the Mavic to repair some cosmetic damage after a crash (not really that difficult, just have to be careful). I might just do it again and put some aluminum tape over that baro sensor hole just to see what happens.

 

[larkin]

I've done a partial tear down on the Mavic to repair some cosmetic damage after a crash (not really that difficult, just have to be careful). I might just do it again and put some aluminum tape over that baro sensor hole just to see what happens.

Be a pioneer

Sent from my XT1650 using MavicPilots mobile app

 

[cobra46]

What happens if you plug the pressure sensor and while in flight you lose signal or hit RTH?

That's a $999 question.

 

[AlanTheBeast]

What about the pilots of the manned aircraft that report drones 1 - 1 1/2 miles away from them? You calling them liars? I'd love to see a drone flier charged with flying beyond VLOS and calling one of those pilots as an expert. Those pilots actually reported the "sightings" to the FAA and they are a matter of record.

Why insinuate that I'm calling someone a liar in a scenario that you bring up after what I posted? I'm just not that good at seeing into the future (as my stock portfolio clearly indicates).

I'm talking about the Mavic Pro seen by me from from the ground. It is not visible to me at about 300 - 400 m against the background sky (white or blue) - and that is with reference to the Home2Drone distance on the display- something known and accurate to a few metres.

(Never mind against grey/brown forest in the Canadian winter. )

Per visual acuity math (which looks at line pairs, not single objects in space) a .335 m object (the MP) should be visible to about 1100 metres for 20/20 vision in optimal contrast conditions. Considering how "thin" the arms of the MP are, it's probably better to estimate the size of the body of the MP alone at its folded size: 200mm. In that case the math works to 687 m. But a MP is not a line pair - so I'm sure the distance that it would be easy to see at is much less than 1100 m and probably less than 500m. My experience bears that out to be sure. I'll be flying over water next week and perhaps have optimal conditions to see how far it is when I lose it (outbound) and acquire it (inbound).

If a pilot is reporting a drone at 1 - 1.5 (2700m+) miles then either the drone was a lot larger than a Mavic Pro or the estimate of distance was exaggerated by the pilot observer. I'll back the 2nd of those: pilots are used to seeing things they know well (other aircraft) and not used to seeing drones. ie: what he (they) saw was much closer.

Also bear in mind that those "matter of record" reports are "records" of what the pilot reported. They are not records of the actual distance as that would require a measurement system or precise knowledge of the positions of the observer and observed at the time of the observation. The Mk I eyeball, regardless of the pilot's opinion, is just not up to it. Esp. when seeing something he is not accustomed to seeing in the sky.

 

[tcope]

Why insinuate that I'm calling someone a liar in a scenario that you bring up after what I posted? I'm just not that good at seeing into the future (as my stock portfolio clearly indicates).

I'm not disagreeing with your statement. I just wanted to add something... that these pilots lie about seeing a drone... so why not us as well. Not that I'd want to be in that situation but it is ironic.

If a pilot is reporting a drone at 1 - 1.5 (2700m+) miles then either the drone was a lot larger than a Mavic Pro or the estimate of distance was exaggerated by the pilot observer. I'll back the 2nd of those: pilots are used to seeing things they know well (other aircraft) and not used to seeing drones. ie: what he (they) saw was much closer.

Yup. Gone are the days of seeing a "UFO"... they are now "drones.

The reports are made to an official record. The pilot knows that. If you were a pilot would you ever say that you say a drone (in those cases they give the dimension that match a Phantom) 1 mile away... while flying a plane... on approach to an airport? Yet, they do.

 

[CactusJackSlade]

I've done a partial tear down on the Mavic to repair some cosmetic damage after a crash (not really that difficult, just have to be careful). I might just do it again and put some aluminum tape over that baro sensor hole just to see what happens.

Absolutely on board with this one!

 

[Xanth]

Not so simple for many mountains. There are a number that take quite a long time and technical skill to summit and in my case, there are many that are beyond my skill level to reach anywhere near the summit.

I'd really like to see a feature where the Mavic could compare a loaded topo map with it's position and allow flight within the AGL limit. Even better would be a sensor that could read ground level but I don't think we'll see that any time soon.

Why couldn't it use its existing ground sensors? It would be easy for me to hover 10' AGL at 1600' ATOP. Why not make it so the software simply adds 400 ft to the ceiling anytime it detects the ground?

 

[adiru]

Obstacle avoidance based on mapping data would be great but we're no where near that. Even using the best topo maps available, I have encountered unexpected rock out croppings and of course trees are not typically included on maps.

Aircraft equipped with EGPWS has had that since the 1980s, DJI needs to get with the times.

 

[WolfgangStiller]

Why couldn't it use its existing ground sensors? It would be easy for me to hover 10' AGL at 1600' ATOP. Why not make it so the software simply adds 400 ft to the ceiling anytime it detects the ground?

I like that idea!

 

[CactusJackSlade]

Aircraft equipped with EGPWS has had that since the 1980s, DJI needs to get with the times.

Good idea, but not sure it would be that simple... you would have to be close enough to the ground (20 feet or whatever that max height is the Mavic can read)... then it would "make the adjustment" to the mac ceiling height... but what happens if you are over a mesa, fly off the edge and the bottom drops out... suddenly you are 2000 feet AGL.. what would the aircraft do then... Hummm

 

[Fplvert]

Good idea, but not sure it would be that simple... you would have to be close enough to the ground (20 feet or whatever that max height is the Mavic can read)... then it would "make the adjustment" to the mac ceiling height... but what happens if you are over a mesa, fly off the edge and the bottom drops out... suddenly you are 2000 feet AGL.. what would the aircraft do then... Hummm

Current app will allow you to fly to 500M above Take off elevation.
The blocking of the bari might be a work around.
It would seriously effect RTH!
This has been a discussion since the launch of the DJI Pilot App. The original had a 5000M limit. (P3) ATOH was limited within weeks of its launch to 500M. No way to go back!