Litchi vs Dronelink... getting started- my impressions

[Tom25]

I like the fact that DL's tutorials are all free. I'll just watch one as I plan out my mission so I don't forget anything and after time it'll become much easier. DL also has online missions on their map but it's different in finding them. I wish DL would make the map more like litchi but importing them to DL is easy enough from what I can see.

If Litchi doesn't come to the MA2 sometime soon I will give DL a try. Thanks for the feedback.

 

[Tolly]

I think both have strong merits and they're not expensive just get both! And yes there are a lot of public Dronelink missions you can reuse.

 

[ChrisOutdoors]

One thing that made DL a dealbreaker for me: it's terrible in remote areas without a cell connection. It also requires constant RC connection to the drone, meaning if you lose the signal the drone stops doing it's thing. Other programs like Litchi and Dronedeploy upload the mission waypoints to the drone, once the drone has the data it flies autonomously and no RC connection is required, both programs also work offline. You'll see this mode on the RC, with DL it says joystick and with the other 2 it says waypoint. I also feel the DL subscription requirement is absurd, they're not providing anything that justifies that monthly cost.

 

[maelstrom]

Other programs like Litchi and Dronedeploy upload the mission waypoints to the drone, once the drone has the data it flies autonomously and no RC connection is required

But that is illegal in most countries without special permission.

 

[Tom25]

After reading all the responses I am sticking with my plan to sit it out until Litchi comes online, as it is the product best suited for what I want, which is an easy to use platform with a large library of editable way missions that their users have posted and shared. Making things 250 times easier from the start, if for no other reason to learn from.

Question is how quickly that will happen, who knows. Hopefully by Spring.

 

[ChrisOutdoors]

But that is illegal in most countries without special permission.

That's not accurate at all.

 

[maelstrom]

That's not accurate at all.

Why is that not accurate? In Europe, for example, EASA says:

"An autonomous drone is able to conduct a safe flight without the intervention of a pilot. It does so with the help of artificial intelligence, enabling it to cope with all kinds of unforeseen and unpredictable emergency situations.

This is different from automatic operations, where the drone flies pre-determined routes defined by the drone operator before starting the flight. For this type of drone, it is essential for the remote pilot to take control of the drone to intervene in unforeseen events for which the drone has not been programmed.

While automatic drones are allowed in all categories, autonomous drones are not allowed in the ’open’ category.

Autonomous drones need a level of verification of compliance with the technical requirements that is not compatible with the system put in place for the ’open’ category. Autonomous operations are, instead, allowed in the ’specific’ category, where the Regulation includes a tool flexible enough to verify requirements with the appropriate level of robustness."


About the Specific category (which would be required for autonomous operation), EASA says:

"The ‘specific’ category is a category of UAS operation that, considering the risks involved, requires an authorisation by the competent authority before the operation takes place, taking into account the mitigation measures identified in an operational risk assessment, except for certain standard scenarios where a declaration by the operator is sufficient or when the operator holds a light UAS operator certificate (LUC) with the appropriate privileges"

The bottom line is that to operate a drone autonomously, without the ability of the pilot to intervene (so no connection to the RC), requires special authorisation.

 

[ChrisOutdoors]

Why is that not accurate? In Europe, for example, EASA says:

"An autonomous drone is able to conduct a safe flight without the intervention of a pilot. It does so with the help of artificial intelligence, enabling it to cope with all kinds of unforeseen and unpredictable emergency situations.

This is different from automatic operations, where the drone flies pre-determined routes defined by the drone operator before starting the flight. For this type of drone, it is essential for the remote pilot to take control of the drone to intervene in unforeseen events for which the drone has not been programmed.

While automatic drones are allowed in all categories, autonomous drones are not allowed in the ’open’ category.

Autonomous drones need a level of verification of compliance with the technical requirements that is not compatible with the system put in place for the ’open’ category. Autonomous operations are, instead, allowed in the ’specific’ category, where the Regulation includes a tool flexible enough to verify requirements with the appropriate level of robustness."


About the Specific category (which would be required for autonomous operation), EASA says:

"The ‘specific’ category is a category of UAS operation that, considering the risks involved, requires an authorisation by the competent authority before the operation takes place, taking into account the mitigation measures identified in an operational risk assessment, except for certain standard scenarios where a declaration by the operator is sufficient or when the operator holds a light UAS operator certificate (LUC) with the appropriate privileges"

The bottom line is that to operate a drone autonomously, without the ability of the pilot to intervene (so no connection to the RC), requires special authorisation.

It's a good thing I don't live in EU territory. Your point was "most countries ". BTW, your write up says waypoint missions are authorized which is what I was commenting on. You're confusing autonomous with automatic.

 

[maelstrom]

You're confusing autonomous with automatic.

Not really. You were the one who mentioned “autonomously”. Automatic is ok because the RC is still in contact and you can intervene if required, which is not necessarily the case with autonomous missions.

 

[ChrisOutdoors]

Not really. You were the one who mentioned “autonomously”. Automatic is ok because the RC is still in contact and you can intervene if required, which is not necessarily the case with autonomous missions.

Funny how you pick the 1 word that benefits but ignore the rest. I clearly explained the use of waypoints...and many devices that are autonomous have measures in place that allow for human interference, which technically can make them automatic as your article defines.

My original point is still valid, DD and litchi are the better apps for the uses I pointed out and your point that it's illegal is just plain inaccurate and your rebuttals are utterly ridiculous.

 

[Coskier]

I think both have strong merits and they're not expensive just get both! And yes there are a lot of public Dronelink missions you can reuse.

As I have been reading through this thread , that is the exact thought I have had. It seems like there are reasonable use cases for both.

 

[RiderATX]

DL released MA2 support this week. It's cool to see the MA2 do 48mp image maps.

 

[Conservative Nihilist]

Having purchased Dronelink on whim, it didn't take me long to realize that while Litchi fulfills all my auto-flight requirements to a tee, and is above all, intuitive to master, Dronelink is ponderous, didactic, extremely difficult to navigate, and overly complicated, for what it does.

There is way too much obscure and esoteric terminology introduced with Dronelink. From the vaguely medical-sounding "repositories" to the cryptic "components" to those annoying and utterly baffling menus teeming with options I'd never use, Dronelink's maze-like user interface brought to mind a notice pasted to the door of an old college professor: "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullchit". I gave up searching for a means to set waypoint altitudes in Dronelink, after an exasperating hour-long search through multiple menus and pages crammed with ambiguous verbiage.

I finally decided that there was no waypoint mission programming capability attainable with Dronelink that cannot be achieved with less effort, and in far less time, using Litchi. As a hobbyist drone flier, I want to create flight plans that show the altitude and camera orientation at each waypoint on the map screen, without any meandering searches for those very basic flight parameters. The final nail in the coffin for Dronelink, as far as I am concerned, is that there is currently NO offline access to flight plans, which is a major deal-breaker for me.

Having purchased Dronelink, I will leave it on my system until it is ready for prime-time, while relying exclusively on Litchi for all my waypoint drone mission requirements, as I have done over 1,200 cumulative autonomous miles flown with my Phantom3S.

 

[vindibona1]

Having purchased Dronelink on whim, it didn't take me long to realize that while Litchi fulfills all my auto-flight requirements to a tee, and is above all, intuitive to master, Dronelink is ponderous, didactic, extremely difficult to navigate, and overly complicated, for what it does.

There is way too much obscure and esoteric terminology introduced with Dronelink. From the vaguely medical-sounding "repositories" to the cryptic "components" to those annoying and utterly baffling menus teeming with options I'd never use, Dronelink's maze-like user interface brought to mind a notice pasted to the door of an old college professor: "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullchit". I gave up searching for a means to set waypoint altitudes in Dronelink, after an exasperating hour-long search through multiple menus and pages crammed with ambiguous verbiage.

I finally decided that there was no waypoint mission programming capability attainable with Dronelink that cannot be achieved with less effort, and in far less time, using Litchi. As a hobbyist drone flier, I want to create flight plans that show the altitude and camera orientation at each waypoint on the map screen, without any meandering searches for those very basic flight parameters. The final nail in the coffin for Dronelink, as far as I am concerned, is that there is currently NO offline access to flight plans, which is a major deal-breaker for me.

Having purchased Dronelink, I will leave it on my system until it is ready for prime-time, while relying exclusively on Litchi for all my waypoint drone mission requirements, as I have done over 1,200 cumulative autonomous miles flown with my Phantom3S.

I agree with you 98%. The one thing that Dronelink supposedly can do is be more precise on how the camera moves and films than Litchi. But as you say, the difficulty in getting to that point is far beyond the amount of energy one wants to expend. With DL if you don't do things in the exact sequence required it fails. So far I have tried 3 different times to program a basic mission, failing each time.

One other thing that I recently discovered with Litchi is that is has an FPV mode for flying with inexpensive VR goggles. I've been experiementing in this mode along with the DroneVR app dedicated to VR/FPV and am really getting a kick out of the immersive experience. Of course you can't fly a Mavic liike a true FPV drone, but it is a much different experience than having a phone screen in your hand attached to the controller.

 

[Tufargon]

As a new user I'm also finding it extremely frustrating trying to use DL. Going through the lessons, it seems like he's going through the dictionary to use words nobody uses to make it more complicated. There doesn't seem to be any SIMPLE lesson/lessons in easy english. Spent $40 on it and I feel like I might have wasted my money.

 

[Tolly]

I really get what you guys are saying but I do love DL and I'm 66 years old
I think the reason I can get on with it is that I have worked in IT for over 40 years and understand programming so adapted easily to all of the variables and parameters in DL that ultimately make it much more versatile and powerful. BUT, it is written and marketed by techies and what they really need is a grounded user in their design team to make it user friendly with some training material in good old plain speaking English. It is, in my opinion, a far superior product than Litchi but you need real perseverance to climb the learning curve.

 

[AZDave]

I really get what you guys are saying but I do love DL and I'm 66 years old
I think the reason I can get on with it is that I have worked in IT for over 40 years and understand programming so adapted easily to all of the variables and parameters in DL that ultimately make it much more versatile and powerful. BUT, it is written and marketed by techies and what they really need is a grounded user in their design team to make it user friendly with some training material in good old plain speaking English. It is, in my opinion, a far superior product than Litchi but you need real perseverance to climb the learning curve.

I've gone through the DL tutorials and the author actually gloats over the fact that DL was written with all of the flexibility and complexity that a top tier programming language would provide. In my opinion it's a mistaken adoption ... kind of an in-your-face statement like "here's how we do it in my world", complete with non-intuitive terms. I agree that DL is powerful and the reusable modularity of various elements may appeal to some users, but overall I think it's an app created by a misguided techie who insists that you think like he does .... and I say that as a degreed engineer who has embraced computer programming for almost 50 years. I just recognize hubris when I see it.

 

[vindibona1]

I've gone through the DL tutorials and the author actually gloats over the fact that DL was written with all of the flexibility and complexity that a top tier programming language would provide. In my opinion it's a mistaken adoption ... kind of an in-your-face statement like "here's how we do it in my world", complete with non-intuitive terms. I agree that DL is powerful and the reusable modularity of various elements may appeal to some users, but overall I think it's an app created by a misguided techie who insists that you think like he does .... and I say that as a degreed engineer who has embraced computer programming for almost 50 years. I just recognize hubris when I see it.

I agree. If they simplified the interface they would sell exponentially more copies of the app. What I'd like to see Litchi do is create and advanced method of gimbal/camera control that is more refined and predictable before flight without getting into the programming nightmare that Dronelink drags its users into.

I have to wonder how many people buy Dronelink but have never flown a mission with it [raising my hand for the first ballot cast]?

 

[Tufargon]

I've gone through the DL tutorials and the author actually gloats over the fact that DL was written with all of the flexibility and complexity that a top tier programming language would provide. In my opinion it's a mistaken adoption ... kind of an in-your-face statement like "here's how we do it in my world", complete with non-intuitive terms. I agree that DL is powerful and the reusable modularity of various elements may appeal to some users, but overall I think it's an app created by a misguided techie who insists that you think like he does .... and I say that as a degreed engineer who has embraced computer programming for almost 50 years. I just recognize hubris when I see it.

Nailed it!!

I have to wonder how many people buy Dronelink but have never flown a mission with it [raising my hand for the first ballot cast]?

Raising my hand here. I took a mission from Litchi Hub and brought it into DL but I'm too scared to fly it (if you saw it you would realize why).

I really get what you guys are saying but I do love DL and I'm 66 years old
I think the reason I can get on with it is that I have worked in IT for over 40 years and understand programming so adapted easily to all of the variables and parameters in DL that ultimately make it much more versatile and powerful. BUT, it is written and marketed by techies and what they really need is a grounded user in their design team to make it user friendly with some training material in good old plain speaking English. It is, in my opinion, a far superior product than Litchi but you need real perseverance to climb the learning curve.

Touting over 40 years of IT experience really doesn't convince me. I've been an IT for over 26 and I know a lot of the people on the forum with the same opinion on DL have a boat load of experience also.

 

[dronelink]

Hey guys, Jim here (the guy that wrote the whole thing). We are aware that many hobbyist users (and even some professionals) would prefer to not be bothered with the extraordinary number of details that are required to program drones. Having said that, the target audience for Dronelink from the start has been Dronelink SDK customers (enterprises with software development teams). We made the same tooling available to hobbyists in the meantime for the people that don't mind learning new things, or who already have technical backgrounds. We do have plans to create an entirely different mission planner for casual users (which would look more similar to 99% of other waypoint mission planning apps out there), but it would still have a "show details" option to dive into the current "advanced mode" mission planner. Until then, if you are just looking for basic waypoint missions, you should definitely consider Litchi, Maven, etc.