DJI Mavic, Air and Mini Drones
Friendly, Helpful & Knowledgeable Community
Join Us Now

MA flew itself into Active Track subject

Status
Not open for further replies.

ravenflight

Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2018
Messages
19
Reactions
4
Age
43
Has anyone else had an MA fly itself into something while in one of it's Intelligent Flight Modes? We were testing out the Active Track functionality today by have it lock on to the Inspire and follow it around. The first try it worked pretty well for a minute but then lost the track, as it does. I started the track again and after it engaged it moved to face the Inspire... and then flew full speed straight into it. The Inspire, the X5R camera it was carrying and the Mavic are all ruined now. :(

 
Last edited:
Sorry for the loss!
BUT what you have proved is that a drone can bring down another aircraft!
If nothing else, you have proved that trusting toy technology to handle a dangerous action should be avoided.
Are you saying I did something wrong? I don't see what.
 
Are you saying I did something wrong? I don't see what.

Dont need to put up a defense!
Obviously something went wrong, you proved it and have a video to support it.
Either you messed up or the drone did. But what difference does that make at this point? Unless you are planning to replace everything and trying the same maneuver again? Then we probably need to figure out what happened.
In the mean time, thanks for warning others of the possibility of injury to someone else is possible with these "smart modes"
 
whoaaaaaa, thats crazy footage, i cant believe the mav would do that, no sensors picked up the inspire? wow, what a costly trial, so sorry to hear this
 
I suspect that the problem is that active track was intended to track an object on a stationary background. The Inspire was far from the background and the parallax was completely different. Interesting test but I don't think the software had any way to cope with it. Expensive test as a result.
 
Are you saying I did something wrong? I don't see what.
I assume that your first successful flight(s) were operated as such the MA was above the tracked subject.
As i am understanding the ActiveTrack system, this works on the base that the tracked object is always below (on the ground) in relation to a flying Mavic AIR.

As the manual also states:
a) The tracked subject is not moving on a level plane

The obstacle avoidance system maybe was unable to 'see' the Inspire because of the shape of the Inspire,
and the Mavic accelerated so fast and the sensors were pointing down ...
 
Glad he wasnt tracking a child.
 
Glad he wasnt tracking a child.
It’s amazing how many people don’t even read the manual before they fly!
It is absolutely essential to read the manual before you fly!
You might learn something! Lol!
 
I think you may Have thought you were ‘locked’ on to the Inspire the 2nd time, but were in fact on something behind it. Then, when it set off to head for that point, the Inspire was, unfortunately, directly in its flight path, and was too small for it to react to.
 
I suspect that the problem is that active track was intended to track an object on a stationary background. The Inspire was far from the background and the parallax was completely different. Interesting test but I don't think the software had any way to cope with it. Expensive test as a result.
Yeah, the background was all leafless trees and stuff too. Probably hard to distinguish clearly.

I assume that your first successful flight(s) were operated as such the MA was above the tracked subject.
As i am understanding the ActiveTrack system, this works on the base that the tracked object is always below (on the ground) in relation to a flying Mavic AIR.

As the manual also states:
a) The tracked subject is not moving on a level plane

The obstacle avoidance system maybe was unable to 'see' the Inspire because of the shape of the Inspire,
and the Mavic accelerated so fast and the sensors were pointing down ...
The Inspire wasn't moving at all, level plane or not, so I don't think that's an issue but it was more or less at the same altitude as the MA rather than below it, as you can see. You assume correctly that in my previous tests the MA was above the subject. You're probably right about the forward sensors pointing down due to the acceleration and so weren't able to see it. The background was probably confusing too.

Glad he wasnt tracking a child.
A few days ago I had it track my 3-year-old. It didn't work well but at least it didn't do this lol

It’s amazing how many people don’t even read the manual before they fly!
It is absolutely essential to read the manual before you fly!
You might learn something! Lol!
If you're implying that I haven't read the manual then you're making a bad assumption about a situation you couldn't possibly know anything about. Keep your posts on-topic and you won't wind up showing your *** like this in the future.

I think you may Have thought you were ‘locked’ on to the Inspire the 2nd time, but were in fact on something behind it. Then, when it set off to head for that point, the Inspire was, unfortunately, directly in its flight path, and was too small for it to react to.
I think you're probably right about it being locked on to something behind the Inspire. I guess it couldn't distinguish it from the trees.



I'm pretty heart-broken about the whole thing and not looking forward to the repair bill. I hope DJI will take pity (and/or responsibility) and replace these units for me but IDK how likely that is. I'll find out Monday I guess. Last time I had to send the Inspire off to be repaired though I was pleasantly surprised with how relatively inexpensive the repair was.
 
Are you saying I did something wrong? I don't see what.
First time i have seen someone try and track an airborne target - maybe someone has successfully documented it before? But to me it looks like you discovered the limitations of current DJI technology in this area...a painful experience for you but I'm sure your footage will save someone else suffering the same faith.
All the best dealing with DJI !!
 
I'm pretty heart-broken about the whole thing and not looking forward to the repair bill. I hope DJI will take pity (and/or responsibility) and replace these units for me but IDK how likely that is. I'll find out Monday I guess. Last time I had to send the Inspire off to be repaired though I was pleasantly surprised with how relatively inexpensive the repair was.

If you have DJI Care/Refresh on both machines, then the cost to be up and running again should be reasonable.
 
The same thing happened to me. I was tracking a phantom 4 indoors in a gym, and suddenly it just raced directly at it.. I was just in time to abort the tracking. It seems the automatic tracking is best suited for people, it was almost as if the dron thought it was to far away and needed to get closer.
 
Maybe you can negotiate a deal for a new inspire if they won't fix it for you.
 
If you have DJI Care/Refresh on both machines, then the cost to be up and running again should be reasonable.
I have it only on the MA. I had been planning to get it for the I1 and X5R but hadn't done it yet. :(
The same thing happened to me. I was tracking a phantom 4 indoors in a gym, and suddenly it just raced directly at it.. I was just in time to abort the tracking. It seems the automatic tracking is best suited for people, it was almost as if the dron thought it was to far away and needed to get closer.
Yeah, that sounds like the exact same thing. I'm glad your reflexes were better than mine. I just stared at the screen wondering what it was doing and thinking "it's going to stop, right?" lol
Maybe you can negotiate a deal for a new inspire if they won't fix it for you.
I'm hopeful. I think they'll be well within their rights to refuse to help though so we'll see.
 
Last edited:
Tracking a relatively slow moving person or car is very different than another flying aircraft. You can easily lose tracking on a walking subject if they move quickly enough out of frame particularly if they are closer to the drone. What made you think you could track another flying aircraft?
 
Tracking a relatively slow moving person or car is very different than another flying aircraft. You can easily lose tracking on a walking subject if they move quickly enough out of frame particularly if they are closer to the drone. What made you think you could track another flying aircraft?
Reason and logic? The fact that the object was in the air is irrelevant. It wasn't moving so "a relatively slow moving person or car" is still moving infinitely faster than the aircraft I was tracking. Even if it had been moving I have the ability to control the speed at which the aircraft moves. It's possible for a VTOL aircraft, which quadcopters are, to move slower than cars and people typically do. Nothing in the documentation indicates that tracking an airborne object should be different than a land or waterborne object.
 
Wrong. A flying object can move much more quickly out of frame and there by lose tracking much easier. Think about it! One slight move of the stick on the drone being recorded and it's out of frame.....and there is the distance factor also which can change dramatically and quickly too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Lycus Tech Mavic Air 3 Case

DJI Drone Deals

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
130,584
Messages
1,554,091
Members
159,586
Latest member
maniac2000