Official Mavic Pro Range Leaderboard!

[dirtybum]

I don't think you coast past the limit. I have been out there 4 or 5 times at least. I've tried Sport mode , flying backwards , turning around after the limit is reached. Every flight gave me the exact same max distance 58,919 ft. I do like your idea though quickest run out to 58,919 and back takes the top spot. Makes perfect sense. Hopefully somebody smarter then me solves the problem , but until then your idea is the best alternative.

so when you said you've been out there several times and then fool around a little bit, trying to make it past the limit, that means you knew that you was going to come up short and have to retrieve your bird short of homepoint three or four times? Because obviously at that distance you're already using up so much battery as you can spare.

and just to be clear, I don't think going out to the max distance and then coming back the quickest should be the deciding factor, not flight time, I think whoever can come back and land with the most battery percentage.aka Airdata reports landed with 4% beats the next guy that landed with 2%.
because winds another factors May not allow some to get out there quicker but if you're willing to take the risk of packing on as much batteries as you can and make it back with 5%, until somebody figures out this restriction, which I think will happen,
that's kind of where I was thinking

 

[CyberNate]

so when you said you've been out there several times and then fool around a little bit, trying to make it past the limit, that means you knew that you was going to come up short and have to retrieve your bird short of homepoint three or four times? Because obviously at that distance you're already using up so much battery as you can spare.

and just to be clear, I don't think going out to the max distance and then coming back the quickest should be the deciding factor, not flight time, I think whoever can come back and land with the most battery percentage.aka Airdata reports landed with 4% beats the next guy that landed with 2%.
because winds another factors May not allow some to get out there quicker but if you're willing to take the risk of packing on as much batteries as you can and make it back with 5%, until somebody figures out this restriction, which I think will happen,
that's kind of where I was thinking

Battery percentage is not consistent across different batteries. Some have higher or lower voltages for same percentage. I don't think that metric will work well.

 

[dirtybum]

I don't think you understand, just because you can use a battery that is charged to 4.2 V per cell or you could use one that's charged to 4.33 per cell, it's still going to show your battery percentage when you come back, if you make it back with more battery percentage than the next guy, then that's a clear winner ,and you have made the right choice of which mods and battery to use. Some of us don't have the luxury of flying in warm weather where we can go 10 miles only 60 feet off the ground and it's always calm, but we can make up for that by choosing the right battery combinations. so yes in my opinion that will work.

 

[dirtybum]

Battery percentage is not consistent across different batteries. Some have higher or lower voltages for same percentage. I don't think that metric will work well.

while I respect all the analytics and battery data that gets thrown around here, I like many others here have been flying distance on many models before the Mavic. The fact that some batteries have higher and lower voltage is irrelevant, it's up to the distance flyer to choose the right combinations to get him out and back, and if there's a hard limit, the only thing that can tell you and others "hey I could've got 1000 feet more" is the fact that you came back with a surplus of battery percentage.

 

[CyberNate]

while I respect all the analytics and battery data that gets thrown around here, I like many others here have been flying distance on many models before the Mavic. The fact that some batteries have higher and lower voltage is irrelevant, it's up to the distance flyer to choose the right combinations to get him out and back, and if there's a hard limit, the only thing that can tell you and others "hey I could've got 1000 feet more" is the fact that you came back with a surplus of battery percentage.

I have a battery that will fly for 2.5 minutes at 0 percent indicated. I have another that the drone will fall out of the sky at around 3%. There is a HUGE difference in battery calibration based on the age of the battery. I think I understand. I have over a 11 million feet of flights logged with several mavics.

 

[dirtybum]

I have a battery that will fly for 2.5 minutes at 0 percent indicated. I have another that the drone will fall out of the sky at around 3%. There is a HUGE difference in battery calibration based on the age of the battery. I think I understand. I have over a 11 million feet of flights logged with several mavics.

OK first off Nate it wasn't a dig at you, I know you understand how batteries work, I didn't think you understood what I was saying.
In the event that multiple people go out to 59,000 and all come back with 0% and land, yes, that's something we're going to have to sort out at that time, the fact is that not many people are going to hit that limit, can't say if I ever will.
i've had complete Aircrafts that just didn't perform as good as ones I've had in the past or good as ones that was on the shelf next to it, it was up to me to choose the right equipment and the right batteries, I if I have a battery, that shuts off when it hits 3% I'm probably not gonna choose that one for a distance run.
Its ultimately up to the entire group which way it works, but it is still an open discussion

 

[CyberNate]

OK first off Nate it wasn't a dig at you, I know you understand how batteries work, I didn't think you understood what I was saying.
In the event that multiple people go out to 59,000 and all come back with 0% and land, yes, that's something we're going to have to sort out at that time, the fact is that not many people are going to hit that limit, can't say if I ever will.
i've had complete Aircrafts that just didn't perform as good as ones I've had in the past or good as ones that was on the shelf next to it, it was up to me to choose the right equipment and the right batteries, I if I have a battery, that shuts off when it hits 3% I'm probably not gonna choose that one for a distance run.
Its ultimately up to the entire group which way it works, but it is still an open discussion

No worries man. Yes, 59K is tough. I've hit it, but didn't make it back. I need a better Mavic to mod. My old one isn't up to the task. I had one that flew 2 minutes longer in stock form than the others I've tested and then trashed it missing home by 300ft on a stock distance run. Broke every board on it, bending the entire body. Sucks, as I was going to mod it after that flight.

 

[lolo780]

Battery % is meaningless. Best way to decide, assuming the software limit is never fixed is to fly extra distance after reaching home. Same heading will best simulate as if there was no software limit.

I posted in the battery thread about finding a 7g difference between two stock batteries. If that translates into proportionally more capacity, that would explain a lot. Could you guys weigh all your batteries and see if there's any correlation between performance and the ones that are heavier/lighter.

 

[dirtybum]

Battery % is meaningless. Best way to decide, assuming the software limit is never fixed is to fly extra distance after reaching home. Same heading will best simulate as if there was no software limit.

I disagree that battery percentage is meaningless, but I'm interested to hear from everybody.
I've heard you suggest that "extra distance" idea before lolo and maybe you can shed some light on what you mean, because personally I don't understand how that works.
Are you saying that after we go out to the limit and then are lucky enough to make it back with a little to spare, say were on 4% or 3.3v ,however you want to look at it, then we're just supposed to (a) keep flying past us another 2 to 3000 feet or whatever we can make until it crash lands or we put it down somewhere a few thousand feet behind us?
Or (B) we make it back to our feet with a tiny bit to spare, so then we turn it around and start heading back out away from our controller for 2 to 3000 feet until it drops or we land?
What's the idea?

 

[lolo780]

Come back home, then fly out and back again and land at the home point. Say 59k out and home, then go out 2k and come back successfully and call it 61k.
I've flown on 0% for several minutes so battery percentage has no bearing on actual capacity remaining.

I predict with upgraded one piece props there will be more people hitting the limit consistently. I have T Motor 9x3 carbons coming, and the test data online looks promising.

 

[dirtybum]

Come back home, then fly out and back again and land at the home point. Say 59k out and home, then go out 2k and come back successfully and call it 61k.
I've flown on 0% for several minutes so battery percentage has no bearing on actual capacity remaining.

I predict with upgraded one piece props there will be more people hitting the limit consistently. I have T Motor 9x3 carbons coming, and the test data online looks promising.

That sounds very unconventional and crazy to think that at 5% you're going to turn around and go back out, but we got to put all ideas on the table to come up with what's going to work.
I see no sure fire way to keep accurate record that you went out 1800 extra feet or 2400 extra feet

 

[SkyNinja]

I agree with Nate and lolo. it depends on the battery type you’re using. Some batteries can be run down to much lower voltages compared to other batteries that are in good condition, allowing the bird to fly additional distances and time.
Here’s a video below of a Mavic flying with a Lithium ion battery flying below 3V per cell.

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

 

[SkyNinja]

No can't do..have no Platinum.

Its not looking promising, I downgrade the firmware on the platinum to 700. It would not let me take off due to main controller error. It shows 4 esc errors, I’m assuming the 700 firmware is not compatible with the new ECS board without some tweaking. I had been holding off mod my newest Mavic until I receive the platinum to do some testing since my first one Mavic went scuba diving.[emoji1]

 

[lolo780]

Its not looking promising, I downgrade the firmware on the platinum to 700. It would not let me take off due to main controller error. It shows 4 esc errors, I’m assuming the 700 firmware is not compatible with the new ECS board without some tweaking. I had been holding off mod my newest Mavic until I receive the platinum to do some testing since my first one Mavic went scuba diving.[emoji1]

Did you try flashing 4.1000 after deleting module 305, 306 and 905?

 

[SkyNinja]

Did you try flashing 4.1000 after deleting module 305, 306 and 905?

No, I was on my Mac using dronezbreak downgrade the firmware.

 

[lolo780]

That sounds very unconventional and crazy to think that at 5% you're going to turn around and go back out, but we got to put all ideas on the table to come up with what's going to work.
I see no sure fire way to keep accurate record that you went out 1800 extra feet or 2400 extra feet

Not as crazy as turning around at 38% at max distance which I've done and landed successfully.

The txt and dat file shows distance travelled, just don't land as you fly over the home point the first time.

 

[CyberNate]

Come back home, then fly out and back again and land at the home point. Say 59k out and home, then go out 2k and come back successfully and call it 61k.
I've flown on 0% for several minutes so battery percentage has no bearing on actual capacity remaining.

I predict with upgraded one piece props there will be more people hitting the limit consistently. I have T Motor 9x3 carbons coming, and the test data online looks promising.

Do you think the larger props will work well with heavy load? Perhaps they work well due to your light setup? Even the platinum props are a bit aggressive for dual 4000 light and standard weight mavic. I guess the other option is to run lighter batteries such as dual 3000s.

 

[lolo780]

Do you think the larger props will work well with heavy load? Perhaps they work well due to your light setup? Even the platinum props are a bit aggressive for dual 4000 light and standard right mavic. I guess the other option is to run lighter batteries such as dual 3000s.

The 9x3 should work well and I'll test them with my TP4500 + 3500 setup. I ordered the standard hub mounts and also the thin T style ones.
Full weight Mavic is 734g, 8ah of batteries 415g, plus battery mod (16ga xt30) and mounts means there's no reason to weigh more than 116x grams with 11.8 Ah.

 

[CyberNate]

The 9x3 should work well and I'll test them with my TP4500 + 3500 setup. I ordered the standard hub mounts and also the thin T style ones.
Full weight Mavic is 734g, 8ah of batteries 415g, plus battery mod (16ga xt30) and mounts means there's no reason to weigh more than 116x grams with 11.8 Ah.

Yes, I know those 9x3.0 props I had talked about them many months ago, but never actually tried them. You are using the DJI Snail mounts, right? How is the mount? Does it feel secure? There was a guy on youtube that tested them and he said the mount is not very secure.

 

[lolo780]

Yes, I know those 9x3.0 props I had talked about them many months ago, but never actually tried them. You are using the DJI Snail mounts, right? How is the mount? Does it feel secure? There was a guy on youtube that tested them and he said the mount is not very secure.

Not my pics, but looks like it should be secure with no chance of slipping due to left and right threads.