There's no general threat using Google Assistant with Go 4 app. "DJI Drone could kill…"

[PropSpin]

It does not disable GPS, at least on iOS devices.

It doesn't on Android either, at least not on Nougat.

 

[Thoraldus]

The cellular radio in the phone isn't going to interfere with the OcuSync radios - different frequencies. And the DJI GO 4 app is designed to be used with cellular data enabled to provide real time mapping.

An interfering signal does not have to be on the same frequency to cause issues. A reciever is easily desensed by strong out-of-band signals. Even digital systems have rf front ends that function in the analog domain. Here's some good info on the issue. Reciever blocking and desensitization or here

 

[Thoraldus]

Guess what this puppy does ...

 

[sar104]

An interfering signal does not have to be on the same frequency to cause issues. A reciever is easily desensed by strong out-of-band signals. Even digital systems have rf front ends that function in the analog domain. Here's some good info on the issue. Reciever blocking and desensitization or here

True, but the cellular radio isn't even remotely powerful enough to overwhelm the front end of the OcuSync radio. And they are designed to be used together. It's simply not an issue.

 

[Thoraldus]

True, but the cellular radio isn't even remotely powerful enough to overwhelm the front end of the OcuSync radio. And they are designed to be used together. It's simply not an issue.

At a maximum output of +30 dbm (3g/4g/LTE) I bet it could affect the receiver sensitivity when in intimate contact with each other. Even FHSS systems are not immune to front end desense. Remember we're talking about how a distant aircraft's signal would be degraded by receiver desense in the controller. I'm not proposing that it will happen in all cases, but local environmental conditions (undefined RF environment) could exacerbate the issue.

 

[WithTheBirds]

At a maximum output of +30 dbm (3g/4g/LTE) I bet it could affect the receiver sensitivity when in intimate contact with each other. Even FHSS systems are not immune to front end desense. Remember we're talking about how a distant aircraft's signal would be degraded by receiver desense in the controller. I'm not proposing that it will happen in all cases, but local environmental conditions (undefined RF environment) could exacerbate the issue.

Let’s say the phone running Android was able to compromise the phantom AND Mavic controllers (it is claimed the issue occurred with both models). To the extent the receiver was unable to discriminate the downlink from the AC..... What would happen? Amongst the possibilities we probably won’t find one being the AC would fly off uncontrollably.

 

[Thoraldus]

Let’s say the phone running Android was able to compromise the phantom AND Mavic controllers (it is claimed the issue occurred with both models). To the extent the receiver was unable to discriminate the downlink from the AC..... What would happen? Among the possibilities we probably won’t find one being the AC would fly off uncontrollably.

Probably not. You would hope the AC would fail safe into RTH or Hover when it loses the controller.

BTW - I solved this for myself with the purchase of Crystalsky - I had several disconnects with loss of control when using a Pixel 2 XL unless it was put in airplane mode - zero control issues to date with Crystalsky. YMMV

 

[ruggb]

that's about as smart as answering your phone while flying

OR DRIVING

 

[WithTheBirds]

Probably not. You would hope the AC would fail safe into RTH or Hover when it loses the controller.

BTW - I solved this for myself with the purchase of Crystalsky - I had several disconnects with loss of control when using a Pixel 2 XL unless it was put in airplane mode - zero control issues to date with Crystalsky. YMMV

There you go- RTH seems the most likely and expected outcome. We are no closer to having a reasonable explanation to the OP’s claimed observations.

There is a difference between loss of control and uncommanded behaviour. Absent evidence to demonstrate otherwise it is likely that at best we have the the first scenario here.

 

[John Gowland]

Just posted this to PhantomPilots

I agree Brojon, I seem to be the only one to have had and issue with GA. That has to lead me to believe there is an issue with my particular gear/set up. Although I have yet to see someone with a SG 9+ test it. It has been mentioned that both GA and the DJI go 4 app take up huge resources on processor and memory.
I have tired it in a "desert"

and it went crazy again, not on this vid.
But to be honest I have given up on experiments. Way to scary.
I have done some experiments with the props off and there is an odd thing with my side micro usb port on the Mavic 2 r/c. When ever I use this port connecting to the M2 r/c the camera always points up, no matter what I do with the left rocker. I tried this today.
Using the underside standard USB port on the r/c connecting to a SG 9+ or 8+ there is never an issue. Although I stil disable GA.
What is more perplexing is it has recently happened to my P4P v2.
DJI "field engineers" or "R&D team" are still trying to fathom out what happend.
Now I just turn my phone off while I fly with the Epson BT 300 glasses which are far superior to any device where you have to look up and down all the time.

 

[WithTheBirds]

Just posted this to PhantomPilots

I agree Brojon, I seem to be the only one to have had and issue with GA. That has to lead me to believe there is an issue with my particular gear/set up. Although I have yet to see someone with a SG 9+ test it. It has been mentioned that both GA and the DJI go 4 app take up huge resources on processor and memory.
I have tired it in a "desert"

and it went crazy again, not on this vid.
But to be honest I have given up on experiments. Way to scary.
I have done some experiments with the props off and there is an odd thing with my side micro usb port on the Mavic 2 r/c. When ever I use this port connecting to the M2 r/c the camera always points up, no matter what I do with the left rocker. I tried this today.
Using the underside standard USB port on the r/c connecting to a SG 9+ or 8+ there is never an issue. Although I stil disable GA.
What is more perplexing is it has recently happened to my P4P v2.
DJI "field engineers" or "R&D team" are still trying to fathom out what happend.
Now I just turn my phone off while I fly with the Epson BT 300 glasses which are far superior to any device where you have to look up and down all the time.

I wouldn't be waiting on DJI to solve this mystery.

Yes or no question. Did the problem you are concerned about ever occur with the S9 phone running GA connected to your Mavic or Phantom controllers? If your answer is NO please consider modifying the thread title and either move on or apply some serious effort to trying to find the actual cause of the issue.

For people who might have missed it- it seems from what has been revealed to date in the threads here that the device running GA was not being used to fly the drone. It wasn't connected to the controller. The OP was flying with BT-300 AR glasses which have their own Android OS that supports GO4 and attaches directly to the controller.

Btw- why post a video where the claimed issue didn't occur- do you not have the video and or a log file for any of the tests you conducted recently in the desert? It is hard to accept that if your true intent was to replicate the issue you wouldn't have had video. And you say it happened during the tests..... Lets see the logs so there is some hope of an explanation. If not lets move on...... PLEASE....

 

[MikeFreeland]

If you want to surf the internet, land the drone and do it. Multi tasking while in control of (according to you) a DANGEROUS aircraft is an irresponsible act. It is not the phone or the aircraft that is creating the danger, it is YOUR irresponsible actions. Argue all you want, but i am right.

No argument here. Wrong people often need to be right even in the face of annoying factual details. So, in that context, yes, you're right, but you aren't listening, and continue with each post to be more acerbic and presumptuous in your superiority, neither of which is necessary here.

He was NOT surfing the internet, he was engaging a feature (OK Google) to accomplish a task which otherwise would have required him to take his attention off the drone and call up a settings screen, make an adjustment, then get back to Go4. THAT would have been irresponsible. He said "OK Google, turn the screen brightness to maximum." You call that surfing the net? Irresponsible? Good lord, you need to get a drink and calm down. Sometimes one likes to see his screen in unexpectedly bright or dappled light. (I didn't know you could do that with DA -- thanks for the tip -- I'll try that as soon as I land my MA.)

I can find no fault in what he tried with GA, or even classify it as a mistake. He had no reason to think that his screen adjustment would have the effect it did. His cautionary post is enthusiastically justified.

As to his "flying over people" -- of course he wasn't flying over people. Look at where he was flying it - huge field. An out-of-control quad, however, doesn't know nor care where the hell it is when it goes mad. THERE's the danger. Dropping randomly into a crowd watching a street performer would be horrible. And stop with the statistical dismissals. You willing to try it?

Can we just thank this fellow for his post, regardless of their redundancy? It may not affect the rest of us, but maybe it does. We don't need to use any other apps on a phone while flying, and this just might be a great example of why.

Thunderdrone - I'm disappointed in your snarky (imo) comparison of baseball and tennis ball impacts with that of a drone. You seem to have forgotten that a baseball doesn't have sharp, angrily spinning blades which arrive before the mass of the impacting body. Those blades are there only to clear the way for the 2.9-joule impact of the drone's body.

Thank you Mr. Gowland.

 

[Amarand]

He was NOT surfing the internet, he was engaging a feature (OK Google) to accomplish a task which otherwise would have required him to take his attention off the drone and call up a settings screen, make an adjustment, then get back to Go4. THAT would have been irresponsible. He said "OK Google, turn the screen brightness to maximum." You call that surfing the net? Irresponsible? Good lord, you need to get a drink and calm down. Sometimes one likes to see his screen in unexpectedly bright or dappled light. (I didn't know you could do that with DA -- thanks for the tip -- I'll try that as soon as I land my MA.)

From experience, virtual assistants like OK Google and Siri often get it wrong. I don't want to take that risk. (Risk is always a personal thing to accept, mitigate, etc.)

Personally, I would figure out the easiest, quickest way to adjust the brightness control of one's phone that lacked ambiguity. To me, that's learning how your phone works, and selecting the quickest/safest way (in my case, it's iOS Command Center) before you take off.

Certainly voice recognition/virtual assistants are far more buggy (currently) than a swipe-down from the upper-right, a drag up, and another drag up. DJI Go is covered up for less than a second (it's technically still running in the background), and I've done this a few times recently while flying (low, near my home, as a test) and bringing up the Command Center is flawless.

Granted, it does cover the DJI Go app for that one second, but a "Hey, Siri" can take far longer, and have much more confusing results.

I think at this point in the smart phone's evolution, it's far wiser to learn the shortcut keys for your operating system (again, iOS Command Center is fantastic for adjusting volume, brightness, lots of useful features - I'm sure Android OS has something similar) than to use a voice-activated virtual assistant in less than ideal conditions (drones are loud, wind causes issues, you may not have WiFi and virtual assistants require Internet connection to function, normally).

So many points against using a voice-recognition-based virtual assistant. Then again, I come from a long line of people who prefer to use function keys on the keyboard, or physical dials to adjust brightness.

 

[ac0j]

No argument here. Wrong people often need to be right even in the face of annoying factual details. So, in that context, yes, you're right, but you aren't listening, and continue with each post to be more acerbic and presumptuous in your superiority, neither of which is necessary here.

****snip******

Thunderdrone - I'm disappointed in your snarky (imo) comparison of baseball and tennis ball impacts with that of a drone. You seem to have forgotten that a baseball doesn't have sharp, angrily spinning blades which arrive before the mass of the impacting body. Those blades are there only to clear the way for the 2.9-joule impact of the drone's body.

Thank you Mr. Gowland.

No question where the superiority complex actually lies, I bow to your vast wisdom!
The video I saw, he is wearing moverio(?) goggles, if you adjust the phone brightness does it adjust those? I think NOT.
Thanks for your input. But as is stated several times, he seems to be the ONLY one reporting this issue.

 

[Amarand]

No question where the superiority complex actually lies, I bow to your vast wisdom!
The video I saw, he is wearing moverio(?) goggles, if you adjust the phone brightness does it adjust those? I think NOT.
Thanks for your input. But as is stated several times, he seems to be the ONLY one reporting this issue.

Also, and this may be a dumb question, but without a co-pilot or observer, are you really observing VLOS with your craft, wearing goggles? I guess I should watch the video, but I've heard it goes off the rails, and I've been trying to focus more on videos with good droning behavior, not bad behavior.

 

[JoeDimwit]

I’ll just say this once... when I’m driving my car, and need to send a text(actually need, not just want), I pull off the road, put the car in park, send my message, then resume driving. I have been known to stop and park to make a phone call that was going to require significant concentration.

If you need to adjust the settings on your screen, put the drone on the ground. It can’t crash if it’s already stopped.

 

[ac0j]

Also, and this may be a dumb question, but without a co-pilot or observer, are you really observing VLOS with your craft, wearing goggles? I guess I should watch the video, but I've heard it goes off the rails, and I've been trying to focus more on videos with good droning behavior, not bad behavior.

That is a very weird thing about the fAA rules, What I have found and read specifically says NO you cannot maintain VLOS with goggles, and that an observer is NOT a substitute when VLOS is discussed, and with that I decided that flying with goggles is NOT allowed, but some one posted another article from somewhere else that states a pilot CAN wear goggles IF he has an observer...........
From the part 336 main page;

It is important to review the rules for flying your drone, prior to your first flight.

• Fly only for fun or recreation
• Follow the safety guidelines of a model aircraft community-based organization
• Fly at or below 400 feet when in uncontrolled airspace (Class G)
• Fly within visual line-of-sight, meaning you as the drone operator use your own eyes and needed contacts or glasses (without binoculars), to ensure you can see your drone at all times.
• Never fly near other aircraft.
• Never fly over groups of people, public events, or stadiums full of people.
• Never fly near or over emergency response efforts.

 

[Burk]

I rarely post. Your post made me smile about impact energy. But I love riding my Harley. I was cruising down the highway, at 65 mph, when a sparrow decided he wanted to fly into me a give me a heart punch to the chest! That little birdie knocked the wind out of me! I had on leathers and all the paraphernalia us Harley riders wear.)) I had to stop and catch my breath for a few. Got to my hotel room that night, took a shower and had a bruise in the middle of chest.)) Teasing you a bit, how many Joules did the impact of the sparrow produce? Funny post! Oh, I prefer the K.C. Royals.))

Go Royals!

 

[Simmo]

Also, and this may be a dumb question, but without a co-pilot or observer, are you really observing VLOS with your craft, wearing goggles? I guess I should watch the video, but I've heard it goes off the rails, and I've been trying to focus more on videos with good droning behavior, not bad behavior.

You need to watch the video. Moverio aren't your typical goggles, more like glasses with a heads up display, so you can maintain vlos.

 

[ac0j]

You need to watch the video. Moverio aren't your typical goggles, more like glasses with a heads up display, so you can maintain vlos.

Maybe, I have never used them, but I wouldn't call that "Unobstructed" vlos, It looks like the FAA doesnt think so Either?
Another tidbit from the FAA rules site;

By definition, a model aircraft must be “flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft.” P.L. 112-95, section 336(c)(2). 1 Based on the plain language of the statute, the FAA interprets this requirement to mean that: (1) the aircraft must be visible at all times to the operator; (2) that the operator must use his or her own natural vision (which includes vision corrected by standard eyeglasses or contact lenses) to observe the aircraft; and (3) people other than the operator may not be used in lieu of the operator for maintaining visual line of sight. Under the criteria above, visual line of sight would mean that the operator has an unobstructed view of the model aircraft. To ensure that the operator has the best view of the aircraft, the statutory requirement would preclude the use of vision-enhancing devices, such as binoculars, night vision goggles, powered vision magnifying devices, and goggles designed to provide a “first-person view” from the model. 2 Such devices would limit the operator’s field of view thereby 1 For purposes of the visual line of sight requirement, “operator” means the person manipulating the model aircraft’s controls. 2 The FAA is aware that at least one community-based organization permits “first person view” (FPV) operations during which the hobbyist controls the aircraft while wearing goggles that display images transmitted from a camera mounted in the front of the model aircraft. While the intent of FPV is to provide 9 reducing his or her ability to see-and-avoid other aircraft in the area. Additionally, some of these devices could dramatically increase the distance at which an operator could see the aircraft, rendering the statutory visual-line-of-sight requirements meaningless. Finally, based on the plain language of the statute, which says that aircraft must be “flown within the visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft,” an operator could not rely on another person to satisfy the visual line of sight requirement. See id. (emphasis added). While the statute would not preclude using an observer to augment the safety of the operation, the operator must be able to view the aircraft at all times