That info is in the manual, isn't it? That's why my earlier post was to RTFM!!!! But he is too stubborn to read!!While I hesitate to get involved with such a toxic person, I think I may know what is going on.
The Mavic 3 waypoint implementation uses a Bezier curve to define the waypoint path where the curve passed through the control points. Consider the mission pictured below if it were rotated into a vertical plane. One can see how when traversing from waypoint 3 and through waypoint 4 that the path continues to reach a lower altitude.
Without seeing any details on the OP's mission, this is only a guess. However, depending on the configuration of the OP's mission, this may explain the apparent drop in height below the lower waypoint.
View attachment 164964
If you knew it was in the manual, why didn't you point out the specific passage that applies in this case? I assume you're talking about your post #4? I just read the owners manual RTH section, and it says nothing about this problem. Sorry.That info is in the manual, isn't it? That's why my earlier post was to RTFM!!!! But he is too stubborn to read!!
You can't read?If you knew it was in the manual, why didn't you point out the specific passage that applies in this case?
I just read it, and I would say you're the one that can't read, or understand what he's reading!You can't read?
Try post #23. Apologies will be accepted.I just read it, and I would say you're the one that can't read, or understand what he's reading!
Ok, but that still, does not specifically say, that the waypoint flight will go below the waypoint altitude, does it?Try post #23. Apologies will be accepted.
No, but it wouldn't make sense for DJI to also use Bezier curves for changes in elevation where such curves could lead to a lower elevation than programmed, leading to exactly your result: potential obstacle avoidance leading to RTH and cancellation of the mission. DJ Wes is offering a possibility, but a speculative one that would result in changes of a few feet, not 50 feet in elevation. Also, keep in mind that the drone is still alwayprogrammed to fly through each waypoint, even though the path between two points may be a Bezier curve.Would it violate form rules, if I sent a DJ Wes's explanation, in his post number 51, in an email to DJI?
See my post #70 above.Here I try to show what is happening. So pretend that waypoint 1 high, and waypoint 4 is as low as you want to go. You can see with the curve, that it will actually go lower than waypoint 4.
View attachment 165077
Agreed, and "the aircraft altitude may decrease during the flight" might even be Chinglish for "beware of rising ground level below the aircraft" when programming waypoints because they are always relative to your launch point, and not the ground level below the aircraft! "Aircraft altitude" might mean the distance between the aircraft and the ground below it, while still flying level.Ok, but that still, does not specifically say, that the waypoint flight will go below the waypoint altitude, does it?
When they said "the aircraft altitude may decrease during the flight" if they had said "the aircraft altitude may decrease, below the waypoint altitude, during the flight" that would be alerting us to the problem. Maybe that's what they meant, but not exactly what they said. Maybe because they're not native English speakers. So if you think that that alerts pilots to the problem of going below the waypoint altitude fine, but I don't think it does.
Lots of stuff DJI does dosen't make sense! I was thinking the same thing, that even if you're curving the vertical flight, it's not very smart to go below the altitude of the waypoint. In the future, I will put 3 waypoints where the waypoint flight descends significantly.it wouldn't make sense for DJI to also use Bezier curves
It still is programmed to fly through every waypoint in 3D, regardless of any Bezier curve, so that cannot explain what you have reported, which is that one waypoint is set at 150 feet and the next at 100 feet, and the drone arrives at the second waypoint 50 feet lower than the set 100 feet. That is verbatim what you have reported.Lots of stuff DJI does dosen't make sense! I was thinking the same thing, that even if you're curving the vertical flight, it's not very smart to go below the altitude of the waypoint. In the future, I will put 3 waypoints where the waypoint flight descends significantly.
Not for everybody for sure.Lots of stuff DJI does dosen't make sense!
I was thinking the same thing, that even if you're curving the vertical flight, it's not very smart to go below the altitude of the waypoint.
If you reread Post #51, it only hypothesizes that the Bezier curve also works in 3D, which I find unlikely, but, in any event, that cannot explain what the OP is reporting, which is that the mission is not flying through the waypoints in 3D, but arriving at them 50 feet lower than set. He sets waypoint 1 at 150' and waypoint 2 at 100’, but the drone arrives at waypoint 2 at 50’, 50’ below the set elevation. Assuming that is an accurate statement, Bezier curves between waypoints are not relevant, even if they take place vertically, which I doubt. The mission is still supposed to fly through each waypoint in 3D space, within the accuracy of it's positioning system.Not for everybody for sure.
Do some homework, that's the way with interpolation of waypoints. There is a choice to make, and DJI decided to plan the mission with a path through the waypoints with Bézier interpolation, with the effects @DJI Wes described in #51.
The alternative would be "The Litchi way" with B-spline interpolation, where the drone never exceeds the imaginary boundary of straight lines between waypoints, but where a curved path may never hits any of them, which means for interpolation, the drone flys curves tighter as planned.
Some would say, that's not very smart because a path shouldn't be flown tighter than projected with waypoints, and I personally agree.
But whatever the alternative, in the end you just have to be smart enough yourself to take the interpolated path into account, instead of blaming others.
Where did he describe that? Not in #16.the OP is reporting, which is that the mission is not flying through the waypoints in 3D, but arriving at them 50 feet lower than set. He sets waypoint 1 at 150' and waypoint 2 at 100’, but the drone arrives at waypoint 2 at 50’, 50’ below the set elevation.
Tested that today, and it does the same in Z-Axis as expected.If you reread Post #51, it only hypothesizes that the Bezier curve also works in 3D, which I find unlikely…
Post #5, but to your point, post #16 was rather snarky!Where did he describe that? Not in #16.
But regardless, I do not speculate on such claims. When it comes to crashes, I only get really involved if the flight log can be viewed at Airdata, for example.
Experience has shown that the problem is usually less with the drone than with the person on the sticks.
And to rule that out, you have to see the original flight log at least, and in this case the Mission Plan too. Otherwise it's all just speculation.
Very well. Thanks for converting the speculation into confirmation and disproving my doubts. That could also explain the DJI warning that the aircraft may fly lower than set.Tested that today, and it does the same in Z-Axis as expected.
Straight path of around 400m lateral distance, 4 Waypoints. The 1st at 50m altitude, 2nd and 3rd at 15m, the 4th at 50m again. The drone went through all waypoints, and down to 11m between waypoint 2 and 3.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.