4 ms·

The Inspire has never been intended to fly with goggles. It has a dedicated "pilot view" FPV camera, but in normal usage it's typically operated by a crew of tw

by olex 3y ago

The Inspire has never been intended to fly with goggles. It has a dedicated "pilot view" FPV camera, but in normal usage it's typically operated by a crew of two, a pilot flying line-of-sight and/or via FPV camera and a dedicated main camera operator, both using similar/identical remote controllers with a display attached (this is typically either a large tablet or a dedicated "proper" camera monitor).

ShadowBanThis01 3y ago
Why would it have to be "intended" for that? If someone wants to do it, why prevent it? They say outright that the thing uses the same generation of wireless transmission ("O3") as their current goggles and stand-alone camera & transmitter. Not to mention that they make a big deal out of being able to send video to two destinations at once, ideal for a feed going to goggles. Is the drone "intended" to be carried around by hand while filming? It doesn't have handles for that, and yet they show a guy doing it in their promo video.
- the__alchemist 3y ago
  Project requirements / intended use is important. This is like asking why Betaflight doesn't support automated flight profiles or loiter. It's not a bad question or unreasonable request, but can be answered as "out of scope / not a commonly-requested feature".
  - ShadowBanThis01 3y ago
    That answer would be hard to validate here. It already has the necessary wireless-transmission feature. And if the feature weren't desired, why would it exist on ANY drone? Look up "cinewhoop" drones. DJI even makes a drone that addresses this market. It just doesn't have the image quality that this one does. I'd say simply supporting an already-existing DJI video receiver is way more of an expected use case than carrying a drone around in your hands while filming.
    - the__alchemist 3y ago
      > And if the feature weren't desired, why would it exist on ANY drone? Different market segments. To draw earlier on my analogy, loiter and automated flight exist in iNav, PX4, and Ardupilot. Are you the target market for this product? Do you plan to buy one? Have you talked to people who are? Do they want goggles support?
      - ShadowBanThis01 3y ago
        Yes, I am. If it supports goggles, I will most likely buy it. And I did get a response from B&H to a question about it today, saying that many customers have indeed inquired about this capability but there is no information from DJI about it yet. Here's the exact statement from B&H: "Unfortunately DJI has not provided further insight as to whether these two will be compatible. We hope they are, with a provided firmware update in some months, as customers have really desired another non-racing fpv headset." For what that's worth...
- tshaddox 3y ago
  I don’t know. If the drone happens to have Bluetooth and a speaker, should it just obviously support being used as a Bluetooth speaker just in case someone wants to do that?
  - ShadowBanThis01 3y ago
    Um, yes, since it was built with those functions.
- tonyarkles 3y ago
  I’m not well-versed in the UAS laws globally, but in Canada you basically need to have a spotter if the PIC doesn’t have unaided line of sight to the aircraft[1]. DJI tends to go above and beyond the actual legal limitations when it comes to aviation safety, so this doesn’t surprise me a whole lot. It’s often frustrating; my Mavic Mini 1 often prevents me from doing perfectly legal things in my own yard because I live pretty close to an airport. I can unlock it, but last I checked it required using a laptop to fill out some forms and was quite a bit more complicated than the usual 30-second setup that I love. [1] Aircraft less than 250g do not have the same regulations, which is why the TinyWhoop family of aircraft are super popular here for FPV racing.
  - bitwidget 3y ago
    Given the use case for this drone (medium-high budget media production) it's extremely unlikely that a person is going to be flying this drone without a spotter. Not having support for their own FPV googles on a $17,000 drone is kind of disappointing.

by olex 3y ago

ShadowBanThis01 3y ago

Why would it have to be "intended" for that? If someone wants to do it, why prevent it? They say outright that the thing uses the same generation of wireless transmission ("O3") as their current goggles and stand-alone camera & transmitter. Not to mention that they make a big deal out of being able to send video to two destinations at once, ideal for a feed going to goggles. Is the drone "intended" to be carried around by hand while filming? It doesn't have handles for that, and yet they show a guy doing it in their promo video.

the__alchemist 3y ago
Project requirements / intended use is important. This is like asking why Betaflight doesn't support automated flight profiles or loiter. It's not a bad question or unreasonable request, but can be answered as "out of scope / not a commonly-requested feature".
- ShadowBanThis01 3y ago
  That answer would be hard to validate here. It already has the necessary wireless-transmission feature. And if the feature weren't desired, why would it exist on ANY drone? Look up "cinewhoop" drones. DJI even makes a drone that addresses this market. It just doesn't have the image quality that this one does. I'd say simply supporting an already-existing DJI video receiver is way more of an expected use case than carrying a drone around in your hands while filming.
  - the__alchemist 3y ago
    > And if the feature weren't desired, why would it exist on ANY drone? Different market segments. To draw earlier on my analogy, loiter and automated flight exist in iNav, PX4, and Ardupilot. Are you the target market for this product? Do you plan to buy one? Have you talked to people who are? Do they want goggles support?
    - ShadowBanThis01 3y ago
      Yes, I am. If it supports goggles, I will most likely buy it. And I did get a response from B&H to a question about it today, saying that many customers have indeed inquired about this capability but there is no information from DJI about it yet. Here's the exact statement from B&H: "Unfortunately DJI has not provided further insight as to whether these two will be compatible. We hope they are, with a provided firmware update in some months, as customers have really desired another non-racing fpv headset." For what that's worth...
tshaddox 3y ago
I don’t know. If the drone happens to have Bluetooth and a speaker, should it just obviously support being used as a Bluetooth speaker just in case someone wants to do that?
- ShadowBanThis01 3y ago
  Um, yes, since it was built with those functions.
tonyarkles 3y ago
I’m not well-versed in the UAS laws globally, but in Canada you basically need to have a spotter if the PIC doesn’t have unaided line of sight to the aircraft[1]. DJI tends to go above and beyond the actual legal limitations when it comes to aviation safety, so this doesn’t surprise me a whole lot. It’s often frustrating; my Mavic Mini 1 often prevents me from doing perfectly legal things in my own yard because I live pretty close to an airport. I can unlock it, but last I checked it required using a laptop to fill out some forms and was quite a bit more complicated than the usual 30-second setup that I love. [1] Aircraft less than 250g do not have the same regulations, which is why the TinyWhoop family of aircraft are super popular here for FPV racing.
- bitwidget 3y ago
  Given the use case for this drone (medium-high budget media production) it's extremely unlikely that a person is going to be flying this drone without a spotter. Not having support for their own FPV googles on a $17,000 drone is kind of disappointing.