Recent content by Bob Coughlan

Autel just replied to me on one of their latest YouTube videos I raised the same issue about altitude vs overlap on the EVO 1 and they stated that they’re working on an update for EVO 1. At least there’s been a response, which I appreciate, and that gives me some hope.

Good point and positive thinking. There is an opportunity to hone the hands-on flying & camera skills It would still be nice to have some properly working automated features seeing as it’s the 21st century ?

Exactly, and also when features of the software simply don’t work as they should. This is not a case of personal preference, it’s a case of calculations made by the code being obviously incorrect This is explained in my post regarding Altitude vs Overlap This works properly for EVO 2, but is...

I’d really like to remain hopeful that the EVO will eventually get some much needed updates, specifically to its side of Autel Explorer I just wish Autel would at least respond, even briefly, to comments on their YouTube videos, or to messages sent via their website. But in my experience it’s...

Ok now I understand. I think I am leaning in that direction too

With respect, I’m not sure what that means

I underwtand what you’re saying (regarding EVO vs X-Star) but in this case it’s slightly different, because 1)EVO and EVO II use the same app i.e. Autel Explorer (granted, there’s obviously different code for each drone series), and 2) There are features of Autel Explorer (for EVO) which...

Oh well, here’s hoping that EVO 1 gets some much needed updates soon

Good point. I’d really like an explanation about the technical reasons why EVO 1 cannot currently handle the various mission planning / waypoint capabilities a) that it previously had, and b) that the EVO II has, such as forward overlap (and a properly working side overlap which changes with...

Considering that it was the popularity of the X-Star which enables the EVO, and the popularity of the EVO which enables the EVO II, this is rather discouraging. Not to discount the X-Star situation, but the fact that the EVO 1 and EVO II use the same software, but the EVO 1 side of the software...

It would be a real pity if this is how they see it I’m willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that they don’t want to alienate their customers by essentially abandoning the EVO 1 before it reached its full potential Let’s hope EVO 1 gets some much needed mission planning upgrades

Am I being overly suspicious or is this a kind of ‘planned obsolescence’ program for the EVO 1? I’ve been focused on the rectangular / polygon missions with my EVO 1, (and there are issues with that side of Autel Explorer as well, which I’ve mentioned in another post) and I have not flown...

I just realized that the Mission Planner for EVO II does exactly what I’d expect it to do for EVO I, i.e. it spreads out the opposing paths of the mission if the altitude is set higher, but it appears the EVO I Mission Planner has not yet caught up Maybe some EVO II users have read my post and...

Thanks for the helpful advice, and the link It appears you’ve confirmed my suspicion that Autel Explorer’s Mission Planner is not working as it should, because if I increase mission altitude, but keep the same overlap setting, I should see an increase in the distance between the opposing legs...

I see that it defaults to 70% when first setting up the mission, but if one adjusts the altitude (while the overlap setting remains unchanged), it’s reasonable to conclude that we should expect to see a change in the distance between the opposing legs of the mission path. My question relates to...