Re: [Paparazzi-devel] Lisa/M questions

[antoine drouin]

congratulations !

Why not make a "records" section on the wiki ? maybe next to the
"competitions" and "applications" ones

On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Reto Büttner <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hi Poine,
>
> I can only thank you for all your great work for the spectacular
> project. I am sure you are making the right decisions concerning
> hardware development.
>
> Did you know that my eHawk 1500 equipped with a TWOG perfectely
> overflew two 4000m peaks in Switzerland:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_m8ZR9XWuQ4
>
> Cheers, Reto
>
> 2011/6/8 antoine drouin <address@hidden>:
>> Hi Christophe
>>
>> Schematics will be released ASAP, CAD files will come later. When ? I
>> don't know.... Worst case would be when Joby Robotics releases a new
>> version of the board, but I hope it will be sooner than that.
>> Now, why do I have the feeling that we get attacked all the time on
>> that choice ? The "beginning of closedsource-only APs in paparazzi"
>> does not sound very neutral to me. Maybe I'm just overreacting, but
>> you seem to be implying that there would be some evil hidden
>> motivations behind that choice. For you information, Lisa/L CAD files
>> have been released (
>> http://svn.savannah.nongnu.org/viewvc/paparazzi-hardware/trunk/lisa/v1.1/?root=paparazzi
>> ) 3 month ago.
>> I had already written a mail to the mailing list to explain the
>> motivations behind not releasing CAD file together with new boards
>> when all the fuss about about lisa/L happened but renounced to send it
>> in order to avoid fueling the flameware.
>> I've started this project together with Pascal 8 years ago and since
>> then I have dedicated my time to try and make it successful. I'm
>> utterly convinced of the benefits of open source, but observing how
>> Paparazzi grew over time, I came to the conclusion that hardware is a
>> bit different than software... "gcc tiny.brd" is not going to make a
>> board magically appear on your desktop. I'll list here some of my
>> arguments in favor of releasing CAD files after the board is mature.
>>
>> 1- Unlike software, where an unskilled user can type make and get a
>> piece of complex software to successfully build, assembling hardware
>> requires tools and skills. Providing gerbers and BOM have lured a
>> bunch of new users into believing otherwise and has created tons of
>> frustration. I've myself fixed a number of badly assembled boards and
>> I even recall that while helping debugging a board ( so after
>> assembly), discovering that the person had manufactured two layers
>> PCBs instead of four layers. As the technology of the autopilot
>> increases, this problem becomes more and more important.
>>
>> 2- The success of the project depends on the availability of
>> affordable hardware. The price of hardware is directly and
>> exponentially dependent on the number of manufactured units. If ten
>> persons manufacture 10 boards each, the cost will be much higher than
>> if one person manufactures 100.
>>
>> 3- Last and not least, the quality of assembly also depends very much
>> on the number of manufactured units. Good quality can only be achieved
>> through the use of automated placing and soldering, and those
>> processes can only be used if the number of units reach a certain
>> amount.
>>
>>  You may think that my arguments are wrong and I'm ready to debate
>> them with you, but questioning my ethics hurts. I, as well as all the
>> Paparazzi developers, only have one goal in mind, the success of this
>> project.
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>> Poine
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Christoph Niemann
>> <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> thank you very much for your replies.
>>>
>>> @Eric: The reason why not to use Spektrum is the following:
>>> I have 2.4Ghz video-gear, so if I'm using it, I have to use 35Mhz. My 
>>> 2.4Ghz stuff is JETI-equipment, so I'm using a receiver, that has been 
>>> modified to output the PPM-Signal.
>>>
>>> So the first question is solved, PPM should work. What remains is the 
>>> question of the license. Will the shematics (perhaps the eagle-files) be 
>>> available, like at the old APs, or are the Lisa-APs the beginning of 
>>> closedsource-only APs in paparazzi? Please don't get me wrong, but this is 
>>> really important to me for making some strategic descisions and might be 
>>> for some more guys too.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Christoph
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Datum: Wed, 8 Jun 2011 07:58:45 +0200
>>>> Von: antoine drouin <address@hidden>
>>>> An: address@hidden
>>>> Betreff: Re: [Paparazzi-devel] Lisa/M questions
>>>
>>>> ppm on lisa/M works, and so does it on lisa/L
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> Poine
>>>>
>>>> ps: on lisa/M, PPM is at the moment sharing a line with servo6 (
>>>> because it's the way it was wired on lisa/L ). It would be trivial to
>>>> adapt the driver to use another line. look at
>>>> sw/airborne/arch/stm32/subsystems/radio_control/ppm_arch.c
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
>>> address@hidden
>>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
>> address@hidden
>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
>