Tarot gimbal for Solo drone

Joined
Dec 6, 2017
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Age
74
I found out that you can get a gimbal mount for the Solo for the 3 ax tarot gimbal. I want to know if you will be able to control all the functions of the gimbal from the controller. Also can you receive video from any other camera besides GoPro. I am a complete newbie to the drone world and need lots of help. Thanks
 
the solo mod club on face book has several people flying Zcam e1s to gopro 5s
I will be trying to adapt a walkera g-3s to my DIY flying a solo IMX6 on a Pixhawk 2.1 DIY
 
The answer is no.
There is no Mavlink control option for Tarot gimbals. Any other gimbal than the original 3DR is a major DIY project. There are many people working on third party gimbals but none are a plug and play solution.
 
Mavlink not required. Any conventional gimbal with conventional pwm pitch control will work just fine in both normal flight and smart shots.

The solo gimbal is required for GoPro control. With any other gimbals, you have to turn the camera on and start recording before you arm for take off. There is no gopro control without the solo gimbal.

Live video will work with any gimbal and camera as long as the camera has a compatible micro HDMI port. You need your own flexible HDMI ribbon cable to plug directly into the camera.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ralph E. Johnson
Mavlink not required. Any conventional gimbal with conventional pwm pitch control will work just fine in both normal flight and smart shots.

The solo gimbal is required for GoPro control. With any other gimbals, you have to turn the camera on and start recording before you arm for take off. There is no gopro control without the solo gimbal.

Live video will work with any gimbal and camera as long as the camera has a compatible micro HDMI port. You need your own flexible HDMI ribbon cable to plug directly into the camera.

Come on Matt the OP is a self described "I am a complete newbie to the drone world". How do you connect pitch control with a third party gimbal? Does it take pulling the Solo apart? Does it require soldering? Can he just buy any third party gimbal and plug it in?
 
I didn't say he was capable of doing it. I said mavlink is not required. But none the less, you solder one wire onto the main board servo 6 terminal at the accessory bay, and set one parameter to enable gimbal pitch on servo 6. That's remarkably easier than a mavlink gimbal, which as of right now, requires non-existent software and firmware changes to work properly. Soldering one wire is a lot easier than debugging firmware...

Down the road, a mavlink gimbal with a plug and play connector to the Solo's existing connector would be ideal. But for that to be useful, corresponding firmware changes are needed in the old solo ArduCopter, the new ArduCopter 3.5, and the gimbal controllers from storm or alexmos. None of this exists today. PWM exists today :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Saijin_Naib
I didn't say he was capable of doing it. I said mavlink is not required. But none the less, you solder one wire onto the main board servo 6 terminal at the accessory bay, and set one parameter to enable gimbal pitch on servo 6. That's remarkably easier than a mavlink gimbal, which as of right now, requires non-existent software and firmware changes to work properly. Soldering one wire is a lot easier than debugging firmware...

Down the road, a mavlink gimbal with a plug and play connector to the Solo's existing connector would be ideal. But for that to be useful, corresponding firmware changes are needed in the old solo ArduCopter, the new ArduCopter 3.5, and the gimbal controllers from storm or alexmos. None of this exists today. PWM exists today :)

I am perfectly aware of all of that but the OP is not. I was trying to advise him that it is not an easy job for a "I am a complete newbie to the drone world and need lots of help." without going into a lot of details.
 
so I registered to just be able to respond to this:

>But for that to be useful, corresponding firmware changes are needed in the old solo ArduCopter, the new >ArduCopter 3.5, and the gimbal controllers from storm or alexmos. None of this exists today.

yes ... BUT:

STorM32 is perfectly ready for it since long, and the required code changes in solo ArduCopter are a total piece of cake and would take just tiny efforts of cooperation to be done.

So, yes, you are right, this doesn't exist today. But it easily could exist tomorrow. And in fact it could easily have existed already yesterday.

IMHO, you exaggerate the problem and blur the source of the problem.

PWM and Solo ... the perfect match

Have fun
Olli
 
  • Like
Reactions: XevetS
I found out that you can get a gimbal mount for the Solo for the 3 ax tarot gimbal. I want to know if you will be able to control all the functions of the gimbal from the controller. Also can you receive video from any other camera besides GoPro. I am a complete newbie to the drone world and need lots of help. Thanks

Rob you kinda got in the middle of a side discussion.
The correct answer to your question is yes but whether you can do it depends on your interest in unsupported DIY projects. Which I love but you may just be after something that can work for you today.

All the information is on the web on how to do it but not all in one place and not easy to find. So as many DIY projects it takes soldering skills and a bit of research.

Cheers and Good Luck
 
so I registered to just be able to respond to this:

>But for that to be useful, corresponding firmware changes are needed in the old solo ArduCopter, the new >ArduCopter 3.5, and the gimbal controllers from storm or alexmos. None of this exists today.

yes ... BUT:

STorM32 is perfectly ready for it since long, and the required code changes in solo ArduCopter are a total piece of cake and would take just tiny efforts of cooperation to be done.

So, yes, you are right, this doesn't exist today. But it easily could exist tomorrow. And in fact it could easily have existed already yesterday.

IMHO, you exaggerate the problem and blur the source of the problem.

PWM and Solo ... the perfect match

Have fun
Olli

I have to add that when the author of a system like the STorM32 gimbal controller offers to fix, at no cost, the problems that exist, that were not introduced by him, and yet can't get even a reply to his request for assistance in integrating his fixes into the exist code it is very discouraging.
 
I have to add that when the author of a system like the STorM32 gimbal controller offers to fix, at no cost, the problems that exist, that were not introduced by him, and yet can't get even a reply to his request for assistance in integrating his fixes into the exist code it is very discouraging.
Good news. That hasn't happened! I've been discussing this with Ollie for over a month now both in open forum posts and by private message. So please cease posting total crap accusations.

Are you volunteering to make the required changes and test it Mike? Or are you just complaining that someone else hasn't dropped everything to do it for you?
 
The solo gimbal is required for GoPro control. With any other gimbals, you have to turn the camera on and start recording before you arm for take off. There is no gopro control without the solo gimbal.
It's certainly possible to have Gopro control w/o Mavlink and a 3rd party gimbal - working on it ;-)
 
It's certainly possible to have Gopro control w/o Mavlink and a 3rd party gimbal - working on it ;-)
Let me be more specific. GoPro control as it is currently implemented on the Solo and it's applications requires the Solo gimbal and it's mavlink connection. So if the question is, can the existing method of GoPro control be used on a custom/aftermarket gimbal, the answer is soundly no. This is why:

Right now, It goes like this: Mobile App sends UDP packets to Solo's IMX >> Solo's IMX sends mavlink commands to ArduCopter on pixhawk >> ArduCopter sends mavlink commands to Solo Gimbal >> Solo gimbal sends GoPro commands to camera through rear connector.
This method is basically dead IMO. GoPo has closed the code that the gimbal uses to talk to the GoPo, so there will be no changes or enhancements there. The mavlink commands going through ArduCopter are also not likely to see any changes or enhancements. And all of it only works when connected to discontinued cameras (GoPro 3 and 4). And only with GoPro FW that has been superseded twice.

If control of a GoPro is desired (and I think it is desirable), some other means will need to be developed. Several people are working on ideas for that. They would need to leverage the GoPro's WiFi or the GoPro's USB, and make a new link into the Solo's IMX. Then redirect from IMX directly to the GoPro rather than through ArduCopter and mavlink. Both methods have their challenges. Neither are impossible, but neither exist today. A new implementation would look like this:: Mobile App sends UDP packets to Solo's IMX >> Solo's IMX sends commands to GoPro over USB or WiFi.
 
Good news. That hasn't happened! I've been discussing this with Ollie for over a month now both in open forum posts and by private message. So please cease posting total crap accusations.

Are you volunteering to make the required changes and test it Mike? Or are you just complaining that someone else hasn't dropped everything to do it for you?

Bad news, post number 8 tends to contradict your claim. It certainly is not about "dropping everything". How long does it take to compile a couple of lines of code? You have admitted that getting Vagrant and the dependencies installed at this point is difficult. Maybe someone who already has it installed could lend a hand?
 
No it doesn't. In fact it confirms what I said. I said there are firmware challenges to overcome. And Ollie pointed out that there are firmware challenges to overcome. I've been discussing those changes and issues with Ollie for over a month. So have numerous other people. And you know it because you were a part of that discussion!!! Yet despite this, you've proclaimed that the opposite. Just stop. You're disrupting an otherwise useful technical discussion trying to create a problem where there isn't one.

BTW, this has nothing to do with the vagrant build environment for Open Solo. It's coding changes in ArduPilot. So nice try on that one. What it requires is the TIME AND EFFORT to debug, code, build, test, and publish. Which I don't personally have at the moment. Again, are you volunteering?

BTW again... I already have the Vagrant build environment up and running and have for months. It's how I make all the beta releases. Once it is up, it is fine. It's new installs that get hosed every time a dependency changes. So what worked on a new install 4 months ago doesn't work now. And the only way you find out, is someone tries to do it and it fails. Then someone has to go look for an alternative package or change URLs or whatever. Then test it by waiting 5 hours for a build to hopefully complete. Sorry that doesn't happen fast enough for you.
 
Everybody appreciates how much time and work you have put into Open Solo. Nobody wants you to stop what you are doing and "drop everything". It is a balancing act.

It does have to do with Vagrant because the build is related to the original Solo version of Arducopter which compiled using the Vagrant VM manager.

I know you have the Vagrant build environment up. For someone new to get a Vagrant environment up is not easy if not impossible because of the missing dependencies. All the problems that you note are why a request was made to have someone who already has the environment up to add OlliW's changes, a couple of lines of code, to add them to a compile. If that is not possible then an answer of " I just don't have time right now" is acceptable but no answer is not acceptable. It leaves someone hanging. OlliW is an expert in gimbal controllers not the various Ardupilot build environments.

I have observed that in general dealing with Ardupilot dev's OlliW has on numerous occasions asked a question and got into a conversation and then everyone just disappears. For months. It makes it impossible for him to make any progress. The risk is losing a valuable resource for the Ardupilot project.

Maybe that is just the way it is but it is a shame.
 
Last edited:
A new implementation would look like this:: Mobile App sends UDP packets to Solo's IMX >> Solo's IMX sends commands to GoPro over USB or WiFi.
Thats what I was trying to say ;-)
Gopro 5 and 6 API is accessible by wifi only. Mavlink is no longer needed to communicate with a Gopro. I have some basic code up and running, will post some stuff over the coming weeks.
 
I use the same Linux environment to build the old ArduCopter Solo that I use for building ArduCopter master, and it works, thankfully. That's how I build the 1.5.4 version of ArduCopter Solo. Master uses their WAF tool. The old thing uses Make. I don't think I needed to install anything extra to get Make to work. At least nothing that wasn't obvious and stands out in my mind. Figuring out how the submodules worked from 2 years ago cost me days of screwing around though. I'll make a guess that the vagrant in the ArduPilot-Solo repo is probably defunct.

I believe Ollie when he says the fix for the old version is simple. But so are lots of things that I need or want to do. And lots of simple things add up to lots of time. My attention right now is getting Open Solo to a stable release. So troubleshooting a gimbal just isn't in the cards for me right now. I would love to make everything for everyone. But I still need to sleep at night, and my dog gives me dirty looks for ignoring her.

As to the ArduPilot dev team on this issue... Neither Ollie nor Francisco were acting nice about it. The issue is still open. Ollie walked away from it and made some sarcastic remarks. And Francisco is not exactly Mr Personality either, and can come off very brash but usually correct. The end result is neither of them continued the discussion. I tried to ask them to get back on track. Neither responded. So the notion that that the problem there is all on the ArduPilot dev team is incorrect. There was plenty of ego to go around on both sides. I know Ollie is reading this. And I hope it gets back on track. I can't even play sides on this.
 
I use the same Linux environment to build the old ArduCopter Solo that I use for building ArduCopter master, and it works, thankfully. That's how I build the 1.5.4 version of ArduCopter Solo. Master uses their WAF tool. The old thing uses Make. I don't think I needed to install anything extra to get Make to work. At least nothing that wasn't obvious and stands out in my mind. Figuring out how the submodules worked from 2 years ago cost me days of screwing around though. I'll make a guess that the vagrant in the ArduPilot-Solo repo is probably defunct.

I believe Ollie when he says the fix for the old version is simple. But so are lots of things that I need or want to do. And lots of simple things add up to lots of time. My attention right now is getting Open Solo to a stable release. So troubleshooting a gimbal just isn't in the cards for me right now. I would love to make everything for everyone. But I still need to sleep at night, and my dog gives me dirty looks for ignoring her.

As to the ArduPilot dev team on this issue... Neither Ollie nor Francisco were acting nice about it. The issue is still open. Ollie walked away from it and made some sarcastic remarks. And Francisco is not exactly Mr Personality either, and can come off very brash but usually correct. The end result is neither of them continued the discussion. I tried to ask them to get back on track. Neither responded. So the notion that that the problem there is all on the ArduPilot dev team is incorrect. There was plenty of ego to go around on both sides. I know Ollie is reading this. And I hope it gets back on track. I can't even play sides on this.

I appreciate your help in the matter. Thank you.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
13,093
Messages
147,741
Members
16,048
Latest member
ihatethatihavetomakeanacc