RE:Procyon CommentaryRobert,
Just reading your comment and would like to comment and correct you here because you are accusing me and that costed me a lot of time and money.
"
I had developed a policy, where each and every unit sold was test flown for 30-60 minutes before shipping." You haven't done it with my first system or you did but you had to fail the test but you shipped anyway.
- the RPM sensor was delivered separately, ohh you can install that yourself easily.
- Ohh, the telemetry radios don’t work. I don’t know what’s wrong but they lose communication all the time. Let me know if you can fix it, otherwise I will order a new set. (you want to see the invoice from RFDesign where I bought a new set thats working)
- Ohh, the servo seems burned and you haven’t even flown with it? I send you a new one but you have to replace it yourself.
Hope you are not going to bu a new car and get these sorts of emails.
All these emails are available if you want to re-read them just for fun.
Robert, don’t say you did the perfect job, you didn’t as entrepreneur and as designer. There is something like not shipping a product when its not fully functioning and something like warranty if a product doesnt work within an expected economical timeframe of its life.
Now the second Procyon flew. It flew two times and it flew welll. One without payload one with payload. The third time it crashed because the tail rotor engine got burned in the flight with payload before. This was your “newest” upgrade and apparently not tested.
So let’s say your statement “
that well more than 90% of UAV crashes are due to user error. And helicopters in particular present a greater chance for problems due to operator mishandling.” Is a statement besides the truth or my case, I was in the 10%!
Now I read more statements (from you) on the internet that are completely besides the truth but I’m not going to respond on this here but the product
WAS as communications is now: not good or not finished
BartUAV