Well this is very interesting. HEQ sent me one of these last year, and on it's last flight it suddenly started flying erratically, just like yours (nose going up and down, flying in un-commanded steep tight circles etc). In my case I could not get it to transition into multirotor mode, no matter what I did, so I eventually deliberately crashed it into a tree to end the flight. I have no idea what went wrong, and the fact mine got damaged in the crash meant I couldn't really tell if something broke mid-flight. Either way it's concerning, and as a result I declined HEQ's offer of a replacement
Interesting! Well I didn't do anything for it to transition to hover mode, it does that all on its own when it detects abnormal behaviour! When you say "last flight"... last out of how many?
@@ArxangelRC I only had a few flights on mine before it malfunctioned. Maybe 4-5? Seemed like it had a mind of its own for a while, just ignored all my commands for a minute or so and flew erratically. Thankfully I did manage to get back partial control but when I realised it wouldn't transition, that's when I decided to deliberately crash it. Didn't feel safe keeping it in the air
i recently bought one of these used which it has been in a crash. a thing to check in yours if its been in a crash is the main square tube spare is metal when it bends in a crash it doesn't go back leaving the model twisted. i found best way to test this is put the model together and put on a flat table and you will find it rocks. if it does you can hold one side with your feet and twist it sharply the other side like a steering wheel to get the twist out of the metal spar. i did this and tested on a table until its flat. lets hope the maiden goes well when i test it in a weeks time.
Yeah, I just assembled and tested it, but its flat, so I guess my crash wasn't sever enough this time to cause it to twist! There is always next time, right? :P
@@ArxangelRC good... look forward to more of your content , especially on vtols. Im actually interested in a vtol like this swan. I recently went to Indonesia with my wing. It was an absolute nightmare trying to find a flat bit of ground for landing. Its either all wet paddy fields , plantations with big trees or jungle. After lots of searching i found a "flat" patch on a plantation.... but on landing i had an "incident" with a papaya tree . The tree won!. My aircraft is now 30% glue! A vtol would have been perfect for my trip!
Yeah, there will be more... and more VTOL! :) As for the Indonesia stuff... yeah... my thoughts on this exactly! It is so convenient for this to be a VTOL and to fly so well, because you can take it anywhere and have no issues with landings and take offs. Hope it will become more reliable in the future.
@@ArxangelRC hope so too. I would seriously consider buying this if its reliable and can give really big range. Your incident has put me off a little. Reliability needs to be bullet proof on a product this expensive. Not sure if you are aware but there is a new version of the Swan called "voyager" . It uses the siyi mk 15 controller i believe, which claims to have a 30km control distance and 4k camera on a gimbal. Looks pretty good
@@beefybeef1326 Yes, I know it, still in development though, we will see what it will be like when it is finally released! However... $1000 is still petty change when it comes to reliability! There are UAV grade servos, which can realistically be called reliable, but they start at 800 euros a piece...
I had the wing fold on me while doing a banking wide turn. I had tape on the leading and trailing edge, so it held together until impact. I st have to retrieve it. Locked in a construction yard.
@@ArxangelRC I'm not sure if they are made of carbon fiber. I was just making a banking turn when it folded. I still have not been able to recover it. Hopefully I will get a call from the communications company on Monday for me to recover the wreck.
@@jfwahl It should be carbon, its possible though it was not of the woven type, but single direction tubes, which are inherently weaker... and then again... very weird to break in such a spot if there was no prior damage to that component... but I guess its possible.
@@ArxangelRC Hello, I just recovered the drone. It looks like it threw a blade and spiraled into the ground. The main spar is made of aluminum now, not Carbon Fiber.
How is it that the HEQ can not open the log file? that speaks a lot about their state of software in hose support, a really shame since a solid vtol for the mainstream is needed in the market, but this one seems to be too early in the development process.
Well since they are using PX4 based firmware, I assume they also use the tools provided for PX4, which include Flight Review, which is an online tool, but when I try to upload the log file it returns an error that the file is too large, and that is what HEQ also told me, so I assume they are trying the same thing! I will try to get it running using some of the other options.
Wow you wouldnt think anything like that would happen from a system like this, now im wondering how much R&D time HEQ spent with this swan product! Glad you recovered all but the right wing and motors....is that the same wing that came with your product....if i remember correctly they packed 2 left wings and then sent you a right wing? Wonder if that was possibly a used/ test product??
It is actually the left motor module and wing that are missing, and initially I had two right modules, one of them now has the faulty motor as well... so really I only have the right motor module that was in the crash!! Well... now I do also have the full set of replacement parts that they sent... so it will be back in the air pretty soon! :) HEQ did claim this is the first incident of the sort that they've had... so who knows, but given the shape, etc., of the plane, they should have done some testing at least, although I do think there should be a more serious locking mechanism on those parts... however... if it is the motor magnet theory... no amount of locking those parts together would have prevented the motor from losing and magnet...
Ever since I saw the swan come out and be tested by numerous reviewers, I was dumbstruck by the fact that it is using (what i am 99% sure is) phantom 2 or early phantom 3 motors. Why would they use something as old that? Yes one opinion is that they are "tried & tested" motors since they were used in these dji models, but on the other hand, it looks like quality control on these specific motors is not on par to the swan's price or dji's qc standards. This leads me to suspect that heq just got a shitload of these motors for really cheap since p3's are phased out and motors for them are not in demand, and thought "oh well, this is what we will use". I hope I am wrong.
Well... might as well be right, if their thrust specs were a match for what they needed them to do! The whole thing seems to be tuned pretty well, which would suggest the motors' performance is a good match to the weight of the Swan. Also, I assume making a custom motor with that type of prop mount would cost more than getting something already available... so it stands to reason what you describe might just be what happened... but really only HEQ would know that. :)
Well... interesting question and one I have been wondering about, but I've not had the Swan for long yet, so can't really say! Motor replacement would stem from an existing issue with the current motors, which has not proven to be the case just yet! Perhaps it may be a good idea if more efficient motors can be found... but would 5% efficiency gain over an hour long flight be worth the costs and hassle involved in making the upgrade? If only due to the fact that you won't be able to do quick prop installs perhaps will make it not worth doing the upgrade... but... we will see how these handle with extended use. Have you had any issues with yours? How many flights have they had now?
@@ArxangelRC Thanks for the reply - I've only had 4 flights, but was asking because I wouldn't want the same thing happening to mine as you did. For now, I think I will do a careful 'poke' at the motor magnets before each flight.
It's fascinating that the aircraft entered into hover. Don't think this would have been successful if a motor magnet had come loose and jammed a motor. My intuition would lean more to the motor mount partially failing (cracked, or loose screw). The motor torque of the transition (seems to rev some motors), for the RTH likely further loosened the motor, or moved off axis to normal operation. A loose motor would have cause some thrust angle/differential; something that other motors could compensate for initially. With lack of physical control surfaces, the flight controller software would likely not be able to handle a misaligned motor if more than a few degrees off normal axis. If you'd made the decision to land from hover, you might have saved it (at least until it encountered trees in the forest). I think I would have done similar to you and try RTH, just to get it over a more open field (or more easily area to recover). Given size of propellers, and you flying longer flights, wonder if propeller balance would be a factor in possibility cracking a motor mount? Would suggest paying closer attention to motor mounts on pre-flight in future. Not sure what more you could do. The wing extension coming off, and entering a flat spin is actually one of the best possible failure modes possible. Vertical velocity would have be fairly low, and drift (horizontal) minimized. Aircraft would have been in fairly flat attitude. Other than the root cause, everything else is actually positive. I'm so amazed it was able to detect an issue, and enter hover. (pure luck, or otherwise)
At 5:59 the propeller on the motor with broken mount does not look broken. It's just edge on in this frame. It is not rotating. The other motor is rotation from frame to frame (the 3 frames seen)
Well yeah, the first time it entered into hover all motors were working for sure, for the second time it did... all motors were no longer working/attached to the plane! Actually given how much battery was left, it would not have made it all the way to the ground landing in hover even if I'd tried that... but out of experience from the previous day I know that coming down from 500 meters in hover mode is not quick and eats up a lot of battery, battery that it did not have at that point in time! Perhaps if there was an issue with the plastic and mount... the vibrations could have worsened it and caused all of this, but with the new parts having arrived I noticed the left side slips in and out of the spar very easily, while the right one goes in securely! Also, having pulled a motor module apart yesterday, the whole thing is GLUED, in addition to screwed, and it took a good deal of force to pry the plastic open, even with the screws removed... and the motor mount itself is also glued in there... so it is impressive how much force it was needed to get that motor mount out! As for the "landing", yes, a flat spin was probably one of the best things that could have happened, but with the right side still working and motors spinning I am not sure there were many other options how this could have gone! Upon hitting the ground you can hear the motors trying to spin and then the disarm beep shortly after.
@@ArxangelRC Interesting details on motor mount design/build; makes what you experienced more puzzling. Too bad the odds of finding the missing motor arm are very low. It would have been a good item to analyze. If it had been orange/yellow in colour, it might be worth trying a mapping mission over the suspect area, but the arm being grey it would be essentially invisible.
The last frame (of 3) at 3:02 has a pretty decent view of the detached motor. It may give you an idea (with good motor mount pod at hand) as to which pieces separated. The 3/4 of the pod visible seems intact and not distorted.
@@AerialWaviator Yeah, if it were some bright colour perhaps I could have looked for it, but really don't have much hope as it is! All I can do now is check the new parts before every flight to make sure nothing is loose and to tape the bits together before flight just in case! :)
The magnet theory would make sense....are the motor mounts just regular plastic or are they carbon? That may be a huge fatal flaw of the Swan then if they are just weak plastic!
Well... define weak plastic?! The motor mounts on my Phantom 3 Pro are also just plastic... that also has been know to crack... so it depends what kind of plastic, how thick, etc. As far as I can tell they are plastic, not carbon... but then you also have the slits in the large plastic pieces where the mount probably slides in, those can fail as well and they would be prohibitively expensive to make out of carbon! Magnet theory makes sense... but I am not sure how we can prove or deny that with any amount of certainty...
There are multiple reports of this error.on the net. This is also the main issue where I decided the Swan is not a replacement for my Parrot Disco. I will not buy this. I am better of with my own iNAV builds.
Wow, that was interesting. Thanks for sharing your experience with us. Hove you considered using Buy Me a Coffee for people who would like to tip you? I suggested it to another channel and I was pleased to see how many people use it. I occasionally use one of your links to purchase gear. For tips, I'd rather use Buy Me a Coffee instead of RUclips's Super Thanks (and instead of Patreon). Thanks for all the great content.
@@ddegn Alright, thanks for the recommendation, I will look at that coffee thing! :) Not surprised about the link, I think that product has been put of production for quite a while now.
This exact thing happened to my Swan, however, mine crashed in the heart of South Central, and thus, there was nothing left to pick up once I got there. Does anyone have any ideas, or knowledge regarding a warranty? I still have the transmitter, and I found one propeller, and I honestly just want to get back to flying. It's hard to justify paying full price after watching $1k+ plummet to its death as if an SA-15 nailed it.
Damn! Sorry to hear about this! I am not familiar what "South Central" is though! You should contact HEQ... but without a recording of what had happened or a log so they can check it... I am not sure there is much you can hope for! With the new replacement parts I actually taped them together before flight and have had a few good flights without mid-flight disassembly!
@@ArxangelRC after my crash because of not tightening one prop enough, I started taping the wings on with a cross over pattern. No problems since. I have spent a ton of time flying around a field doing take offs and landings.
I bought the Swan K1 Pro and it's been nothing but trouble. It's certainly not worth the exorbitant price HEQ charges for it. If the hardware and software was well designed, it would be worth it but I think it's mostly junk after flying it. HEQ is definitely lying about the 1 hour flight time. Even with the "black label" batteries, you'll be lucky to get 30 minutes even with the emergency landing voltage set to the minimum. Maybe I need to spend more time re-balancing their crap props again. Geez, they charge more than enough for them so why the heck can't they do right by their customers and balance them properly themselves?
Thanks! Hahahaha.... well... as long as there is power on the way down there will be coordinates of the crash location... not sure I have to go that serious about it! :P
@@ArxangelRC make it imu, led + gps, so that it does not rely on one tracking method only, easier to find, and have it have a low bit-rate long range radio (goes throw ground) to locate it
My experience with DJI customer service was HORRIFIC. If you have a big you tube chanel they send you free products for review and testing and bend over backwards to keep you happy. If on the other hand you are just a fat American customer and you have a " legitimate warranty issue " they fight you tooth and nail hoping you will eventually give up and just pay to fix the product. Not sure about this company, however those look exactly like phantom motors and props and the quality of video and range lead me to think this may well be a collaboration with DJI.
Well as of this moment I've never had to deal with DJI customer service because I have made a vow never to buy anything brand new from them, other than perhaps cameras, and its been working out pretty nice so far! As for HEQ... we will see, but so far I am happy! I don't think it is a collaboration with DJI... that does not sound like something DJI will do, also... if it were, HEQ would be advertising it all over the place, video signal quality will be better, but would not regain the link that quickly at distance, IF it were a DJI! :P hahahahahaha! Also... those motors can be made/bought from most places in China... so it doesn't take a collaboration with DJI to get the same looking motors, and I assume they look the same due to convenience with the props, rather than anything else!
@@ArxangelRC I've watched a couple of video's doing reviews and specification of this Model. I like it a lot but it is expensive. I look forward to seeing your next post with this one. Happy landings.
Well... especially after the second transition yes... that much is obvious... question is what exactly happened! I mean... the left side flying off and getting in view of the camera does show the propulsion failure quite clearly! :)
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
Well this is very interesting. HEQ sent me one of these last year, and on it's last flight it suddenly started flying erratically, just like yours (nose going up and down, flying in un-commanded steep tight circles etc). In my case I could not get it to transition into multirotor mode, no matter what I did, so I eventually deliberately crashed it into a tree to end the flight. I have no idea what went wrong, and the fact mine got damaged in the crash meant I couldn't really tell if something broke mid-flight. Either way it's concerning, and as a result I declined HEQ's offer of a replacement
Interesting! Well I didn't do anything for it to transition to hover mode, it does that all on its own when it detects abnormal behaviour! When you say "last flight"... last out of how many?
@@ArxangelRC I only had a few flights on mine before it malfunctioned. Maybe 4-5? Seemed like it had a mind of its own for a while, just ignored all my commands for a minute or so and flew erratically. Thankfully I did manage to get back partial control but when I realised it wouldn't transition, that's when I decided to deliberately crash it. Didn't feel safe keeping it in the air
I see! That is so weird... and also such a pity! This one shows so much potential!
I complained about erratic flight and they told me not to fly in GPS mode. That seems to have helped.
Well... that seems like a weird suggestion! Not sure how that would help!
i recently bought one of these used which it has been in a crash. a thing to check in yours if its been in a crash is the main square tube spare is metal when it bends in a crash it doesn't go back leaving the model twisted. i found best way to test this is put the model together and put on a flat table and you will find it rocks. if it does you can hold one side with your feet and twist it sharply the other side like a steering wheel to get the twist out of the metal spar. i did this and tested on a table until its flat. lets hope the maiden goes well when i test it in a weeks time.
Yeah, I just assembled and tested it, but its flat, so I guess my crash wasn't sever enough this time to cause it to twist! There is always next time, right? :P
Too bad for the Crash.... Glad to hear the HEQ Customer Support was good.
Yeah! :)
Looks like a weakness in motor fixation, plus a wing connection weakness too. Effort on VTOL motor can be large during transitions.
Yeah, perhaps. Though I took apart one motor module yesterday and it was NOT easy! I can't imagine how that motor managed to get out of there.
That spin will become an interstellar meme!. Sorry for your loss my friend
Haha, I guess we will see! Well not much was lost actually, and the replacement stuff from HEQ already arrived! :)
@@ArxangelRC good... look forward to more of your content , especially on vtols. Im actually interested in a vtol like this swan. I recently went to Indonesia with my wing. It was an absolute nightmare trying to find a flat bit of ground for landing. Its either all wet paddy fields , plantations with big trees or jungle. After lots of searching i found a "flat" patch on a plantation.... but on landing i had an "incident" with a papaya tree . The tree won!. My aircraft is now 30% glue!
A vtol would have been perfect for my trip!
Yeah, there will be more... and more VTOL! :) As for the Indonesia stuff... yeah... my thoughts on this exactly! It is so convenient for this to be a VTOL and to fly so well, because you can take it anywhere and have no issues with landings and take offs. Hope it will become more reliable in the future.
@@ArxangelRC hope so too. I would seriously consider buying this if its reliable and can give really big range. Your incident has put me off a little. Reliability needs to be bullet proof on a product this expensive.
Not sure if you are aware but there is a new version of the Swan called "voyager" . It uses the siyi mk 15 controller i believe, which claims to have a 30km control distance and 4k camera on a gimbal. Looks pretty good
@@beefybeef1326 Yes, I know it, still in development though, we will see what it will be like when it is finally released! However... $1000 is still petty change when it comes to reliability! There are UAV grade servos, which can realistically be called reliable, but they start at 800 euros a piece...
Like a trilling technical detective. At least you now have a nice story to tell. :(
Haha, yeah!
I had the wing fold on me while doing a banking wide turn. I had tape on the leading and trailing edge, so it held together until impact. I st have to retrieve it. Locked in a construction yard.
That sucks! But why do you think it folded? Carbon spar failed?
@@ArxangelRC I'm not sure if they are made of carbon fiber. I was just making a banking turn when it folded. I still have not been able to recover it. Hopefully I will get a call from the communications company on Monday for me to recover the wreck.
@@jfwahl It should be carbon, its possible though it was not of the woven type, but single direction tubes, which are inherently weaker... and then again... very weird to break in such a spot if there was no prior damage to that component... but I guess its possible.
@@ArxangelRC Hello, I just recovered the drone. It looks like it threw a blade and spiraled into the ground. The main spar is made of aluminum now, not Carbon Fiber.
@@jfwahl So propeller issues... sucks! Are the props still so unbalanced?
How is it that the HEQ can not open the log file? that speaks a lot about their state of software in hose support, a really shame since a solid vtol for the mainstream is needed in the market, but this one seems to be too early in the development process.
Well since they are using PX4 based firmware, I assume they also use the tools provided for PX4, which include Flight Review, which is an online tool, but when I try to upload the log file it returns an error that the file is too large, and that is what HEQ also told me, so I assume they are trying the same thing! I will try to get it running using some of the other options.
not very in to Vtols but glad you found it
It is already back to full gear and will fly soon! :)
Wow you wouldnt think anything like that would happen from a system like this, now im wondering how much R&D time HEQ spent with this swan product! Glad you recovered all but the right wing and motors....is that the same wing that came with your product....if i remember correctly they packed 2 left wings and then sent you a right wing? Wonder if that was possibly a used/ test product??
It is actually the left motor module and wing that are missing, and initially I had two right modules, one of them now has the faulty motor as well... so really I only have the right motor module that was in the crash!! Well... now I do also have the full set of replacement parts that they sent... so it will be back in the air pretty soon! :) HEQ did claim this is the first incident of the sort that they've had... so who knows, but given the shape, etc., of the plane, they should have done some testing at least, although I do think there should be a more serious locking mechanism on those parts... however... if it is the motor magnet theory... no amount of locking those parts together would have prevented the motor from losing and magnet...
Would it be a good idea to tape the gaps on the Wings? So it stays secure
@@BRExteriorPro Yes, that is what I am doing now when I fly it.
@@ArxangelRC is this worth it? Looks like a pretty sweet drone is it worth the price.
@@BRExteriorPro Well... it could be better, if they wished to make it better! Hard to say really!
Ever since I saw the swan come out and be tested by numerous reviewers, I was dumbstruck by the fact that it is using (what i am 99% sure is) phantom 2 or early phantom 3 motors.
Why would they use something as old that? Yes one opinion is that they are "tried & tested" motors since they were used in these dji models, but on the other hand, it looks like quality control on these specific motors is not on par to the swan's price or dji's qc standards. This leads me to suspect that heq just got a shitload of these motors for really cheap since p3's are phased out and motors for them are not in demand, and thought "oh well, this is what we will use". I hope I am wrong.
Well... might as well be right, if their thrust specs were a match for what they needed them to do! The whole thing seems to be tuned pretty well, which would suggest the motors' performance is a good match to the weight of the Swan. Also, I assume making a custom motor with that type of prop mount would cost more than getting something already available... so it stands to reason what you describe might just be what happened... but really only HEQ would know that. :)
#ArxangelRC - would you recommend yet any existing owners changing their motors to a different brand ?
Well... interesting question and one I have been wondering about, but I've not had the Swan for long yet, so can't really say! Motor replacement would stem from an existing issue with the current motors, which has not proven to be the case just yet! Perhaps it may be a good idea if more efficient motors can be found... but would 5% efficiency gain over an hour long flight be worth the costs and hassle involved in making the upgrade? If only due to the fact that you won't be able to do quick prop installs perhaps will make it not worth doing the upgrade... but... we will see how these handle with extended use. Have you had any issues with yours? How many flights have they had now?
@@ArxangelRC Thanks for the reply - I've only had 4 flights, but was asking because I wouldn't want the same thing happening to mine as you did. For now, I think I will do a careful 'poke' at the motor magnets before each flight.
@@wackyack3165 Well that was just a theory, but yeah, I suppose checking the mounts for slop and plastic for cracks may not be a bad idea!
Got to love multirotors! RIP
Not RIP at all! New motor modules and wing ends arrived, so it should be back in the air by end of week! 😁
It's fascinating that the aircraft entered into hover. Don't think this would have been successful if a motor magnet had come loose and jammed a motor. My intuition would lean more to the motor mount partially failing (cracked, or loose screw). The motor torque of the transition (seems to rev some motors), for the RTH likely further loosened the motor, or moved off axis to normal operation.
A loose motor would have cause some thrust angle/differential; something that other motors could compensate for initially. With lack of physical control surfaces, the flight controller software would likely not be able to handle a misaligned motor if more than a few degrees off normal axis.
If you'd made the decision to land from hover, you might have saved it (at least until it encountered trees in the forest). I think I would have done similar to you and try RTH, just to get it over a more open field (or more easily area to recover).
Given size of propellers, and you flying longer flights, wonder if propeller balance would be a factor in possibility cracking a motor mount? Would suggest paying closer attention to motor mounts on pre-flight in future. Not sure what more you could do.
The wing extension coming off, and entering a flat spin is actually one of the best possible failure modes possible. Vertical velocity would have be fairly low, and drift (horizontal) minimized. Aircraft would have been in fairly flat attitude. Other than the root cause, everything else is actually positive. I'm so amazed it was able to detect an issue, and enter hover. (pure luck, or otherwise)
At 5:59 the propeller on the motor with broken mount does not look broken. It's just edge on in this frame. It is not rotating. The other motor is rotation from frame to frame (the 3 frames seen)
Well yeah, the first time it entered into hover all motors were working for sure, for the second time it did... all motors were no longer working/attached to the plane! Actually given how much battery was left, it would not have made it all the way to the ground landing in hover even if I'd tried that... but out of experience from the previous day I know that coming down from 500 meters in hover mode is not quick and eats up a lot of battery, battery that it did not have at that point in time!
Perhaps if there was an issue with the plastic and mount... the vibrations could have worsened it and caused all of this, but with the new parts having arrived I noticed the left side slips in and out of the spar very easily, while the right one goes in securely! Also, having pulled a motor module apart yesterday, the whole thing is GLUED, in addition to screwed, and it took a good deal of force to pry the plastic open, even with the screws removed... and the motor mount itself is also glued in there... so it is impressive how much force it was needed to get that motor mount out!
As for the "landing", yes, a flat spin was probably one of the best things that could have happened, but with the right side still working and motors spinning I am not sure there were many other options how this could have gone! Upon hitting the ground you can hear the motors trying to spin and then the disarm beep shortly after.
@@ArxangelRC Interesting details on motor mount design/build; makes what you experienced more puzzling.
Too bad the odds of finding the missing motor arm are very low. It would have been a good item to analyze. If it had been orange/yellow in colour, it might be worth trying a mapping mission over the suspect area, but the arm being grey it would be essentially invisible.
The last frame (of 3) at 3:02 has a pretty decent view of the detached motor. It may give you an idea (with good motor mount pod at hand) as to which pieces separated. The 3/4 of the pod visible seems intact and not distorted.
@@AerialWaviator Yeah, if it were some bright colour perhaps I could have looked for it, but really don't have much hope as it is! All I can do now is check the new parts before every flight to make sure nothing is loose and to tape the bits together before flight just in case! :)
The magnet theory would make sense....are the motor mounts just regular plastic or are they carbon? That may be a huge fatal flaw of the Swan then if they are just weak plastic!
Well... define weak plastic?! The motor mounts on my Phantom 3 Pro are also just plastic... that also has been know to crack... so it depends what kind of plastic, how thick, etc. As far as I can tell they are plastic, not carbon... but then you also have the slits in the large plastic pieces where the mount probably slides in, those can fail as well and they would be prohibitively expensive to make out of carbon! Magnet theory makes sense... but I am not sure how we can prove or deny that with any amount of certainty...
What the HEQ happened here ?
The result of some questionable engineering choices! :P
First five seconds and I was like: "Yeaaaahhh, been there."(Drone flyer...)
Hahahahahaha... right... I don't think you can get a drone to do a flat spin though! :P
There are multiple reports of this error.on the net. This is also the main issue where I decided the Swan is not a replacement for my Parrot Disco. I will not buy this. I am better of with my own iNAV builds.
Really? Who else has had this issue?
Wow, that was interesting. Thanks for sharing your experience with us.
Hove you considered using Buy Me a Coffee for people who would like to tip you? I suggested it to another channel and I was pleased to see how many people use it.
I occasionally use one of your links to purchase gear. For tips, I'd rather use Buy Me a Coffee instead of RUclips's Super Thanks (and instead of Patreon).
Thanks for all the great content.
By the way, your *FeiYu Tech Wearable Gimbal* link is broken.
@@ddegn Alright, thanks for the recommendation, I will look at that coffee thing! :) Not surprised about the link, I think that product has been put of production for quite a while now.
Alright, I looked into it and setup a page! Thanks for the recommendation! www.buymeacoffee.com/ArxangelRC
I've done worst than that like on my dolphin 8 launches 8 crashes 😂 i ended up selling my other dolphin full price nib before i crashed that one too
Hahahahahahahahaha, well... that is what I would call a real talent! :P You definitely get the bragging rights here mate, I won't argue! :P
😂
:)
at least, you can guess the problem..
Yeah! A lot of guessing! :)
Bird attack, perhaps. Maybe got into a hawks territory.
I've been flying there for years, not one incident... could be... seems kinda high for that though!
Now you are a 3D pilot 🤣
Oh yeah, that flat spin was totally on purpose! :P Envy my 3D skills!!! :P
Stick to the Planes,oh well what ever floats you boat.
Hahahaha, well it IS a plane! :)
This exact thing happened to my Swan, however, mine crashed in the heart of South Central, and thus, there was nothing left to pick up once I got there.
Does anyone have any ideas, or knowledge regarding a warranty? I still have the transmitter, and I found one propeller, and I honestly just want to get back to flying. It's hard to justify paying full price after watching $1k+ plummet to its death as if an SA-15 nailed it.
Damn! Sorry to hear about this! I am not familiar what "South Central" is though! You should contact HEQ... but without a recording of what had happened or a log so they can check it... I am not sure there is much you can hope for! With the new replacement parts I actually taped them together before flight and have had a few good flights without mid-flight disassembly!
@@ArxangelRC after my crash because of not tightening one prop enough, I started taping the wings on with a cross over pattern. No problems since. I have spent a ton of time flying around a field doing take offs and landings.
@@BrianBetron Yeah, taping the wings is a must!
I bought the Swan K1 Pro and it's been nothing but trouble. It's certainly not worth the exorbitant price HEQ charges for it. If the hardware and software was well designed, it would be worth it but I think it's mostly junk after flying it. HEQ is definitely lying about the 1 hour flight time. Even with the "black label" batteries, you'll be lucky to get 30 minutes even with the emergency landing voltage set to the minimum. Maybe I need to spend more time re-balancing their crap props again. Geez, they charge more than enough for them so why the heck can't they do right by their customers and balance them properly themselves?
I have asked them that exact question a lot! Answer always has been "They are fine in our tests"!!!
locator ballistic helium pop balloon parachute, with gps tracker
nice looking drone plane
Thanks! Hahahaha.... well... as long as there is power on the way down there will be coordinates of the crash location... not sure I have to go that serious about it! :P
@@ArxangelRC right
@@ArxangelRC well, your tracker must have separate power source, and embed that deep in the craft, so it stays where is needs to :)
@@ArxangelRC make it imu, led + gps, so that it does not rely on one tracking method only, easier to find, and have it have a low bit-rate long range radio (goes throw ground) to locate it
My experience with DJI customer service was HORRIFIC. If you have a big you tube chanel they send you free products for review and testing and bend over backwards to keep you happy. If on the other hand you are just a fat American customer and you have a " legitimate warranty issue " they fight you tooth and nail hoping you will eventually give up and just pay to fix the product. Not sure about this company, however those look exactly like phantom motors and props and the quality of video and range lead me to think this may well be a collaboration with DJI.
Well as of this moment I've never had to deal with DJI customer service because I have made a vow never to buy anything brand new from them, other than perhaps cameras, and its been working out pretty nice so far! As for HEQ... we will see, but so far I am happy! I don't think it is a collaboration with DJI... that does not sound like something DJI will do, also... if it were, HEQ would be advertising it all over the place, video signal quality will be better, but would not regain the link that quickly at distance, IF it were a DJI! :P hahahahahaha! Also... those motors can be made/bought from most places in China... so it doesn't take a collaboration with DJI to get the same looking motors, and I assume they look the same due to convenience with the props, rather than anything else!
@@ArxangelRC I've watched a couple of video's doing reviews and specification of this Model. I like it a lot but it is expensive. I look forward to seeing your next post with this one. Happy landings.
@@michaelwhinnery164 Thanks! It is pretty nice indeed! I do like it a lot!
I will vote for propulsion system failure .
Well... especially after the second transition yes... that much is obvious... question is what exactly happened! I mean... the left side flying off and getting in view of the camera does show the propulsion failure quite clearly! :)