The best way to check and compare those modules is using U-Blox's u-center application. Because you see exactly which satellites it picks up, the signal strength for each of them and so on. With two serial-USB-converters you can even hook up both at the same time, start u-center twice and compare both modules in realtime. You can also make sure that you are really seeing a cold start by sending a cold start command from u-center. Because every information still left in the modules memory has an impact on how fast it can obtain the first fix - and even if it's only the current time and date.
Interesting - I may have a play with that to see what info i can get from it. I'll just need a very long cable to get the GPS antennas out of the window though
This is a great idea if you are having bad RF interference from the rest of your quad - I do it on one of mine, but it seems too much faff to do on everything if it's not needed
@@CurryKitten I find twisting the wires well and making sure they are not touching any other electronics running it along the top plate is usually the easiest. Usually get lock within a minute or so on m8 and close to 30 seconds on m10. I also have seen the m10 get 32 sats where I've rarely seen the m8's break 20. That's with matek m10's that are using the ublox modules with built in antenna.
The VTX is the biggest EM and RF producer, turning it down to 25mw for thermal reasons is likely the reason why you got better gnss reception for the test. I’ve started putting the gps under the camera on the front of the quad, just move the tpu to the front, that alone has dramatically improved performance for me and helps the compass as well. Though the primary culprit is EM interference not necessarily RF.
My quads generally all run at 25mw before they arm anyway. There's certainly lots you can do to isolate the GPS receiver in a much better way (and I've had to on other quads just to get a signal) This test is really to show what happens on a "quick-and-dirty" install - which i tend to think the majority of people will do
It's set to autoconfigure, so it should get the fastest baud rate. The area I'm in never gets that many sats - I was surprised to get more than 5 - best it's ever done. Out in the field where I fly, I get far more
Isn't Betaflight 4.4 bugged with M10 GPS systems? I seem to recall JB did a video about the M10 not getting it's full performance unless you did some manual configuration.
It's a little confusing in terms of what's supported. As mentioned, this is a 4.5 feature that was apparently backported to 4.4. However, I can't find anything in the repo that tells me this... but at the same time it works on 4.4 which means it must have been backported?! Anything prior to this though, and you will need to use ucenter to config the GPS separately
Excellent review of comparisons. It certainly is a bit strange for the M 10 to fall behind when Galileo was activated. I would guess all of that will be forthcoming with improvements. I have an M 10 and was going to put it on my 7 inch but I went through a rather arduous task, putting that copper foil around the wires etc. therefore the time being “I plan” to use the M 10 on my 5 inch Merica when I receive the new Walksnail goggles and VTX.
It certainly seemed a bit odd. Not exactly the scientific method to base the conclusions on a single test, but I will be updating the Chimera and I'll be leaving the M10 on that quad to see how it goes, so more data will come.
Thanks for doing this. Very interesting. I've not used either the M8 or M10 as I've yet to GPS-enable any of my FPV quads. But I'm surprised how slow these are to acquire so few satellites. I feel like my Mini 3 Pro acquires a lot more satellites a lot more quickly (admittedly I've not benchmarked it), but I am in a different part of the world, too (Texas).
Most GPS receivers give a stat of a first fix from a cold start in 26 seconds - this is in the perfect conditions. I can guess DJI do a lot more work in isolating the GPS from any interference much better than we do with stuffing all the wires in the quad with the rest of the electronics
Hi, I suspect that the "auto-detect" for galileo assist feature in betaflight to be the culprid => you started the FC with one GPS module, the FC tried to find out which "galileo assist zone" it should use ... but then you unplugged the M8 and plugged the M10, which started again with 0 sats, which messed up the FC algorithm in the auto-detection ... don't know if I'm clear ^^"
Check out your 5V output on the FC, that the GPS has constantly enough power. At some FCs, the 5V pad delivers only around 4.65 - 4.79 Volts, especially when pid mode is turned off and the VTX runs on higher power levels. It causes, that the GPS module starts with rebooting itself, without saving the satellite data. Options: - use an 5V up/downstepper, or - plug a power bank via USB to the FC, without connecting the whole quad to a battery and wait two minutes. The GPS autosaves the sats and switches it´s light mode, when it when it has locked enough sats. Then you can plug in the battery to the copter. If you repeat this step every hour over the day, the gps module gets many data to work with, what means faster lock, or - connect/power on the VTX seperately, even after sats has been found and locked
Although, this is good advice for getting a lock, and I've even featured seperate devices so you can power on your GPS in isolation (without a USB connection) I'm always happiest if I can do something without any extra faff, or messing about. So being able to simply switch on a quad, wait a max of 2 minutes and then take off with sats is always going to be more desirable than the other methods
My M8 performs just fine. Maximum number of satellites I've got is 28. M10 is the same but it locks onto them faster. M9 was solid but only reached 16 satellites, no matter how long I waited or flew.
I have heard that the M10 GPS does not work correctly unless the quad is using Betaflight 4.4.5 (I think). So, that is an issue for me since I don't upgrade or flash the firmware unless absolutely necessary. So far, all of my quads are running on the Betaflight version that came on the quad or FC. If this is correct, then I am sticking with the M8 units.
Both my m8s and my m10s take about 3-4 minutes at the longest to acquire the minimum for gps rescue (6 or 8, can't remember which atm) on the first flight of the day, but the m10s get more satellites in the long run. Subsequent flights are usually less than a minute for both. If I take off with minimum satellites, the m8s are more likely to warn gps rescue not available off and on during the first flight. After the first flight, I seldom get the warning.
That tend to be my experience. Sometimes I seem unable to get sats on the ground, so have a fly around and they all instantly appear. Very weird, but then everything is good for all the subsequent flights
I have the latest M10 from Caddex in my Apex 5 quad....28 Sats it hit peak during Maiden flight....Ive been using Galileo ever since BF FINALLY got around to adding it....Its a European Sat...😮😳😀🇬🇧 It is custom mounted on the FRONT of my quad though....lol
@@CurryKitten It's on my channel a recent upload...The GPS is tiny and mounted on a 3D printed tower which doubles as a Strobe mount...Apex 5 Maiden...🤔😏😏
if you wana get the most out of BF and the m10/gps rescue you need to use the 4.5zulu builds ( rc1 is coming out very soon ). m10 gps are performance wise dependant on what the vender flashed it to some have the internal baud rate set WAY to low... and need to be setup using the ublox software properly.. also the m10 gps use different commands to configure so.. with the latest nightly you'll get the code that's updated to work with the m10 units properly.. you'll get loads of sats and lock much faster than older code
I did think that part of the autoconfig would use the ublox protocol to attempt to put the GPS into a higher baud rate and then drop down if it doesn't respond. But perhaps that bit it still jsut in 4.5. Looking forward to the release of this one
@@CurryKitten it goes with the m8 but the m10 has a different command set. Unfortunately companies didn’t bother to read the white paper before pushing these to market and the BF team had to make the fixes after they were already in the publics hands.. with the continuing evolution of the way we work with the Chinese maybe we can avoid this sort of thing for the future
My M10 on a BNF works no better than M8 on other quads. I hope that's just Betaflight 4.4 and I can't do the hack as I'm on a Mac and it seemed too complicated anyway. Thanks for the vide, very interesting.
BF 4.4 does seem riddles with some annoying bugs. I'd say "roll on 4.5" but no doubt this will involve a bunch more new bugs. Perhaps they should just fix the bugs! I work on a Mac, if you do need a windows only piece of software, VMware Fusion is free and will do the job
Every time JB mentions M10 I start shouting at the screen. He raves about it but I'm getting far better performance than him with my humble Beitan M8. I work with GPS modules at work and there's nothing wrong with M8 IMO. My quad regularly gets >20 sats. The GPS community could do a lot worse than to start looking at cheaper chipsets like the ones from Quectel, which perform very well.
I'd be happy to look at them if someone produces them, but right now Betaflight can use the UBLOX protocol, or basic NMEA, so I think it may depend if Quectel had it's own protocol that made it easy to autoconfigure. As for you M8 doing well, yep there's nothing wrong with them, but a test for you would be to run you M8 next to an M10 and see if there was a significant difference
The first thing I do when I get to my flying area is plug in my USB on the flight controller to a power supply so when it's time to fly I already have a lock on my first flight then after that I'm good for the day..that way I'm not cooking my video transmitter waiting for a lock
If you have to wait more than a few minutes, this is a good idea. However, if we can simply power on the quad as it stands and get a fast enough lock from a cold start so we don't need to do anything extra - then it's better in my book
@CurryKitten that's a video you need to make showing every step on making this happen and all the other stuff you can do. What do you have to do in betaflight to make this work.
My drone with f450 frame and same stack(speedybeee f4 v4) but with the golden 1000kv 3s motors its wobbling too much it flips on its own it shakes too much can't control it how to fix that can i contact you through any social media
First of all don’t listen to this gibberish. My M 10 gets 28 satellites in my backyard. My M8 gets seven satellites. All TH-cam videos demonstrate that M 10 is far superior to M8.
@@benedictcumberbatch4275as long as you have not mixed the tax/rx pads when soldering, just set up the ports tab with the correct part you’ve wired to, and your all set. Make sure GPS is enabled on the configuration tab and that should bring it all to life.
The best way to check and compare those modules is using U-Blox's u-center application. Because you see exactly which satellites it picks up, the signal strength for each of them and so on. With two serial-USB-converters you can even hook up both at the same time, start u-center twice and compare both modules in realtime. You can also make sure that you are really seeing a cold start by sending a cold start command from u-center. Because every information still left in the modules memory has an impact on how fast it can obtain the first fix - and even if it's only the current time and date.
Interesting - I may have a play with that to see what info i can get from it. I'll just need a very long cable to get the GPS antennas out of the window though
I have been shielding the cables with copper tape and earthing this then using tape to avoid shorting. Really speeds things up.
This is a great idea if you are having bad RF interference from the rest of your quad - I do it on one of mine, but it seems too much faff to do on everything if it's not needed
I’ve recently started doing the same and it’s a huge improvement.
@@CurryKitten I find twisting the wires well and making sure they are not touching any other electronics running it along the top plate is usually the easiest. Usually get lock within a minute or so on m8 and close to 30 seconds on m10. I also have seen the m10 get 32 sats where I've rarely seen the m8's break 20. That's with matek m10's that are using the ublox modules with built in antenna.
The VTX is the biggest EM and RF producer, turning it down to 25mw for thermal reasons is likely the reason why you got better gnss reception for the test. I’ve started putting the gps under the camera on the front of the quad, just move the tpu to the front, that alone has dramatically improved performance for me and helps the compass as well. Though the primary culprit is EM interference not necessarily RF.
My quads generally all run at 25mw before they arm anyway. There's certainly lots you can do to isolate the GPS receiver in a much better way (and I've had to on other quads just to get a signal) This test is really to show what happens on a "quick-and-dirty" install - which i tend to think the majority of people will do
Awesome testing, Wayne! Pretty curious results indeed! 😃
Stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊
Talk for the sake of talking bobby bot
Cheers MC :D
Did you set the baud rate to the highest possible speed? With M10 I usually get 18-20 pretty fast on the ground (EU), when flying 29-30 top.
It's set to autoconfigure, so it should get the fastest baud rate. The area I'm in never gets that many sats - I was surprised to get more than 5 - best it's ever done. Out in the field where I fly, I get far more
Nice! I have gotten up to 14 Sattelite with my GepRC M8U gps and a whopping 26 with a foxeer M10 gps
Very nice result. I'm looking forward to actually trying this in the field
Isn't Betaflight 4.4 bugged with M10 GPS systems? I seem to recall JB did a video about the M10 not getting it's full performance unless you did some manual configuration.
It's a little confusing in terms of what's supported. As mentioned, this is a 4.5 feature that was apparently backported to 4.4. However, I can't find anything in the repo that tells me this... but at the same time it works on 4.4 which means it must have been backported?! Anything prior to this though, and you will need to use ucenter to config the GPS separately
Interesting test
Excellent review of comparisons. It certainly is a bit strange for the M 10 to fall behind when Galileo was activated. I would guess all of that will be forthcoming with improvements. I have an M 10 and was going to put it on my 7 inch but I went through a rather arduous task, putting that copper foil around the wires etc. therefore the time being “I plan” to use the M 10 on my 5 inch Merica when I receive the new Walksnail goggles and VTX.
It certainly seemed a bit odd. Not exactly the scientific method to base the conclusions on a single test, but I will be updating the Chimera and I'll be leaving the M10 on that quad to see how it goes, so more data will come.
Thanks for doing this. Very interesting. I've not used either the M8 or M10 as I've yet to GPS-enable any of my FPV quads. But I'm surprised how slow these are to acquire so few satellites. I feel like my Mini 3 Pro acquires a lot more satellites a lot more quickly (admittedly I've not benchmarked it), but I am in a different part of the world, too (Texas).
Most GPS receivers give a stat of a first fix from a cold start in 26 seconds - this is in the perfect conditions. I can guess DJI do a lot more work in isolating the GPS from any interference much better than we do with stuffing all the wires in the quad with the rest of the electronics
Hi,
I suspect that the "auto-detect" for galileo assist feature in betaflight to be the culprid => you started the FC with one GPS module, the FC tried to find out which "galileo assist zone" it should use ... but then you unplugged the M8 and plugged the M10, which started again with 0 sats, which messed up the FC algorithm in the auto-detection ... don't know if I'm clear ^^"
Check out your 5V output on the FC, that the GPS has constantly enough power. At some FCs, the 5V pad delivers only around 4.65 - 4.79 Volts, especially when pid mode is turned off and the VTX runs on higher power levels. It causes, that the GPS module starts with rebooting itself, without saving the satellite data.
Options:
- use an 5V up/downstepper, or
- plug a power bank via USB to the FC, without connecting the whole quad to a battery and wait two minutes. The GPS autosaves the sats and switches it´s light mode, when it when it has locked enough sats.
Then you can plug in the battery to the copter. If you repeat this step every hour over the day, the gps module gets many data to work with, what means faster lock, or
- connect/power on the VTX seperately, even after sats has been found and locked
Although, this is good advice for getting a lock, and I've even featured seperate devices so you can power on your GPS in isolation (without a USB connection) I'm always happiest if I can do something without any extra faff, or messing about. So being able to simply switch on a quad, wait a max of 2 minutes and then take off with sats is always going to be more desirable than the other methods
My M8 performs just fine. Maximum number of satellites I've got is 28. M10 is the same but it locks onto them faster. M9 was solid but only reached 16 satellites, no matter how long I waited or flew.
There's no reasons to throw your M8's away. I do like the quicker fix idea from the M10s though
I agree.@@CurryKitten
I have heard that the M10 GPS does not work correctly unless the quad is using Betaflight 4.4.5 (I think). So, that is an issue for me since I don't upgrade or flash the firmware unless absolutely necessary. So far, all of my quads are running on the Betaflight version that came on the quad or FC. If this is correct, then I am sticking with the M8 units.
Both my m8s and my m10s take about 3-4 minutes at the longest to acquire the minimum for gps rescue (6 or 8, can't remember which atm) on the first flight of the day, but the m10s get more satellites in the long run. Subsequent flights are usually less than a minute for both. If I take off with minimum satellites, the m8s are more likely to warn gps rescue not available off and on during the first flight. After the first flight, I seldom get the warning.
That tend to be my experience. Sometimes I seem unable to get sats on the ground, so have a fly around and they all instantly appear. Very weird, but then everything is good for all the subsequent flights
I have the latest M10 from Caddex in my Apex 5 quad....28 Sats it hit peak during Maiden flight....Ive been using Galileo ever since BF FINALLY got around to adding it....Its a European Sat...😮😳😀🇬🇧 It is custom mounted on the FRONT of my quad though....lol
Out the front is probably a cleaner area as we tend to have the VTX's at the back. I've never had 28 sats on a quad before!
@@CurryKitten It's on my channel a recent upload...The GPS is tiny and mounted on a 3D printed tower which doubles as a Strobe mount...Apex 5 Maiden...🤔😏😏
im using a hglrc m100 5883 gps module and can get 17 sats indoors in bf
Good old M8 😊
I'm not ditching any of mine
if you wana get the most out of BF and the m10/gps rescue you need to use the 4.5zulu builds ( rc1 is coming out very soon ). m10 gps are performance wise dependant on what the vender flashed it to some have the internal baud rate set WAY to low... and need to be setup using the ublox software properly.. also the m10 gps use different commands to configure so.. with the latest nightly you'll get the code that's updated to work with the m10 units properly.. you'll get loads of sats and lock much faster than older code
I did think that part of the autoconfig would use the ublox protocol to attempt to put the GPS into a higher baud rate and then drop down if it doesn't respond. But perhaps that bit it still jsut in 4.5. Looking forward to the release of this one
@@CurryKitten it goes with the m8 but the m10 has a different command set. Unfortunately companies didn’t bother to read the white paper before pushing these to market and the BF team had to make the fixes after they were already in the publics hands.. with the continuing evolution of the way we work with the Chinese maybe we can avoid this sort of thing for the future
My M10 on a BNF works no better than M8 on other quads. I hope that's just Betaflight 4.4 and I can't do the hack as I'm on a Mac and it seemed too complicated anyway.
Thanks for the vide, very interesting.
BF 4.4 does seem riddles with some annoying bugs. I'd say "roll on 4.5" but no doubt this will involve a bunch more new bugs. Perhaps they should just fix the bugs! I work on a Mac, if you do need a windows only piece of software, VMware Fusion is free and will do the job
@@CurryKitten Yeah, maybe I'll go that route (VM/Windows) but so far I got by... Thanks for the tip.
Every time JB mentions M10 I start shouting at the screen. He raves about it but I'm getting far better performance than him with my humble Beitan M8. I work with GPS modules at work and there's nothing wrong with M8 IMO. My quad regularly gets >20 sats. The GPS community could do a lot worse than to start looking at cheaper chipsets like the ones from Quectel, which perform very well.
I'd be happy to look at them if someone produces them, but right now Betaflight can use the UBLOX protocol, or basic NMEA, so I think it may depend if Quectel had it's own protocol that made it easy to autoconfigure. As for you M8 doing well, yep there's nothing wrong with them, but a test for you would be to run you M8 next to an M10 and see if there was a significant difference
The first thing I do when I get to my flying area is plug in my USB on the flight controller to a power supply so when it's time to fly I already have a lock on my first flight then after that I'm good for the day..that way I'm not cooking my video transmitter waiting for a lock
If you have to wait more than a few minutes, this is a good idea. However, if we can simply power on the quad as it stands and get a fast enough lock from a cold start so we don't need to do anything extra - then it's better in my book
I use this method as well. Not wasting those precious mAh sitting on the ground.
How do you do that on the remote showing your sats
If you have an RX which will send telemetry (like anything on ELRS) then you can get this (and a load of other stuff from Betaflight) on your radio
@CurryKitten I've been searching videos on how to do this, but I'm still confused. I have the boxer remote
@CurryKitten that's a video you need to make showing every step on making this happen and all the other stuff you can do. What do you have to do in betaflight to make this work.
I have 2 gps M10 and I removed them from my quads. They are not efficient !
Seemed better to me - what was the problem with yours?
My drone with f450 frame and same stack(speedybeee f4 v4) but with the golden 1000kv 3s motors its wobbling too much it flips on its own it shakes too much can't control it how to fix that can i contact you through any social media
First of all don’t listen to this gibberish. My M 10 gets 28 satellites in my backyard. My M8 gets seven satellites. All TH-cam videos demonstrate that M 10 is far superior to M8.
I just show the results I get. I do think the M10 is better because it gets the sats quicker - I don't know why it didn't lock as many on the 2nd test
Does anyone know the uart settings in beta flight for the m10 blitz mini gps installed on a nazgul f4?
@@benedictcumberbatch4275as long as you have not mixed the tax/rx pads when soldering, just set up the ports tab with the correct part you’ve wired to, and your all set. Make sure GPS is enabled on the configuration tab and that should bring it all to life.