I’m currently using MAVProxy in my setup to connect QGC with my Drone. It runs on a companion computer (Jetson TX2) and transmits the messages via WiFi. In the last few weeks I read multiple times that if the sole purpose is to transmit MAVLink messages to the ground one should consider using mavlink-router.
Can anyone tell me why this seems to be the general opinion, I guess both of the applications will get the job done, right?
I am interested on the answer for this one as well - im following
MAVProxy is really a ground control station that includes lots of utilities that can be used standalone. Its main purpose is to be a developer tool. It’s built around the
pymavlink python MAVLink library (which internally uses a C wrapper) and is also a good solution for routing, but is really capable of doing much more, at the cost of carrying baggage that you might not need.
mavlink-router is a specialized tool to “route” mavlink packets from endpoint to endpoint, and it has a very robust feature set for doing just that. It’s written in C, and you can distribute a single binary. It performs really well and is very dependable.
While they will both get the job done, IMO,
mavlink-router is made specifically for routing mavlink, and it performs much better. Although having worked directly with pymavlink myself, I’m biased against it (I’m part of the DroneKit founding team). And while it’s been a while since I used both pymavlink and MAVProxy directly, the project’s direction and goals remain the same.