We are unhappy about three things of our back transitions:
It takes too long.
We are using the Generic AAVVT v-tail plane airframe with Quad VTOL airframe (13007), which doesn’t support pusher thrust inversion. (Corresponding mixer file: https://github.com/PX4/Firmware/blob/master/ROMFS/px4fmu_common/mixers/vtol_AAVVT.aux.mix) Is there a reason for that, other than it has just not been done? I could create a PR copy-pasting the corresponding lines from the Deltaquad mixer.
When using a VTOL transition command, the drone flies back to the waypoint where the transition was triggered. (https://github.com/PX4/Firmware/blob/ca0b5700ab0ba6dd2c088564dc13988af27d3263/src/modules/navigator/mission.cpp#L997-L1019)
Why was this code added? We don’t see any benefit in this behaviour. If the drone overshoots, it flies back only to fly forward afterwards. Surely there must be some use for it though, otherwise it wouldn’t have been added in the first place.
We would like the drone to continue to the next waypoint after the transition command. If this is in favour with most people, I can also create a PR.
One of the reasons why we don’t use the VTOL Transition & Land command is that the pusher gets disabled when landing. (https://github.com/PX4/Firmware/blob/ca0b5700ab0ba6dd2c088564dc13988af27d3263/src/modules/vtol_att_control/standard.cpp#L342-L346)
Flying in high winds without pusher assist has already almost cost us a drone on a previous flight when the drone couldn’t advance against the wind. We understand that for drones with no feet it’s not a good idea to have the pusher spinning when touching the ground. Our preferred solution would be to keep the pusher active above MPC_LAND_ALT2 or similar. What do you think of this?
A simpler alternative would be to add a parameter to activate/deactivate the pusher on landing.
We would be glad to know your thoughts on our ideas