Is LogHat free to use?

There's a free tier that handles the common use cases — uploads, basic analysis, forensic PDFs, share URLs. Paid tiers add fleet features (batch analysis, JSON artifact APIs, longer retention, white-label sharing). Open the pricing page for current tiers.

Can I use both LogHat and Mission Planner?

Yes — they're complementary. Mission Planner is your live GCS and post-flight visual tool; LogHat is the AI-driven analysis layer on top. Many operators upload to LogHat for the structured report and 3D replay, then open the same .bin in Mission Planner for manual deep-dive into specific plots.

Which tool reads PX4 ULog?

MAVExplorer (via pyulog under the hood), PlotJuggler (with its plugin), PX4 Flight Review (canonical), and LogHat. Mission Planner and UAV Log Viewer are ArduPilot-only and don't read .ulg.

Does any of these tools work offline?

Mission Planner, MAVExplorer, and PlotJuggler are desktop tools that run fully offline. UAV Log Viewer is web-based but can be self-hosted. Flight Review can be self-hosted too. LogHat is hosted-only as of June 2026.

Which tool is best for fleet operations?

LogHat for the per-flight forensic layer and structured JSON output that fleet systems integrate against; MAVExplorer for custom scripted analyses. The two compose well — LogHat handles the per-flight analytics, MAVExplorer handles fleet-wide custom queries.

Is UAV Log Viewer the same as Mission Planner's log review?

Different tools. UAV Log Viewer is a separate browser-based viewer (logs.ardupilot.org). Mission Planner's log review is built into the Windows GCS. They overlap in capability — both read .bin and tlog — but UAV Log Viewer's web interface and 3D replay are cleaner for sharing, while Mission Planner's integration makes it more convenient if you're already running it.

Can the AI in LogHat replace expert log analysis?

No, and we don't claim it does. The AI ranks hypotheses and cross-references against community knowledge — it accelerates the first 80% of a forensic review. The final judgment, especially in marginal cases, still needs an engineer who knows the airframe. Treat the AI report as a starting point, not the conclusion.

Flight Log Analysis Tool Comparison — LogHat, Mission Planner, MAVExplorer, UAV Log Viewer, PlotJuggler, Flight Review

TL;DR: Six tools dominate ArduPilot and PX4 flight log analysis: Mission Planner (Windows GCS, integrated), MAVExplorer (MAVProxy ecosystem, scriptable), UAV Log Viewer (browser, 3D replay), PlotJuggler (robotics, ROS-friendly), PX4 Flight Review (hosted PX4 viewer), and LogHat (web AI analysis). They overlap in core plotting capability but differ widely in interface, scriptability, AI assistance, and PX4 ULog support. Pick by the question you’re asking: a one-off plot, a scripted batch over a fleet, an AI-assisted forensic report, or a deep parameter dive.

The six tools in one table

Comparing on the dimensions that matter:

Mission Planner. Type: Windows desktop GCS. Cost: free, open source. Supports: ArduPilot DataFlash (.bin), MAVLink telemetry (.tlog). 3D replay: yes. AI assistance: no. Strength: integrated GCS + log viewer; familiar to every ArduPilot operator. Weakness: Windows-only, manual log review (you have to know what to plot).
MAVExplorer. Type: Python desktop, part of MAVProxy. Cost: free, open source. Supports: DataFlash, tlog, ULog. 3D replay: no. AI: no. Strength: scriptable, community-shared XML graph definitions, fast for repeated analysis. Weakness: command-line interface, learning curve.
UAV Log Viewer. Type: browser (logs.ardupilot.org or self-hosted). Cost: free, open source. Supports: DataFlash, tlog. 3D replay: yes. AI: no. Strength: zero-install web access, drag-and-drop, expression engine for derived plots. Weakness: ArduPilot only, no AI digest, manual interpretation.
PlotJuggler. Type: Qt desktop. Cost: free, open source. Supports: DataFlash (via plugin), ULog (via plugin), ROS bags. 3D replay: limited (via plugin). AI: no. Strength: robotics-grade plotting, time-series operations, ROS-native. Weakness: not designed primarily for flight log forensics; setup heavier.
PX4 Flight Review. Type: hosted at logs.px4.io or self-hosted. Cost: free, open source. Supports: ULog only. 3D replay: limited. AI: no. Strength: canonical PX4 viewer, dense default report, fast for PX4 operators. Weakness: PX4-only.
LogHat. Type: web, hosted. Cost: free tier + paid. Supports: DataFlash, tlog, ULog. 3D replay: yes. AI: yes (Vector AI copilot). Strength: AI-driven root-cause hypotheses, forensic PDF, knowledge-base cross-referencing, Indian data residency. Weakness: hosted-only.

What to use for each kind of question

"I just landed and I want a quick visual check."

Mission Planner if you’re Windows-based and ArduPilot; UAV Log Viewer if you’re cross-platform or sharing with a teammate via URL; Flight Review if you’re on PX4. All three render a familiar dashboard fast.

"The drone crashed and I need to know why."

LogHat for the AI-ranked root-cause hypotheses with supporting log evidence per hypothesis. Use Mission Planner or UAV Log Viewer alongside if you want to manually verify the suggested cause. For PX4, Flight Review covers the basics; LogHat fills in the AI layer.

"I want to plot custom fields or compute derived signals."

MAVExplorer for scriptable derivations; PlotJuggler for ROS-native time-series transforms; UAV Log Viewer’s expression engine for in-browser derivations. Mission Planner’s graph language is more limited.

"I have 500 flights and want to identify maintenance triggers across the fleet."

MAVExplorer scripted via Python is the open-source path; LogHat’s JSON artifact stream (one structured record per flight) is the managed path. The two compose — LogHat’s JSON feeds your own batch analyser.

"I’m teaching someone to read logs for the first time."

Mission Planner’s Errors tab and Log Browser are the most beginner-friendly. UAV Log Viewer’s 3D replay helps visualise what the plotted fields mean in space. Start with the visual; introduce MAVExplorer when scripts make sense.

LogHat’s share URL gives a private, account-free link to the forensic PDF and 3D replay. Mission Planner exports static PDFs but doesn’t handle the sharing surface. UAV Log Viewer can be shared via URL but doesn’t produce a structured report.

Honest assessments — where each tool wins

Mission Planner wins when you’re already running it as your GCS and just need post-flight review without a separate tool.
MAVExplorer wins when you’re comfortable with a command line and want repeatable, scriptable, version-controlled log queries.
UAV Log Viewer wins when you need a quick browser-based look at an ArduPilot log without installing anything.
PlotJuggler wins when your workflow already involves ROS or you need advanced time-series mathematics.
Flight Review wins when you’re a PX4-only shop and the standard PX4 report covers your needs.
LogHat wins when you want AI-driven root-cause ranking, a forensic PDF that stands on its own, and Indian data residency — or when you have so many flights that manual review across them stops scaling.

Honest assessments — where each tool falls short

Mission Planner is Windows-only and the integrated nature means it carries the GCS complexity even for users who just want a log viewer.
MAVExplorer isn’t friendly to new users; the XML graph definitions are powerful but uninviting.
UAV Log Viewer doesn’t support PX4 ULog and has no AI layer.
PlotJuggler isn’t built specifically for flight log forensics; you’re bringing a robotics tool to a flight log problem.
Flight Review is PX4-only and doesn’t cross-reference to ArduPilot-shaped knowledge.
LogHat is hosted-only — offline review requires you to use one of the others. Paid for full features.

Where the tools complement each other

A working fleet-ops setup often runs three of these together. Common stack: Mission Planner for live operations, MAVExplorer for scripted batch queries, and LogHat for AI-driven per-flight forensic reports plus share URLs for external audiences. Choosing one shouldn’t mean ruling out the others.

If you’re evaluating LogHat against this list

Drop a known-good .bin or .ulg into LogHat, get the analysis result back, then compare it against the same log loaded in Mission Planner or Flight Review. The forensic PDF should match what you’d conclude manually within minutes; the AI hypothesis ranking should be defensible from the same log evidence you would have used. If both pass, the question becomes whether your operation values the time saved per flight enough to pay for the managed surface.

When LogHat helps — and when it doesn’t

LogHat is the AI analytics layer on top of the same log files all the other tools read. We’re not trying to replace MAVExplorer for scripting or Mission Planner for live GCS operations — we complement them. What we don’t do is offline analysis; if you need to review a log on a closed network without internet, the desktop tools are the answer.