rcairlinerflyer

I mean if this 13 year old wants to be cheap and money saving he could just through on board an FMA Direct Co-pilot and one of those new Range Video On-Screen Displays and be the heck done with it. Of course I would probably use a more high tech autopilot if I had the money but frankly I don't. That just leaves you with direct control if you want and, THIS IS A BIGGY, your power plant! What I would use is a fueless permanent magnet engine. It sounds goofy and all but for what the lil' man wants to do it would be the way. What would really be revolutionary is if we could all get together and try to accomplish this marvelous idea together...

rcairlinerflyer

Like I say, you'll never know if you don't try. Of course with some professional help and FAA allowance.

reuven_segal

ok...enough said about the whole deal. We all agree we are about doing things intelligently.
Having said that, perhaps we could look at running something concurrently..a design and build project perhaps, trying to keep things as cheap and simple as possible. The idea is that we can take a trainer (something nice and stable) and sort out an autopilot system to do the basic runs around the airfield.

The main idea here is that someone with limited knowledge could work through it step-by-step with the group, and learn a great deal. Problems can be sorted at as the project progresses. Obviously we would want to keep the costs to a minimum, but it would be a fantastic learning process.

Anyone interested in this proposal???


R

rcairlinerflyer

Sounds good. You really don't have to spend anything in doing what you're saying. Only about $500?... Although your idea doesn't really sound allll that facinating. If any of us were to do anything like that it would have to do more than just THAT.

I propose a cell phone radio which I don't know if it works, but if it does it'd be a great addition to anything. Eliminating the autopilot as we wouldn't really need it. Don't forget almost unimaginable range. I'm seeing into it right now...

cmoulder

Video from my Telemaster Electro with Unav PicoPilot

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showt...24#post9304313

Thread with a lot of ideas, first rate technically

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=511550

fireplug1111

My Feedback: (21)

VEGAS JET:

First of all don't listen to anyone on here saying that you CANT fly that thing in U.S.Airspace. Fly your heart out........ All the items that one post said pertains to CIVILIAN aircraft. Your aircraft is not defined under any AIM / FAR ( Airmans Information manual / Federal Aviation Regulations) Guidelines.
I live 40 miles from NASA ( thats right everytime that DAM shuttle lands my windows rattle ) And there is a Model club here that frequently flies to 20,000 feet and higher. ( do a google search for them) they use sat's for thier guidance systems. GPS and on board cameras mostly. Anyway NASA is always on thier asses to stop them, Guess what they still flying. I would susjest using HIGH teck long range Video systems and GPS for guidance. Thier systems are kinda simple and easy.

Enjoy the long range flight....

Harley Condra

My Feedback: (4)

Hey guys!!!!

HE'S JUST A TROLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

rcairlinerflyer

You know what I wan't to know. Why has it got to be such a firewall to accomplish something like this. I always see so many people just having fun with their hobby and doing the same old traditional way all hobbiests have been for several decades now. People, GET REAL, we're in the the year 2009 and what major things have we accomplished with this hobby or sport. I hear about all this UAV talk and feel like people are getting excited about reinventing the rubber wheel! Has anyone taken the time to accomplish something like this? I know I'm not the person who came up with this idea, but I frankly have some respect for this vegasjet person. Now I am going to disagree slightly with fireplug1111 because I would be a little more cautious with civil airspace and such. Of couse the FAA is going to be a little temptatious at the hobby but why does that have to stop any of us.

It's not like anyone knows the difference when they look up in the sky and see a model craft flying over or a model craft flying to Las Vegas. No one has any care of it anyway most of the time. Anyways, I'll have more to say soon...

rcairlinerflyer

I'm sorry, but I just don't see how flying around with a camera on the nose with a limited range of a mile or so could be astonoshing. It is enjoyable and all but why not more? Frankly, I can't stand AMA and all of their rules. They don't even allow FPV flying unless your buddy boxing or some BS like that!!! That's why I'm not a member of that turdy organization. I don't understand it. If you look on many videos, you see people breaking the rules all the time in regards to AMA standards.

Couldn't somebody do something "INTELLIGENTLY" like this?

rcairlinerflyer

Constantly, the world is being fed by new ideas, that solely expand "out of the box". There's not a lot of people in this area with a mindset like so. And truthfully, it doesn't surprise me. Too many people are old school when it comes to this. When I put a post up involving 'cell phone radios' and there was not much interest. Almost like no one cares or it is just "not a want". What's up with that?!
Is anyone on the same wavelength I'm on? I just curios. Has anyone had a vibrant idea like this lately?

rcairlinerflyer

Sorry to repost. I'll tell you what it is, though. Not very many people around here likes change. Nobody is willing to accept it, perfect it, or pursue it. It's as simple as that. I know I've gotten a little off subject with this, but it just mind bottles me, even to see people responding so inmaturely just like Harley Condra just did. I mean, who uses that many explantion points anyway! You're either inmature or mildly retarded. Get real people, get serious, or just get something. This is real. This is the future. Back in the early 1900's we used to think things we do on a regular basis now are crazy and insane.
A century from now, I'm sure we'll be looking back wondering how fogeyed we were.

smh20502

My Feedback: (1)

Out of the box thinking is what got us to land on the moon...what got the Wright brothers in the air. What you are seeing is the dumbing up of America. Most people believe what their friend says or what they hear in the news, paper etc. without any research into facts. Take the average college student...many are just priming themselves to work for someone else. They have no ability to think outside the box...they are what I call prime candidates for the Special Olympics. They can only do what a book says you can do. For example...relative to us, can the speed of light barrier be broken? Yes! Try to get some college kid to understand that! the book is wrong, or more accurately misinterpreted. The appropriate research will show that C that we view as 186MPS can be broken.


Now, for UAV stuff: what do you want to know? It's not that difficult now as there are several 6dof devices out there and the software is shareware. Cameras? not a problem, heads up display, not a problem...this is actually old technology. The only new part is the price is low enough that the average modeler can afford it.

Go check out http://www.sparkfun.com/commerce/adv...ction=products

Lets look into the actual FAA regulations. From what I recall, a UAV that stays under 1500 feet and does not fly over populated areas is free to fly. Above 1500' you may be in controlled airspace.


Lets get back to getting the UAV stuff up. there is diydrone.com that deals with all kinds of UAV data.

rcairlinerflyer

Well, of couse you don't want to turn a project like this into some sort of lunatic adventure! I checked out the site and never knew it excisted. Lots of interesting products I will admit.

smh20502

My Feedback: (1)

yea, go to yahoo and look up 6DOF (six degrees of freedom) you'll find quite a bit. I started looking at this stuff a couple years ago when trying to develop anti crash technology. Turns out this is very easy (relatively speaking) Problem is cost of components. I can make an anti crash box for less than a grand. But to sell it to the public means that device would be in the 5k market. Not too many people willing to pay that. Well, then I ran into the 6DOF stuff which kindof put the project on the back burner.

By Anti- Crash I want to take a plane, heli...doesn't matter get it in the air...flip it twist it...turn around and walk away with out a problem and have it land itself. Also, what to have it avoid people. Still not a problem. hopefully by this time next year I'll have something working

reuven_segal

Sparkfun is fantastic for both hardware and help. Used them a lot over the previous year.
You can combine one of the 5DOF chipsets and a new 2DOF 300deg/sec chipset for under $150 to give you a 6DOF unit at half the price of a 6DOF-in-one chip. I used it last month with no issues whatsoever.
Check out http://www.project240.net/mav_turbulence/ to see the footage for which it was used. Upstream in much of the footage you can see the four cobra probes giving 3D readings of the wind. The tunnel is 50m long for reference. Aircraft tested include Flash 3D, Walkera, Blade 400 and a variable dihedral, variable MOI model.

With the cost od hardware now around (got to love Sparkfun), the sky is not the limit anymore.

R

smh20502

My Feedback: (1)

So are you flying the plane and your electronics are keeping it from slamming to the ground?

smh20502

My Feedback: (1)

I like the clipped wing version...Was that because of a crash or is flying in a 50MPH wind just not challenging enough?

reuven_segal

The pilot and designer of the DAQ is my research partner from your side of town. Currently at Aeronvironment, he did some great research at the university of Florida.
The DAQ fits in nicely under the wing on the side of the Flash, or on a small blue foam plate on the skids of the heli. It weighs in with 16 channels Sampling over 200Hz at under 6grams. Despite some crazy smashes, it had no issues whatsoever. Nothing available COTS can compete with it. Part costs were minimal.
It is also possible to get a lot of the stuff free as samples from a number of companies.

R

smh20502

My Feedback: (1)

I'd like to talk in a little detail on what you're doing. Please excuse the elementary level questions I'll have, as I've had a few drinks and forgot 90% of what I new about electronic from 10 years ago..

DAQ...Data acquisition? digital to analog...

COTS?

So device exactly are you using here? I saw a lot of stick movement there in one of the videos. From what I can tell you are doing what I want to do with my heli's which is have crash avoidance.

reuven_segal

DAS=data acquisition system
DAQ refers more specifically to the data acquisition card/hardware
COTS="commercially available, off-the-shelf" meaning that you can go into a shop, say hello, and walk out with a ready to use peice of hardware, such as with the video cameras onboard for 50 dollars that at one point would have costs thousands and only available to the military.

There are some great reports available if you are into crash avoidence. Look up youtube, NASA and so forth for some of the free information and stuff going on. A lot of the equipment being used is publicised and suprisingly cheap and simple. For example, search youtube for crash avoidance for helicopters by a group of Navy students. Email me your details and I'll forward you journal articles and such as they pop up. I should have a fair bit in my records as well.

The pilot looks like he has just taken speed. He is working so hard because he is flying in a turbulence intensity of around 14%. Not many can do that. Look up http://mav.mae.ufl.edu/mujahid/publications/ for his publications and the funky research he has done. I guarantee you will enjoy it. At 14% turbulence intensity, even an athiest would start to thank God for EPP foam and superglue. For testing, the FLASH 3D turned out to be a superb aircraft. I will probably end up purchasing another 8 or 9 before I finish my research. I would highly recommend this craft to anyone.

R

smh20502

My Feedback: (1)

OK, I'm not completely loosing my mind...COTS, should have remembered from some software testing I did. DAQ, DAS...Ok...a few to many.

Crash avoidance from the research I've done doesn't appear to be too difficult, detecting and avoiding people, a little more difficult. At least in a size that a blade 400 can carry.

Thanks for the direction, I'll go look into your suggestions. I'm trying to find all the data I can..no college degree here, so I'm not limited by the books. But lack some of the basics.

14% turbulence? This is back to the basics of fluid dynamics isn't it. Crap. 14% he was on crack wasn't he. LoL

reuven_segal

Turbulence intensity needs a good google to understand. However, a lot of the journal articles do have some great stuff in them. It is quite confusing at the beginning, but there is just so much info out there. For example, refer to NASA education notes (free online) which are great for understanding various concepts. For some very cool information on helicopters that can effectively teach themselves to pull some weird and wonderful maneuvers, look at Stanford University's efforts.

CastorTroy2150

My Feedback: (10)

So I understand this thread has been gone for a while now and I just want to say one thing. Watched a friend of mine take off a .60 size trainer and fly it for a total tank of fuel. Never touched a rc plane in his life and landed better then half the guys i know that have been doing it for 40 years. Bottom line reuven was right. I have read to may posts on here where new people have gotten slammed. Man am I glad i wasnt at YOUR guys flying fields when I started. If I was, I wouldnt have been around in RC today, you are so discouraging. I had crazy ideas when I started and the "guys" brought me down to ground level in a very easy way. you all do realize that he was only talking about a 12 foot wingspan right? How many guys have built planes that large, pletny, look on youtube. Albeit that its not the place to start. But i really hope someday this guy posts his success and all you neigh-sayers jaws are on the floor. I really hope you eat it. You all werent trying to help him out, you were like the Sr. football jocks telling the stupid freshman weenie what was up. Hope your chests feel nice and big now. Please, lets try and keep the sport going and help out new guys, not make them hate the community in the first week and give up on it. THATS MY .02 cents, not to mention Im willing to bet that 65% of all the laws and regualtions were googled, not from first hand experience. So what he gets in to deep and buils one with a 7' wingspan and flys it @ 300', Im sure he knew his ideas were out of sight, but it pays to be a dreamer, and not a skeptic, look at the Wright brothers...right?

derrick_chi

I agree 100%, stop being so negative and discouraging. So what he is dreaming big, so are a lot of people, I have similar plans but they extend beyond his, and it can be done. The guys who write software for UAV's are mostly not pilots, most of the war birds we fly today have the aerodynamic properties of a large rock, what do you think keeps these things in the air, the flight controls software, thats what does it, and many of the guys who write the software have never even seen the inside of these planes. So just cause he has little rc flying experience does not mean he can't accomplish his goal. How do I know this because I work with the guys who write the software, and I design the hardware that their software goes on, that’s how I know.

What he is talking about is not beyond the capability of off the self technology you can buy from sparkfun, and the UAV software is free, so how “EXPENSIVE” can it be, GET REAL, he can even get the hardware to put it on for under $200, and the hardware hdl rtl models are even free, check out opencores.org, and digilent inc, then put 1 and 1 together and come up with 2, I’ll let you do the math. Dream big that’s what got us to the moon and will take us to Mars and beyond

cmoulder

If the original poster (troll) is so un-serious in his quest as to be deterred by a few RCU cranks, then he shouldn't haved considered it in the first place because he clearly hasn't got the perseverance to succeed.

If the mythical UAVer is serious, he should just shut up and do it. Plenty of alternate resources available.

Amazing how a few techie drama queens have gotten the vapors over this. Sheesh.[&o]