Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Sean Skirvin on August 16, 2011 at 6:42pm

The reason that this article says $2,000,000 darpa contest on the main page is that was the first title for this thread, but I changed it to $100,000. There is a $2,000,000 awarded to the manufacturer that is selected to build the first lot of 15 drones that wins the contest. It should be noted that a team that flies a entry can not be the selected manufacturer.

• ▶ Reply

ModeratorPermalink Reply by Chris Anderson on August 16, 2011 at 7:39pm

We discussed it when it was launched:
http://diydrones.com/profiles/blogs/darpa-creating-its-own-diy

The consensus was that very few teams here were interested. The whole designer/manufacturer split was weird and the perch thing seemed just silly. Also, we have an emphasis on open source here and and have a general policy of not discussing military use of UAVs, so it was a poor cultural fit.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sean Skirvin on August 16, 2011 at 9:32pm

Sorry, didn't see it under there, only looked under the events/contests section. If you want to remove this thread I'm fine with that.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sean Skirvin on August 16, 2011 at 9:44pm

I do agree that the manufacturer/designer split is kinda weird(bad). I am planning on openly sharing what we develop for the contest both here and at the other site once we have a little more to show. I was not aware or the not discussing military apps here, though I can completely understand. I guess even though it is a contest by Darpa, I still think of it as a fancy camera platform.

• ▶ Reply

ModeratorPermalink Reply by Chris Anderson on August 16, 2011 at 10:05pm

Yes, feel free to discuss. I think of Darpa as "pre-military", so that's okay.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by narwhal on August 16, 2011 at 11:35pm

I am entering this contest, it took me a while to design a UAV that would fit the specs properly but I feel like I have come up with a good design, although how well it works in practice I won't know until deliverable 2. I am currently talking to a 3D Video designer on making me a 3D video to fulfil the first deliverable of the contest.

It is based on lighter than air technology with a variable geometry to change its internal density (achieving silent VTOL). I am currently building an airship for the outback challenge that involves using OpenCV, Bundler, ffmpeg, x264 and Google Earth for calculations regarding object detection/positioning and structure from motion so I will attempt to use the same software solution for the UAVForge challenge. If you would like to collaborate on some of the software I would be more than willing (I have to open up my server source anyway due to using GPL libs).

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sean Skirvin on August 17, 2011 at 12:26pm

I would be very interested to collaborate with you on this. I am not very experienced in OpenCV, but a new team member that I am hoping will join soon will be much more on your "level" in that respect. More of my background is in windturbine development. Working on that we developed a cost effective way to rapidly produce, high strength, light weight, wind turbine blades using vacuum infusion and other methods. I also have a little experience working with 3d graphics, CAD, and FEA (just 2d magnetic modeling), though I would not consider myself an expert.

We are currently working on a tri-tilt rotor design. Nothing revolutionary in the design, just the way we are making it break down, and how we are dealing with the weight I feel may give us the edge. We are also going to be testing a DIY active gyroscopic stabilizer, along with other exotic vibration dampening methods if time permits. As far as the prop noise we plan on moving the props further away from the support beams, along with making the beams more aerodynamic so less pressure will build up above them. Also time permitting, I would like do design and build a custom set of props for our airframe.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Stephen Wuest on November 10, 2011 at 12:41pm

I agree with the comment that this is not a military UAV site.

I have reservations about the managerial efficiency of anything overseen by DARPA.

I have serious doubts that Boeing or Lockheed or the big aero boys have practical experience building things with Reynolds Numbers under 100,000.

I like the idea that DARPA is opening the door to dialogue, but I think that it will turn out to be a Director type methodology posturing exercise, with very little practical connection. This is the golden age of RC, and I really respect the people who have designing and building for 30 years. I don't think that DARPA does.

 

 

• ▶ Reply