Comment by Michael Zaffuto on September 30, 2009 at 4:30am

Just in time for the holidays! LOL, Great idea!
Add a mode switch for standard out of the box boomerang mode,
or select full ArduPilot mode for advanced users!

The box could have a yellow sunburst in the right bottom corner
stating "DIYDrones Compatible"!

Comment by Gary Mortimer on September 30, 2009 at 4:37am

No it would'nt be export controlled Chris, just think you could use an advanced autopilot to RTL via a route and that might describe a photo pattern for instance.

Of course the other way to avoid export nonsense is to make the autopilot outside of the USA ;-)

Comment by Rory Paul on September 30, 2009 at 8:52pm

I do not get it you go to all that trouble integrate the airframe, autopilot etc etc and its dumb.. I want my UAV to be point and toss and then I want to be able to tell the thing to loiter over the target. The had AV on the local tv this morning with their Switchblade Now there is a useful product.

Comment by Mike Bakula on October 1, 2009 at 10:24am

The idea is that in order to get acceptance, SUAS class systems have to be able to work without a lot of operator training. Nobody wants a system that requires a user to be staring into a PC screen for an extended time. While I don't agree with the trades they made for this system (I got to talk to the marketing guy at the AUVSI demo), it does have the advantage of being very simple and easy on bandwidth.

Comment by Jerry Rodberg on October 1, 2009 at 1:26pm

Low cost is $25000 ( http://homelandsecuritynewswire.com/single.php?id=8499 ). Remember, DIY drones is filled with technical people. This is about perfect for military use actually. The less complex the better when you're literally under the gun. It might be expandable to do, say, a pre-programmed search spiral, or even a simple knob that lets them set how "far" out it flies. I'm guessing the white handle is either a manual safety (for the moment) or a return to base trigger. I am a little worried about how something like this would handle mountainous terrain.

More functionality may be possible in the future. Now, a live video feed back to the launcher would be VERY useful then. Maybe pipe it to a small display in the handle, add a DVR review function for the flight. Low res now, maybe high res on command or after return. Just enough to know when to pull back. A second level, for instance, could be a GPS referenced terrain map in the handle that you preprogram waypoints before launch via a simple touch screen interface.

Comment by bGatti on October 1, 2009 at 7:56pm

The lack of RF has a military advantage, one cannot be traced by RF triangulation.
I would definitely add some randomized return vectors, as I wouldn't want this the return vector to be a dead giveaway.

Comment by Mike Bakula on October 1, 2009 at 8:03pm

The handle is just to set direction (point-n-shoot to set the bearing) -- the flight profile is fixed, and there's no communication while in flight.

Comment by Rory Paul on October 1, 2009 at 8:45pm

So you send this thing out it comes back with images and then you need to return to your fox hole and bury your head searching the images for your target? By the time you have gone through the image set the target has moved ten times already. Its okay if you are observing a fixed position or scouting a route but if you are in a contact situation you want to have the UAv loiter and orbit and feed you real time data. I like the design but you will find that it will be upgraded fast.

Comment by Mike Bakula on October 1, 2009 at 9:48pm

Did I mention that I didn't agree with the engineering tradeoffs in this system? ;-)

Comment by Rory Paul on October 2, 2009 at 8:31am

Sorry was having one of those days where seeing my own postings validated my existence....I really need to get out to fly something ;)

Comment