Outback Challenge: Profesional Teams

[reedchristiansen]

Hello,

Just wonder if it is allowed, or appropriate for profesional sponsored teams to enter the outback challenge? For example, would it be ok if employees of a UAV related company were to participate in the challenge using company equipment, while being payed their normal salaries?

I did a quick scan through the rules and could not find anything solid one way or the other?

Reed

[ios]

Interesting question.

Section 2.2 states "This category is open to worldwide entrants – university students, privateers or hobbyists. Teams will be assessed for their eligibility to enter this category on application."

Section 5.3.2 states " UAV entries will be subject to the following requirements and limitations: Must not be a commercial off-the-shelf UAV complete system (ie: UAV with all avionics already integrated);"

This implies that (i) you are a university student, privateer or hobbyist, and it would depend if an entrent working for a UAV company and, using company equipment and funds, qualifies as one of the above listed in section 2.2 - (further guidance of the from the definition of each of those type of individuals from the organising committee would be required) and (ii) if the equipment was acceptable against section 5.3.2 above. I suppose the second point could simply be overcome by integrating a COTS autopilot with a previously unintegrated non-COTS airframe. Which is what some teams I think were doing last year anyway - I think a couple of the University teams were integrating the Micropilot into their own airframes.

Another interesting question would be, are some of last year's entrents eligible to enter the comp, given that through their efforts last year, they now have an integrated COTS autopilot and airframe (i.e. hobby airframe available at a hobby shop) combination!!!.

Section 2.2 also contains the catch all statement "Teams will be assessed for their eligibility to enter this category on application.", which implies the organising committee will be having the final say. I sent an email to the organising committee a few days ago, requesting more information about the eligibility criteria, however I havn't received a response yet.

Hypothetically, what would you enter into the comp reedchristiansen!? !!!?

[reedchristiansen]

I would probably enter a 56 or 60 inch flying wing with the btc 88 mm
http://www.procerusuav.com/Downloads/DataSheets/TechSheet_BTC-88_Gimbal.pdf
or the new btc101 with the photon IR.

The airplanes would be built by us and integrated with our autopilot. It would be very similar to the test platforms http://www.procerusuav.com/productsZagiTestAirframe.php

that we offer as COTS UAVs to our customers. By the sound of things, if we were to buy these from someone, we would not be eligable to comptete, however, where we are making them ourselves, maybe we can.

I think it would be a good oportunity to showcase our product, but at the same time, I don't want to be an "unfair" contestant.

Reed



Interesting question.

Section 2.2 states "This category is open to worldwide entrants – university students, privateers or hobbyists. Teams will be assessed for their eligibility to enter this category on application."

Section 5.3.2 states " UAV entries will be subject to the following requirements and limitations: Must not be a commercial off-the-shelf UAV complete system (ie: UAV with all avionics already integrated);"

This implies that (i) you are a university student, privateer or hobbyist, and it would depend if an entrent working for a UAV company and, using company equipment and funds, qualifies as one of the above listed in section 2.2 - (further guidance of the from the definition of each of those type of individuals from the organising committee would be required) and (ii) if the equipment was acceptable against section 5.3.2 above. I suppose the second point could simply be overcome by integrating a COTS autopilot with a previously unintegrated non-COTS airframe. Which is what some teams I think were doing last year anyway - I think a couple of the University teams were integrating the Micropilot into their own airframes.

Another interesting question would be, are some of last year's entrents eligible to enter the comp, given that through their efforts last year, they now have an integrated COTS autopilot and airframe (i.e. hobby airframe available at a hobby shop) combination!!!.

Section 2.2 also contains the catch all statement "Teams will be assessed for their eligibility to enter this category on application.", which implies the organising committee will be having the final say. I sent an email to the organising committee a few days ago, requesting more information about the eligibility criteria, however I havn't received a response yet.

Hypothetically, what would you enter into the comp reedchristiansen!? !!!?

[air]

I dont think you'd qualify as a hobbyist or privateer given that your full time job is working in the UAV industry.

[ios]

I don't think working for a UAV company automatically disqualifies anyone from entering the competition. I think it depends on which capacity they enter in. I think based on the rules,... even entering with company equipment wouldn't disqualify Reed from entering, but if they entered say one of their complete integrated UAV products, I think that would be enough to disqualify them. Also have a look at some of last years entrents, isn't the Flemingo supposed to be a product by Silvertone of Australia and Dave Jones' AUAV from the U.S. ? But I think they entered as hobbiests.... obviously the rules arn't very clear on this....

It would be good to get comment from the organising committee on all this...

[air]

Good point, it's all a bit vague. I'm still wondering if entrants need to drop the water bottle during the same flight that they find outback joe :)

[ios]

Ah yeah,... thats another one,...the way I read the rules you have one hour to find Joe, and drop the water bottle to him, with no limit of number of flights conducted - as long as its the the same aircraft. So potentially, you could fly the plane initially in a 'Search' configuration (i.e. with detection devices, such as camera attached) get Joes coordinates, go back, remove the camera, load the bottle, and send the plane off again in the 'Rescue' configuration, dropping the bottle at the given waypoints (you really wouldn't need the camera, or it's dead weight on this flight).

Looking at the rescue area however, its a real challenge to do that because of the size of the ground you have to cover, so I think the practical approach would be to have an airframe with sufficient payload capacity to carry all the equipment, and a flight endurance of somewhere in the order of 90 minutes - which is a challenge in itself - as most model planes only do around 15 minute flights.

[Mick Molloy]

Hello,

Just wonder if it is allowed, or appropriate for profesional sponsored teams to enter the outback challenge? For example, would it be ok if employees of a UAV related company were to participate in the challenge using company equipment, while being payed their normal salaries?

I did a quick scan through the rules and could not find anything solid one way or the other?

Reed

I might be able to shed some light on some of the questions raised in the thread,
My name is Mick Molloy and I am on the Technical Committee for the 2008 Outback Challenge, I was on the Technical Committee, the Safety Director and a Judge for the Competition in 2007.

RE: professional sponsored teams
"Search and Rescue - This category is open to worldwide entrants - university students, privateers or hobbyists. Small companies will be permitted to enter at the discretion of the Technical Committee provided they are shown to be participating in the spirit of the competition. Teams will be assessed for their eligibility to enter this category on application and the Technical Committee reserves the right to re-assess Team Eligibility at Deliverable 1.
Staffs of partner and sponsor organizations are permitted to enter a modified version of the Search and Rescue category which will be known as the Professional Challenge. This category will follow the same rules as the Search and Rescue Challenge; however competitors will compete only against other Professional Challenge competitors and will not be eligible to win any prize money."

Reed you may want to review rule 5.3.2
Must not be a commercial off-the-shelf UAV complete system (ie: UAV with all avionics already integrated); as ios stated

RE: last year's entrants eligible
If they went through the heartache last year they deserve to have something to build on this year, we are trying to encourage development, not re-invent the wheel each year. Note: the rules in 5.3.2 are not breached (I.E. they now sell that system commercially) and "Platform and onboard systems can be commercial off the shelf or custom made."

RE: Individuals Entries – we don't see that having to be part of a team is in the spirit of the comp, as long as it is for the S&R comp (AD comp requires at least 2 people the pilot and mission manager and that all parts of the mission can be SAFELY completed by 1 person launch recovery etc…

Re: Multi trips – your call on how you do it as long as it is done within the hour….

Finally, the best place to get you questions answered will be the official 2007 Outback Challenge Forum at CLICK HERE (http://www.unsysinst.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=55&sid=6c8de79411fb137074962a15e0c66f1a)
I will be updating it in the next few days for the 2008 competition.

Good Luck

Mick Molloy

[ShadesOfGray]

Just wonder if it is allowed, or appropriate for profesional sponsored teams to enter the outback challenge?



You misspelled professional. :rolleyes:

[Mick Molloy]

2008 UAV Outback Challenge official forum, http://www.unsysinst.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=55

[Dan_Jones]

One of the best parts about the competition is talking with other teams to see what they tried and how they accomplished certain goals. The problem with companies is that once they get a certain size, their information becomes proprietary. At that point, others cease to learn from it. As long as others can learn from what you do, then I don't think you'll have a problem. I personally drew the line at source code. That was proprietary. But the general functionality or procedural workings that the source code accomplished (or tried to accomplish - in my case) was fair game. So if you ask me exactly how my autopilot worked (or was supposed to work) then I would tell you. But that is just the icing on the cake. The most valuable information really is why it works like that. The reasoning behind the decisions is what people want to know more than anything else. So if you feel comfortable talking about what you did and why you did it that way, then I look forward to seeing you there. (speaking from a fellow competator's point of view).

On a side note, I also signed up but being a new father and a new homeowner with a normal 8am to 6pm job, I may not make it this year. But it would be great to go again, even if it is just to watch. The first year was great and I have a feeling it is only going to get better.

[CenTexFlyer]

We had considered this contest since we have a little experience in the SAR arena. As a matter of fact, Reed, the University of Texas team won the Texas Challenge using one of our wings flying at an all up weight of 13 lbs! I'm sure you remember that since they called on you to do a few software "mods" for them.

"We" do not fit into the category of "hobbiest or privateer" since we really do this for a living. Having reviewed the last years "winner", and what was done to secure their place, this one would be a fairly straight forward mission for us using anyone's autopilot. I could take your Kestrel, in my wing, and load it up with sensors and imagers, using our experience at SAR and we could pick out a tennis shoe at 500 ft AGL.

It's not all about the techno-wizzo stuff you can put in an airframe, but the practical field experience you can bring to table. Our tally is up now up to six confirmed "finds" of victims that have been missing as long as 7 months. Both water and land. Combine both of those experience levels into a single package and there would be quite a lopsided competition.

Gene