Perspective?

[bmw330i]

Well, before everyone gets too worked up about a toy airplane autopilot no matter how nifty the new features are just try this perspective on for size:
http://www.is.northropgrumman.com/systems/nucasx47b_gallery.html

What an eye-opener. Now that's an autopilot. What now floors me is that the same Govt. that builds these autonomous fighters wouldn't laugh someone out of the room who came in asking to classify any of these model airplane flying autopilots as more than a hobby item. I mean really.

Damn I can't wait to see one of those X47 in the sky though. Those photos were taken in San Diego. I swear I have seen that building. Looks to be in Rancho Bernardo somewhere. So cool.

So, just for fun why don't the most paranoid among us give some worst case examples of how dangerous these toy airplanes we are playing with or beta testing are...I would start but I can't even dream up a worst case that a foam FunJet flying (or flying wing) around for 10min, 20min who cares if it flew for 2hrs what damage could it cause. Full speed the damn thing is sure fun but I really can't see it harming anything bigger than a small dog or cat even with a direct hit. The physics just don't support it. I saw it drill straight into the ground 4x and it barely dug up soft dirt.

So, this thread is fair game for your fantasies about a hobby autopilot or about the X-47B...I just want to lighten up the discussion some here. It's gotten way to heavy lately.

-BMW

[dmgoedde]

BMW,

I see the main difference between serious and "toy" autopilots NOT having to do with bells and whistles or comparison against state of the art, but rather robustness and base level capabilites above some threshold.

When you start adding things like gain scheduling, <10m precision, high rate attitude control, and triggers, it is not just a toy. It is at least dual use like EAR.

Many of the simpler autopilots are FAR more sophisticated and capable than what was used to guide Germany's V1 (can that be called a UAV?) in WWII.

[bmw330i]

[Edited]After re-reading in a new light I don't dissagree.

[bmw330i]

[edited] I think this is a complete misunderstanding. I'll edit this to reflect just that and not get wordy and make more confusion here.

[dmgoedde]

Please believe me based on #1 below and any credibility I have built on RCGroups as someone that knows a few things...

1) I have a PhD in chemistry

2) I know that energetic compounds can in fact be improvised using some commonly available consumer items. This is real folks, not the BS you saw on McGyver. People have been hurt from Evil people applying this sort of knowledge. Look up Timothy McVey, look up the 1st World trade Center bombing, look up the London Bus bombing of 2005, look up Richard Reid. Not the fodder for a funny thread at all. BMW, I assume you have a good heart, so I conclude you are simply ignorant of what history says of what is possible.

3) BMW, why do you think a 2 Lb funjet is the upper weight limit for a "hobby" autopilot? Inherently why would a 500 Lb plane not work?

4) Who cares about the meager kinetic energy of a lowly Funjet... nobody would waste their time crashing a funjet into a cat/dog/building/embassy. It would be something a lot bigger with a payload.

Please, let's not have a lite and funny thread here. I don't see any room for humor on this one.

Instead of lightening the mood by poking fun at export regulations and saying how harmless R/C planes are, I suggest we all talk about Kalman filters, components, etc... I'd like to see some pretty pictures taken by Icebear.

[dmgoedde]

...Dean...honestly. It's no X47 autopilot. No disrespect. You are one person. Likely quite a team of bright people spent years on that thing. There is no comparison. I just looked at the specs of the X47. Crazy. About time. I am laughing as I imagine the day one of our unmanned fighters goes head-to-head with a manned enemy fighter...pulls a 20g turn and fires without them having a clue what just happened...it's amazing the possibilities. If nothing else it's a deterrent because how is Russia, China, Iran.. going to complete? With a fleet of AttoPilots smuggled in via illegal exports? AttoPilot is good for what it was designed for but not a threat to anyone any more than any hobby RC airplane. Less so I think because flying autonomously it's far less likely to do anything that would cause harm not the reverse.

I am in no way saying the money you are spending is not well spent. We live in a society of laws and it's expected and normal to cover your bases. That is a given in the US. But along those lines ... Please spend some more money and get some equally good lawyers to write you up a contract for people to sign before buying it that protects you from frivolous lawsuits when they hurt themselves with it. You did say you've made it so children can fly it with little or no training. Imagine a parent giving it to their kid who flies it and causes injury to someone...the hobby UAV is more of a personal injury worry IMHO than national security. I sort of like Paparazzi is not all that easy to get flying because I truly don't like the idea of children or dolts buying one and doing something stupid with it.

That's somewhat my worry with these things. Make it so an idiot can fly it and some idiot will fly it and do somehing an idiot would do with it. Then like an idiot blame you for not making it idiot proof. Having to have some reasonable level of skill to use is a good thing. Sort of a "you must be this smart to fly it". Then if someone does something dumb you can say it was never intended for idiots or children to fly...requires some assembly... ;)

Again Kudos on your work. A lot done very quickly with very little budget. You can't say that about the X47. Now I think Northrop though should be calling you because you have what it takes IMHO.My responses aren't about my ego and AttoPilot. Atto is mere dust compared to the X47!!!

My comments are about someone doing harm to civlians with a DIY cruise missile, which unfortunately is very possible.

[bmw330i]

[edited]Lots of people have PhD. No need to state your credentials I believe you I just may not agree. That's ok.

[dmgoedde]

Are you telling me Paparazzi couldn't be setup to fly a 500 Lb airplane, then actuate a servo upon arrival to waypoint #X?

This is not a funny topic. Yes: Let's get a bunch of smart people together to fantasize about funny situations of them being destructive by crashing into a cat. Good thing that is the worst thing a mere hobby autopilot can do. Good thing we coded them to not trigger cameras or fly precise or anything!

[bmw330i]

Are you telling me Paparazzi couldn't be setup to fly a 500 Lb airplane, then actuate a servo upon arrival to waypoint #X?

This is not a funny topic. Yes: Let's get a bunch of smart people together to fantasize about funny situations of them being destructive by crashing into a cat. Good thing that is the worst thing a mere hobby autopilot can do. Good thing we coded them to not trigger cameras or fly precise or anything!
[editd] I am sure it's quite easy for some people to do. Not me but some people. Even if I could I just wouldn't do it nor see a reason to.

[eddymoore]

Yes, I am saying that. No it can't. Prove me wrong. Build a 500lb airplane and do just that and I'll admit I am wrong. Dreaming it up here on a forum is no proof. I know of no Paparazzi autopiloted model airplane that's 500lbs and that has a servo to drop .. what''s the payload capacity of a 500lb model airplane again? ...my point stands.

This is laughable. Control theory doesn't break down at some magic weight. Of course you don't use a hobby servo, but making a big servo is not difficult, and not expensive. Likewise the burden of proof is not on someone to prove it - that would be very dangerous and foolish.

That you have got your knickers in a twist over a big state sponsored project is immaterial to the fundamental engineering going on. Whilst waving qualifications around is never helpful, I have worked on guidance and decent for the current crop of Mars landers - billions of euros/dollars (as you like) - and guess what, it's the same physics, the same engineering, just more money to run hundreds and thousands of expensive and time consuming simulations and check every number at every stage, and write tedious interface reports, fly 25 people to monthly project meetings in different countries, and other general nose picking, over several years.

This is RCGroups not DOD or MIT labs here.

There are lots of people around here who've been to MIT. It's not a secret place full of boffins doing some higher engineering that no one else understands. The budgets are not huge. It's just smart people doing some interesting stuff in a logical way. I can say that same for my own institution Cambridge UK - it's honestly not witchcraft. You're just wanting it to be.

But simply because your flying wing can cross a waypoint with great precision does not make it dangerous any more than my hand-held GPS makes me dangerous.

Bizarre reasoning. A kitchen knife isn't dangerous - unless I decide to attack you with it. A 747 isn't dangerous - unless you fly it into a building. Do you genuinely think that the measure of something's efficacy is a weapon is defined only by its original purpose?

I urge you not to pursue this argument much further because it is bizarre and quite unhelpful. It is also not particularly suitable content for this forum, indeed no more suitable than discussing stabbing techniques is in a chef's forum.

[bmw330i]

[edited]I appreciate your enlightening words. I edit this not to go back on what you quote above but to stop a misunderstanding and my flip comment (my mistake) from escalating further in the wrong direction.

[bmw330i]

eddymoore: You more than anyone has completely missed it. RCGroups UAV thread is not MIT labs or DOD. It's a direct comparison. I didn't say they do not read RCGroups forums. I said it's not the same thing. Why did you assume like that I was trying to say the best and the brightest don't come here and read or post? I'm not trying to make argument but correct a misunderstanding. The best and the brightest from all around the world certainly do read forums. Maybe even these ones.

Sorry people. There are some valid views this can be read as off topic and inappropriate. I'm locking the thread. Too sensitive of a topic right now (or maybe any time)...maybe just a bad topic I'm not taking it personally...I hope none of you do.

-BMW