There is nothing stating autopilots with waypoints is not allowed, and if you think it is I want to see hard concrete proof.

Originally Posted by NorCalMatCat

There is nothing stating autopilots with waypoints is not allowed, and if you think it is I want to see hard concrete proof.

Excellent find Gary, sell the autopilot to NorCal and let him sell it on eBay...

while I'm on a roll..... ian, as far as the media and negative bias, I think the media is trying to bias the "sheep" to the negative. I think the battle is unfortunately lost and the AMA is trying to show "members just don't want FPV"

Originally Posted by thekubiaks

Excellent find Gary, sell the autopilot to NorCal and let him sell it on eBay...

while I'm on a roll..... ian, as far as the media and negative bias, I think the media is trying to bias the "sheep" to the negative. I think the battle is unfortunately lost and the AMA is trying to show "members just don't want FPV"

I don't understand what you are trying to say here... please clarify

Originally Posted by NorCalMatCat

I don't understand what you are trying to say here... please clarify

Just messing with you, but seriously, in the article Gary pointed out, if the powers that be are going to go after someone selling drones to foreigners, it isnt a stretch to say they will go after someone selling waypoint capable autopilots. The media would probably spin it as selling autopilots to Al Queda so they can fly Lear jets into buildings or spy on America, total absurdity....

Originally Posted by thekubiaks

Just messing with you, but seriously, in the article Gary pointed out, if the powers that be are going to go after someone selling drones to foreigners, it isnt a stretch to say they will go after someone selling waypoint capable autopilots. The media would probably spin it as selling autopilots to Al Queda so they can fly Lear jets into buildings or spy on America, total absurdity....

The whole ordeal behind that article was that the guy was selling something listed on the governments munitions list, it IS a military UAV classified as a military defensive weapon, which makes it illegal, not that it has an autopilot.

Right.That case happened the way it did because the Raven was specifically listed on the US munitions list. If autopilots are also expressly listed, then it would be illegal to export them, but if not you'd be fine.

Just keep on pressing the test button guys. Its the IMU that is the problem under 1950's missile control regs.

This explains it pretty well http://www.micropilot.com/uav-export-controls.htm

Here's Northrop moaning about it http://www.suasnews.com/2012/04/1513...throp-grumman/

This is the one I should have remembered first time round, Micropilot autopilots bought and smuggled http://www.suasnews.com/2009/05/1678...itar-offences/ Its only because people seem to be looking the other way that nobody has been charged IMHO

The really dumb thing and anti American jobs is that importing autopilots from China is legal!

Huh, that's interesting. So this applies to hobby grade autopilots like the FY-31AP and such, not just military grade UAV gear? But you can import that into the US because it's made in China, but an American who made an identical product couldn't export it elsewhere? That makes no sense at all.

That sort of weird logic has been used elsewhere. For instance, for a long time any product
using high grade encryption could be produced anywhere in the world and imported into
the US legally, but you could not take that same product or an equivalent and export it.
The rise of WWW, E-commerce finally forced em to change that although some remnants remain.

ian

I think I am right in saying, but could very well be wrong...If you have an idea in America is belongs to the country first, then you. So best have your ideas outside of the USA.

There is one autopilot out there that was invented by an American whilst he was in Australia. Because of that he can make and export it from the USA. If he claimed that idea in the USA he would be bound by ITAR, yes its nuts.

The FY stuff is a lift of some very excellent opensource work. I wonder how many people knew that. The project that did the legwork does not get the recognition it deserves.

I don't think in the 50's people thought there would be communication devices in peoples pockets that had all the sensors required for missile control.

Heck thats why there is the famous Apple TOS 4.2 no autonomous devices term.

What opensource system is FY based on?

I am an American, I buy stuff, I don't sell AP's, so I am not going to worry myself about it :P.

Well you can work it out if you use GoogleFu try the one that can can use the same GCS.

The FY people offered help to the project and then ran off and started making boards, to the extent that some of the first issues that never made it to the opensource project boards are in the early FY gear. The OpenSource project worked it out before they hit the go, the FY guys did'nt.

Its no surprise that they take ages to roll out new features, the opensource project worked out what they were doing and stopped releasing stuff.

If you re in America its ASTM F-38 that you should really be worried about.

Originally Posted by Gary Mortimer

Well you can work it out if you use GoogleFu try the one that can can use the same GCS.

The FY people offered help to the project and then ran off and started making boards, to the extent that some of the first issues that never made it to the opensource project boards are in the early FY gear. The OpenSource project worked it out before they hit the go, the FY guys did'nt.

Its no surprise that they take ages to roll out new features, the opensource project worked out what they were doing and stopped releasing stuff.

If you re in America its ASTM F-38 that you should really be worried about.

Can you please name or link to the opensource project it is based on please? I can't google it without a reference.

I believe that this technology is here to stay, we must try to control the narrative by doing positive things with it. Here is a link to a video I made and donated to the Vietnam Veterans of America. It is now posted on the DoD's Vietnam War 50th Commemoration website.
http://www.vietnamwar50th.com/videos/
If anyone asks what is FPV send them to this site, I put FPV in the title for that reason.

Originally Posted by Tarro

I believe that this technology is here to stay, we must try to control the narrative by doing positive things with it. Here is a link to a video I made and donated to the Vietnam Veterans of America. It is now posted on the DoD's Vietnam War 50th Commemoration website.
http://www.vietnamwar50th.com/videos/
If anyone asks what is FPV send them to this site, I put FPV in the title for that reason.

That is a great video. Thank you for posting it's link