Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by problah on January 5, 2008 at 9:50pm

Those are pretty inventive ideas, and I wish you luck with those. International waters are just that. There is no set law defining what can happen in the area. The zone laws between aircraft and military vessels are covered under the Rules of Engagement. If you're not operating commercially, or in a commercial lane, you should be okay to fly around and investigate. NOAA and several other oceanographic companies use UAV's to explore large scale waterwats from a high altitude so they can find large masses (Aka the big floating plastic island that we've created).

Be inventive, be creative, because that is the only thing that will grow this hobby.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by david albert on January 23, 2008 at 10:54am

International waters is not international airspace. Just because you are in international waters 12 nautical miles from a shoreline does not mean you are in uncontrolled airspace. Case in point, I live in Miami where the Miami International Airport control tower controls 30 miles out, well into international waters.
-dave

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by problah on January 23, 2008 at 11:49am

Airport control towers control anything 30 miles out over 400 feet in elevation. However if you launch a small aircraft from international waters, the only thing they can do about it is shoot it down if they deem it hostile, or operating with illegal intent to enter the country.

• ▶ Reply

ModeratorPermalink Reply by Sgt Ric on January 23, 2008 at 12:10pm

The cri-cri aircraft is indeed novel (esp the version using hobby sized turbine engines),.
To build it for UAV use obviously you would want to lose the large bubble on top as unnecessary, leaving a very basis airframe.
However, it is still a low wing design, so not much builtin stablility.
The only remaining interesting part in my mind would be the twin engines, which are novel in that they are both nose mounted.
Better to mount them on the wing, or in the case of the turbines, further aft like a Lear or A-10.
So, in the end we are back to a very basic common design.

• ▶ Reply

ModeratorPermalink Reply by Sgt Ric on January 23, 2008 at 10:25pm

While Colomban developed an incredible aerobatic concept as you point out, the design is completely unsuited for the role of a stable UAV platform.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Marcus Wolschon on January 27, 2008 at 8:43am

I don't have much experience with fixed-wing airframes, so I'm not commenting on that at all. However, that image looks impressive.

What experiences did you make with the sonic sensors?
I'm planning on experimenting with sonic sensors for unattended landing of a powered paraplane.

As pointed out, international waters start very far off the shore.
What safery-features have you planned to recover your model there?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by john the welder on February 4, 2008 at 9:02pm

this is a good question. I remember a friend when I was young .He was looking at a barge for auction. Long short,ultralight landing deck. Maybe there is a market for an attended floating landing carrier for uavs operating in international waters.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Philippe M Roy on November 16, 2009 at 3:24pm

I thought international waters were under ICAO jusrisdiction and essentially could be allocated back to specific country agencies such as the FAA for the US, is this incorrect?

• ▶ Reply