Replies to This Discussion

3D RoboticsPermalink Reply by Chris Anderson on June 14, 2008 at 9:38pm

Very interesting proposal. As you've discovered from reading this site, it's possible to do these thing for much lower cost than people think. I wouldn't suggest that our autopilots are ready for deployment in Iraq (or even the local park), but you can see that the low end gear is getting very capable and may soon suit a local build UAV.

BTW, I was amused to see that MicroPilot claims it's the smallest and lightest (28g) autopilot in the world. Every autopilot we've built is smaller and lighter than that, as are all of the commercial ones in our range, from Procerus to AttoPilot. I think it's time for MicroPilot to revise their marketing material (or build a much smaller autopilot!)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by wayne garris on June 14, 2008 at 10:02pm

that is simply fascinating , i work for a small company building 1/2 scale uavs, our A-3 or a little larger version of it just might foot the bill , our whole concept is easy to build,maintain,repair and fly, we have also flown it for Washington state DOT under a COA . read more about us and the A-3 at Peak-Aviation also check out my profile
Thank you
wayne

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rory Paul on June 14, 2008 at 10:21pm

Sorry within 15 minutes that UAV would be deployed against US troops in my opinion rather send them school supplies! The situation in so fluid one day one faction is fighting with us the next day its against us.

There have been reports that a non US UAV was shot down over Baghdad this year already.

Oh and MicroPilot's day night sensor package....well lets just say that the Israeli company that makes it would be none to pleased to see it flying in Iraq...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Howard Gordon on June 14, 2008 at 10:50pm

The employment issue is significant, and we certainly understand your motivation. However, there might be an issue with the fact that a UAV can't be at all places all of the time, and operating time might be relatively low.

Could you discuss how you think the locals might employ this type of system ? Are you considering primarily urban or rural settings ?

Though this isn't what you asked, I had the thought that, at least in an urban setting, it might be worth considering creating a population of stationary cameras deployed as a large wireless mesh network, perhaps powered by solar cells + battery. That type of deployment would fairly labor intensive, between building and configuring the cameras and radios, installation, repair, and live monitoring, thus representing significant training and employment opportunities.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Roger Gerrard on June 15, 2008 at 7:14am

The Firetide system can be deployed statically and dynamically (tested up to 185mph) so both methods are being considered. Much of the trouble in Iraq is caused by insurgents coming across the Iranian border so the idea is to have a string of observation aircraft along the border and over the southern marshes sending video surveillance through the mesh network back to police and military posts so they can monitor criminal/insurgent activity. There are also checkpoints in rural areas that have no way of communicating with their hqs.

I have a Multiplex EasyStar on order to start a demonstration project for the Iraqis to show how a UAV is within their reach. I hope to have a Firetide installation deployed at one of their bases (static) to show its capability by August.

Roger

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Roger Gerrard on June 15, 2008 at 7:17am

The Burt Rutan design is very efficient and with the 19hp Lombardini diesel I expect to get 24hrs of flight time. I am also looking into the Cineflex system, though the weight is a concern.

Roger

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Howard Gordon on June 15, 2008 at 8:04am

o you really need such a large engine ? There are some very efficient 4-stroke diesel engines that are quite a bit smaller, e.g.
http://www.modelflight.com.au/enya_engines/enya_41_4c_diesel_rc.htm

Clearly, the limiting factor will be your camera system size and weight. I imagine Wayne Garris can give you some advice on matching the payload to the airframe and propulsion system. What options for camera systems are you considering ?

By the way, though it's dated, there is an interesting discussion of UAV endurance / range here - http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=360145

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Howard Gordon on June 15, 2008 at 7:39am

The Firetide system looks good - that's along the lines of what I was thinking. It seems that you should be able to integrate the video feed from your UAV(s) with your static monitoring stations to provide coordinated operations.

Beyond that, it's just a matter of finding the right airframe / propulsion / camera / communication component combination for a workable UAV, along with a training program that enables the knowledge transfer from foreign contractors to local labor who can ultimately assume the task of deploying and maintaining these static and dynamic surveillance systems.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rory Paul on June 15, 2008 at 8:05am

Got to love this...we destroy there own indigenous R&D capability that they had under Saddam (they had UAVs trust me), then you want to give them cheap alternatives while they have the oil dollars sitting in US banks they could buy turn key US systems with and all the while we pay $5 a gallon for gas my head spins. This is like Catch 22.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Howard Gordon on June 15, 2008 at 8:15am

Condor -

This could easily devolve into a heated political discussion which would be most unwelcome on this forum. A forum member asked for some technical advice, and the purpose of this forum is to share knowledge. Please bear that in mind with your future comments.

• ▶ Reply