As you may be aware, Darpa and the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center Atlantic have just started a collaborative initiative to design, build and manufacture UAV systems (http://www.uavforge.net/). This was an opportunity for me to propose two themes based on two weaknesses of any quadrotors built to date which are, they can only fly an average of 15 to 20 minutes on a single LIPO battery, and there are no simulation programs predicting what could happen in bad weather (wind, rain, snow, etc.).
My main role is not to design a quadrotor, nor its avionics or electronics, but to work with academic groups and research institutes to explore, and perhaps deliver a fuel cell power source for keeping a backpacked-size quadrotor “alive” for well over 3 hours.
My second role is to select an existing community software package, e.g. the APM Mission Planner and have a team add functionality. This functionality will be to simulate a mission during “extreme” weather conditions (winds, rain, snow, etc. all in moderation of course). Bad weather has a direct influence on flight time and the success of a mission. If we could “insert between waypoints” weather-related impairments, we could decrease the number of aborted missions and lost or crashed quadrotors.
Is the APM Mission Planner a possible solution to accomplish this second task? The simulation function of the APM MP will have to work without physical hardware (except for a laptop or tablet), the goal is to evaluate, on screen, the flight plan in simulation mode and perhaps adjust the waypoints for a safer route, if at all possible.
Thanks for your upcoming comments.
Chris, the APM Mission Planner is a superb piece of software and it should be kept that way without having a third party (us) messing with it.
What if an add-in module having hooks to the Flight Planner code (waypoints), hooks to the Simulation code (sim data) and hooks to the GUI? Would it be a reasonable approach vs. nothing?
This approach, good or bad, will bring many questions: Is the source code available, and if yes what programming language is it? Who has the authority to let us build an open source add-in?
You mentioned in your APM Roadmap a Dev Team, but did anyone write a tutorial on the APM MP’s internals or is it just Michael Oborne who’s doing development and code integration?
I should stop asking too many questions at this early point in time…
Yes, the source code is available (it's in .Net). Everything we do is 100% open source.
You should speak with Michael Oborne directly about the idea of plug-ins. He's the author.
Hi Chris, I'm just beginning my research into autopilots for a plane I'd like to have flying next year (when the $ may be available). I must say... what the ArduPilot team has accomplished already is just incredible!! Many bits of your roadmap post above only amplify my excitement for this project.
I'm sure you've heard this one 100 times since yesterday, but .. any plans to add flaperons to APM? I think many of my missions may find me landing on short runways so slowing my plane down would be pretty nice.
I want to reiterate that I don't mean to undermine your giant list of accomplishments by illuminating a feature that's not currently implemented! I'm just asking because I love flaps :)
Will the new 'high-level photo/video controls ...' include a command set that will control a camera shutter with the flexibility required for aerial survey applications?
We need to be able to snap pictures every X meters (or Y seconds) along a line between selected waypoints at a defined altitude and ground speed. The event should be logged in realtime and the logs should provide geo-stamping information. Manual triggering from the GCS is needed. Mission planning aids would be a big help.
Thanks to all the great work by you and the developers we have successfully flown a 200 meter square survey track. All we need now is the camera shutter control.
Irvin, the issue is that all cameras are different. We have a relay on board that you can trigger whenever you want, if your camera shutter can be controlled by a relay. Other cameras can be controlled by an IR blaster connected to a RC channel; in that case you can trigger it via a spare RC Out channel on APM. Yet others can be hacked to take a direct digital signal, such as the Canons that can be controlled via the CHDK.
So the question is what kind of camera you have and which method is best to control it.
I have a camera that works very well with the relay (Canon SD1100 IS with CHDK) but 'you can not trigger the relay whenever you want'.
The problems are:
The current relay commands don't work properly. (See Issue # 374 Once the relay is turned on - it can not be turned off.)
I see no command set that will cause the relay to be 'triggered' every X meters or every Y sec. between two waypoints.
A log of the trigger event is needed for geo-positioning the pix after the flight.
A trigger command sent from the GCS is needed to ground test the camera.
I submitted Issue # 292 Add a command TRIGGER in March.
Again, thanks all for the good work.
Gotcha. There is a difference between the functions that we build into MAVLink and those you can add yourself to the code. You can do anything you want with APM, but for some functions you'll need to add a line or two to the code. Others (chosen by popular demand) we'll build into the standard configuration, so you can script them in the Mission Planner.
I'll check the MAVlink "relay off" command Issue you mentioned..
What would the difference between "Relay on" and "Trigger" be?
The trigger command would just do with one command what you can now do with multiple existing commands....
I have seen the relay issue on the issue tracker. It is near the top of my to do list. I keep finding more interesting navigation bugs and am digging in to them at present.