Discussions

Flight Termination

Posted by Tod Rippin on March 21, 2010 at 1:07pm
Hello everyone,

So I have a question about flight termination/failsafe modes, what setup is everyone using?
I am looking for a failsafe device that will trigger a parachute in the event of signal loss and cut power to the motor (electric) or possibly the entire radio system together, or that can be manually triggered remotely in the event of a malfunction as what is required for the "Out Back Challenge" competition.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks.
Tod

You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!

Join diydrones

Email me when people reply –
Follow

Replies

  • Andrew Dunlop March 28, 2010 at 8:28pm
    Apologies for replying to my own post.

    The oracle has spoken...

    "Any aircraft that was eligible to fly last year can fly this year..."

    The geofence is only required for those that choose to take advantage of the staged withdrawal thing. Apparently version 1.1 of the 2010 rules will be out shortly.
  • Andrew Dunlop March 26, 2010 at 4:16am
    I can only speculate on what may have triggered the Outback Challenge rule changes. My guess is that the competition organisers are trying to ease up on the 5 second rule, and the staged withdrawal is a mechanism to avoid having to crash planes after 5 seconds of telemetry outage. I do think the organisers are genuinely trying to respond to feedback and make the competition better.

    However...

    The proposal is a staged withdrawal scheme, where UAVs can return to a staging point and wait for telemetry to be re-established, and if that fails can return to base to attempt manual landing. The net effect of this proposal is that a UAV can potentially stay out of RF and visual contact for over 4 minutes. If the autopilot has lost its mind this could result in a UAV being quite a long way away. This is presumably what has triggered the geofence requirement.

    I don't love the added complexity that the new rules bring; I believe systems that call themselves "safety" or "failsafe" should be simple, reliable and testable. This just isn't. I am hopeful that the 5 second rule will continue to be allowed - with a parachute this represents a simple, reliable and non-lethal mission termination system. 10 seconds would be even better, but you can't have everything.

    The new rules are not yet approved by CASA, so not having any certainty is also trying.

    Andrew.
  • Tod Rippin March 25, 2010 at 12:54pm
    So does anyone know why they changed the rules?
  • Developer
    Mark Colwell March 24, 2010 at 7:05am
    These guy must be following the lead of FAA
  • T3
    Krzysztof Bosak March 24, 2010 at 5:19am
    MillswoodEngineering has something developed SPECIFICALLY for OUTBACK challenge.
    But the recent rules are ridiculous, requiring the failsafe in fact to be able to define concave polygon flying zone and trigger when out of the flying zone.
    Also a dangerous looping can occur when using out-of-vlos 'telemetry revival' waypoint as specified by the new rules.

    The New Rules do more harm than good when obeyed strictly.
  • Tod Rippin March 21, 2010 at 2:15pm
    yeah I've looked at that one before but I was kinda wanting a DIY project too and something a little smaller.

    Thanks for your input though Chris, much appreciated.
  • Tod Rippin March 21, 2010 at 1:20pm
    Well that's all fine and dandy if a person is using that system mentioned, in witch case I'm not, what I'm looking for is basically an emergency button to press in case the aircraft goes out of control and it would be a "stand alone" system.
  • 3D Robotics
    Chris Anderson March 21, 2010 at 1:13pm
    ArduPilot's failsafe detection is described here.
This reply was deleted.

Activity

Neville Rodrigues liked Neville Rodrigues's profile
Jun 30
Santiago Perez liked Santiago Perez's profile
Jun 21
More…