Hi all,
well, from my old-fashioned opinion there is currently too much discussion about the best way to do AHRS in this forum. Kalman versus other approaches like Bill Premerlani's one. Remember that the whole DIYDRONE story started with the Paparazzi project in Europe (long before Arduino and the DIYDRONE page) and remember that as early as the Paparazzi project the problem was solved by taking advantage of absolute referencing by means of IR sensors. The US company who did introduce this technology is still alive because it takes care about the "ordinary" RC pilot (like me). From a very pragmatic point of view I do understand the discussions, because I also like to put things into the fuselage instead of sticking/patching sensors to the outer skin. But the only reason for this preference is that I don't want to kill performance of a streamlined plane optimized to win competitions in whatever F3x. SO: As soon as semiconductor industries find a market for micro IR sensors the problem might be GONE.
What I would like to have in my plane is a gadget that learns my flying style should I fail in a critical situation. Just imagine that you want to achieve two things: (1) That your carbon-kevlar plane will not crash into a group of people if YOU loose control and (2) that your plane rescues itself from crashing at all. The first steps towards these goals seems to me that one needs to start thinking about teaching your plane to act like yourself would act is such a situation. The plane is a robot that continues to learn from you while yourself is in control. In a critical situation it is waypoint programmed to return to a homepoint. But the way it does this maneuver has been learned from you. Like other maneuvers.
Anybody interested in a project on evaluating "teach in" algorithms?
Natalius
Replies