A number of years ago while I was doing research for a little story I was working on I stumbled upon DIY Drones and, later, sUAS News.  Hanging out on the DIY Drones forum, building my own amateur UAV and other life-changing events became distractions to finishing my story.  Well, I finally got around to doing just that, i.e. finishing it.

This has very much been a DIY effort from writing the story, to putting together the simple cover, to self-publishing and on to self-marketing.  It has taken a little while, but I have finally received enough feedback that I no longer worry about having embarrassed myself with my first book.

I have never been able to contribute much to this community in a technical sense, but maybe I can provide the entertainment--although I fear that some of my less intelligent posts have already done that.  In any case, using the coupon code below you can download a free copy of my book from Smashwords in any number of e-book formats. While it's intended for the young reader, adults have found it entertaining. Indeed, below is some of their feedback.

Happy reading!

Paul

Coupon Code: QQ26W

Click HERE for book on Smashwords.

Reader feedback:

From Amazon -- 4 stars; "I mainly read to see how well the author did the drone technical details. He did a really good job explaining the workings of the model aircraft drone. I quite liked the book."

From Facebook -- "I read LITTLE EYE IN A BIG SKY and thoroughly enjoyed it! It would be well worth anyone with a young reader in the family to purchase. If the young reader in your family has a scientific bent they will really enjoy it. Has something for the mystery lover as well as a teenage friendship/crush story line. I plan to get it for my great-niece who loves to read and is 13."

Rise of the Drones airing again on PBS/NOVA, January 23, 2013 at 9:00 PM eastern.

Preview can be seen HERE.

Drone article in January 2013 issue of Air & Space Smithsonian magazine.  Lots of application info in this one.

Click HERE to read article.

I know that this is simply another APM2 installation, but I thought I would post it anyway in case anyone might be looking for suitable airframes for their DIY drone.  Also, this is kind of exciting for me since I am finally doing my DIY drone project and like to share my activity.  While my dedicated UAV build is underway, I'm testing APM2 and its accessories in a SkyFly Max.  I already had this airframe, but it would be one to consider buying new.  It's inexpensive, easy to hand launch, and seems to have been sized for APM2.  I put APM2 in the upper equipment bay and located the RC receiver in the lower bay (I love using those technical terms on a park flyer!).

I made a small box for the 3DR transmitter.  I was a little concerned about heat, but it's not airtight and it sits in the airstream.  I'll be mounting the ESC outside like the 3DR radio as well.  It normally sits where the APM2 is now, but I also want to isolate it from the other electronics in case the ESC itself overheats.

My brother is my partner in this project.  We're doing this in stages.  First, we breadboarded the entire system outside of the airframe.  I had the task of walking that tray of electronics around his backyard pretending to be plane and hitting waypoints.  I can't imagine what the neighbors were thinking!  Our next task is to get APM2 working in simulation.  Only then will we move on to flight testing.

Thanks,
Paul

The mainstream news stories about UAVs getting into the NAS are almost getting commonplace, and maybe that's partly the idea of this post, i.e. to point that out.  Still, maybe we should stay on top of what's being said.

One problem with these short radio spots, in this case seven minutes with two guests, is that you just can't get into the details.  Not a whole lot can can be said past "drones can be good, drones can be bad."  Still, these sound bites are what the general public is hearing and reacting to.  This particular radio show, I'm told, is heard by over 500,000 people across the U.S.

If you go to the page, the audio link to hear the spot is just above the Predator image.  Click HERE.

Paul

DIY Drones and Chris Anderson in the news yet again.  You're getting around, Chris!  Well done.

Link: ARTICLE

It's all about expectations, I suppose, but even knowing that I have to admit disappointment.  We just got back from a visit to the National Air and Space Museum on the mall in Washington DC.  If you have never been there, you really need to go.  This isn't about the museum in general--we have been there many times.  One reason I wanted to go this time was to see the UAV exhibit.  Other than one small display case with an RQ-14A Dragon Eye, what you see in the photo above is pretty much it.  In hindsight, I can't say what I expected other than "more."  More information, more artifacts (maybe a sensor pod or two), more history.  To add insult to my self-imposed injury (It's about expectations, remember?), the gallery beneath the hanging UAVs was closed--no chance of getting  photos from different angles.

So, what is the point of this post?  One, misery loves company, so please feel bad with me.  Two, if you happen to be planning a trip mainly to see this exhibit, you might want to hold off.

Here's a LINK that gives info on the UAVs in the exhibit.  My photos aren't all that great, but here are a few more:

This post might be a little premature in that I'm just getting started, but after hanging out at DIY Drones for a few years and doing little more than adding editorial comment to other's posts, I'm anxious to share my real DIY Drone project.  Since all of the hard work has already been done by others in this community with regard to the autopilot, this blog will focus on the airframe.

I decided to turn my DIY Drone project into my first attempt at designing an airframe from scratch.  I have built from plans before, but never went this far.  I chose the IAI/AAI RQ-2A Pioneer to model.  First, I like the simplicity of the design and felt it would be fairly easy to model.  Second, I prefer a more traditional tail to the v-tails that seem so popular with UAVs.  I'm sure there are very good aerodynamic reasons for that, but they just don't appeal to me aesthetically.

My plane will be a 1/3 scale model of the Pioneer.  That gives it a wingspan of 67-1/2".  The design of the main wing and empennage assembly is pretty much done.  Next I'll move on the fuselage.  My plan is to have all ribs and formers laser cut.

I'm using Google Sketchup for the design work.  It has been very easy to learn.  The most difficult thing so far has been figuring out how to get 2D plan-view prints out of Sketchup.  It's not really geared toward basic engineering.  It's primarily a 3D modeling platform.  However, with a little playing you can get the printouts you need.

When finished, the plane will be equipped with APM, telemetry and on-board video (of course).  I will most likely learn APM on a smaller ARF, though, before risking this airframe.

I'll post a few more images in this blog, them move over to just posting progress photos in an album on my DIY Drone page.  The first one below is the real thing hanging in the Air and Space Museum in Washington DC (not my photo).

Thanks.
Paul

This is my current design for the boom saddles that will attach to the horizontal stabilizer.  I'll try to shape them from a layer of four 1/4" balsa ribs.  The channel is for servo leads.

The boom attachments for the main wing will be a little different and will be integrated into the wing itself.  All three spars will pass through the supports.  The wing sheeting itself will also add strength to these supports.

Ribs will be 1/8" balsa.  Spars will be plywood with 3/32" balsa webbing.  Main wing sheeting will be 3/32" balsa.  Tail feather sheeting will 1/64" ply.

Vertical stabilizer and rudder.

Finally, a little fun I had with Google Sketchup before starting the plane design.  I modeled the CCD camera I'll be using and figured out how to model the clear dome.

I thought this article might be of interest to this community.  It starts:

"In September 2010 the Smithsonian Institution in Washington DC vetted the TransAtlantic Model (TAM) and selected it as an historic artifact..."

The short article (letter, actually, from Maynard Hill) can be found HERE.

From AMA Today December 2010 (electronic newsletter)

Update on FAA

The FAA process to create regulation for the operation of small unmanned aircraft systems (sUAS) in the national airspace continues to move forward. There's been a lot of speculation about what will be contained in the sUAS proposed rule that is scheduled to be released as a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) sometime in June 2011.

The NPRM will contain proposed regulation that will most likely have some impact on model aviation. The FAA is prohibited by law from disclosing the exact language in the NPRM until it's released in the Federal Register. However, we have been able to determine, in a generic sense, what some of the proposed language might be. The Aviation Rulemaking Committee’s report submitted to the FAA in 2009 indentifies many of the sUAS issues under consideration; however the specific recommendations in the report may or may not be reflected in the final rule. We know that the NPRM will most likely address things like how high, how fast, and where a model aircraft may fly. We know that the FAA has drawn a hard line between recreational use and commercial use.

AMA is continuing to work with the Unmanned Aircraft Program Office (UAPO) within the FAA and is in contact with the UAPO on a weekly, if not daily basis. Over the past 90 days there have been five face-to-face meetings with AMA and the UAPO staff. AMA’s internal workgroup, consisting of members with a diverse and knowledgeable model aviation background meet by conference call weekly and continues to develop standards that will eventually be submitted to the FAA for adoption that will allow modelers who follow these standards additional latitude from the rule. The foundation of our standards has always been the National Model Aviation Safety Code and its supporting documents including our Turbine Waiver Program and our Large Model aircraft Program. Recently a member of the UAPO office has been regularly attending these calls.

We're fighting a tough battle between keeping our members informed and not painting an overly tenuous picture of the future of model aviation. Not knowing exactly what will be in the proposed rule makes this a difficult challenge. And we're still working through some issues today that may be satisfactorily resolved before the NPRM is released. At the same time we need to make sure our members are aware, engaged, and prepared to react, if necessary, when the time is right.

The FAA has been invited to the AMA Expo in January. They have accepted. Our intent is to hold a roundtable Q&A session to help clarify a number of issues. This roundtable will be open to those in attendance and will also be taped and posted online. The Expo will also signal the beginning of an increased awareness campaign to keep the model aviation community as informed as possible as we move into 2011 and the eventual release of the NPRM.

– Dave Mathewson AMA President

Just FYI...

Excerpt from "President's Perspective," Model Aviation magazine, November 2010


FAA Ruling May Be Challenging to AMA

Things continue to move forward, albeit relatively slowly, with the FAA regulatory process for small unmanned aircraft systems (sUAS) that will have some collateral impact on model aviation.

AMA’s internal workgroup, comprising members with considerable experience representing a number of modeling disciplines, continues to draft an initial set of standards that we will present to the FAA. The purpose of these standards is to create a path in which model aviation enthusiasts may operate outside of the "default" set of regulations that were [proposed] to the FAA by an Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC) in March 2009.

Rich Hanson, AMA’s Government Affairs Representative, and the Safety Committee chairperson, Jim Rice, traveled to Washington in early September to meet with representatives from the FAA’s Unmanned Aircraft Program Office (UAPO). The purpose of that meeting was to share with the UAPO the direction that we are taking with our standards and to ask for guidance to ensure that the form and format of our work was moving in the right direction.

The results of that meeting have raised some additional concerns for us. We have scheduled a follow-up meeting with UAPO manager Rick Prosek. This meeting will have taken place by the time this issue of MA reaches you. I will update you on the results of this meeting next month.

I did a little digging into the current state of affairs with regard to commercial small unmanned aircraft systems (SUASs) and I'm not really sure what it all means. On the one hand, there seem to be quite a few companies developing and/or manufacturing SUASs. Presumably, many of these are for private, commercial use as opposed to pure research, governmental or recreational activity. On the other hand, judging by what I'm reading from the FAA, the current state of allowable SUAS use does not come close to justifying this level of commercial development. What do these people know, and where are all the SUASs currently in existence being used?

I'm sure that anyone developing a hobby SUAS would love to allow it to fly outside of the range of manual control. Right now, the hobby community is pretty much restricted to the pure excitement of watching a plane fly on autopilot, but within the same airspace as a manually flown R/C plane. The point, and I know it's not new, is that as goes commercial SUAS regulation so goes (to some extent) recreational regulation (hopefully in a positive and/or more unrestrictive way). So, this is the tie-in relative to DIY Drones.

First of all, if you haven't read this FAA fact sheet, it's both interesting and encouraging, so you might want to (it's short).

http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=6287

For what it's worth, I think there might be some confusion on this site regarding COAs, or Certificates of Waiver or Authorization. These are only available to public entities, i.e. not private commercial ones, who want to fly SUASs in public airspace. As of September 2010, there are only 251 active COAs. By definition, none of these relate to private commercial SUAS use.

The only certification available to civil operators of SUASs is a Special Airworthiness Certificate in the Experimental Category. Since 2005, only 78 have been issued.

While the FAA seems to be very positive about SUAS development and use, it appears that, in reality, there just isn't much practical use of these systems going on in the private sector. Yet, a whole lot of companies and their investors must see something coming, and soon. Is all of this activity based on speculation, or are there current, practical uses of SUASs going on? If so, what are they? Personally, I would love to see an SUAS surveying a corn field as I drive by! I think it's going to be while, though.

Book Review

Wired for War--The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the 21st Century

P.W. Singer

Penguin (December 29, 2009)

While the mission of DIY Drones is to promote the development of amatuer UAVs in the hobby or even commercial worlds, but to the stated exclusion of military applications, it was unavoidable that, welcome or not, this site would be noticed by some on the military and government side of the fence. Indeed, in yet another instance, DIY Drones as well as its originator, Chris Anderson, received direct mention in the subject of this post, the book "Wired for War--The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the 21st Century."

Introduction

The title not withstanding, Wired for War covers much more ground than how robots are used in warfare. Given that UAVs are most likely the primary interest of visitors to this site, I will say that if you just want to read about the cool, whizbang stuff going on in that arena, this is not the book for you. On the other hand, if you want an in-depth look at what the author and others consider to be the next RMA--Revolution in Military Affairs--and how it revolves around robotics, you will want to read this book. You might be surprised by some of what you read with regard to the acceptance of technology in general, and robotics in particular, among some in the military. Indeed, you might be disappointed.

On the Plus Side

Singer has clearly done his homework in that he has apparenty read a lot and interviewed quite a few people. He has given the reader a great deal of information, both technical and non-technical, as well as much think about. He goes into some depth with regard to the conduct of war in general and other social issues related to conflict. While this might seem to drag on at times, he ultimately makes the connection with how robotics might effect the conduct of war, how combatants might react to the presence of robots, and even how the decision to enter into a conflict might be effected.

On the Negative Side

At one point, Singer was throwing out so many social statistics that I wondered if this was going to be like one of those Carl Sagan talks where people showed up to learn about billions and billions of stars and galaxies, only to be lectured on the perils of nuclear winter. Like some of those people who walked out on Mr. Sagan, Mr. Singer nearly lost me when he found a way, in book on robotics, to insert the mantra relative to aspects of global warming that it is "without dispute..." Indeed, a great deal of information is presented that is not directly related to the technical aspects of robotics. This is only a negative based on my personal expectations, perhaps.

In the Middle

One observation of my own is that this is a book of observations. As already noted, Singer has done his homework. In the end though, few suggestions are given as to what to do with this wealth of information. Perhaps it's presented along the lines of 'I'll report, you decide.' This is not a how-to book on the effective use of robots in war.

Conclusion

I definitely recommend this book. It's not a quick read and, despite some of the one-liner reviews like "it blew my (expletive deleted) mind," it's far from just a gee whiz, whizbang discussion of ultra-cool technology. This is a fairly thorough look at the current state of robotics, what the future might hold, and what we need to think about with regard to the impact of robotics on all things related to war and conflict.

I noticed that my Garmin never says my location accuracy is better than 10 feet. I suspect that's a hard stop--no matter how good it is, nothing better than 10 feet will be reported. I decided to check this by plotting the coordinates given from the Garmin device in Google Maps, then Google Earth, and discovered that if any inaccuracy exists, it's within these two programs. In each case, the program showed my location a good 40-50' from where I actually was. On the other hand, plotting those same coordinates within Bing Maps showed the location within 6' of where the Garmin actually was located. The beta version of MapQuest allows you to enter cooridinates, and it was better than Google, but not quite as good as Bing.

I realize that both the Garmin and the map program being used have inaccuracies that will be additive, but I am very surprised at the Google results. I'm curious if anyone here who has plotted their flight paths within Google Earth has seen similar inaccuracies. Your plane could be shown either flying underground or taking off and landing from a virtual airstrip in the sky.

Thanks,
Paul

I'm sure this has been discussed here before, but past posts seem pretty well buried now.

I've been giving some thought as to whether rudder or aileron (in isolation of each other) is better for initiating turns via autopilot control. As a bank-and-crank RC flier (it wasn't until relatively recently that I learned that the left stick on my transmitter could be used for more than two things, idle and full throttle), my initial thought was to use aileron. But the more I thought about it, the more I realize that rudder is probably a better way to actually turn a plane with anything less than a 60º bank. (Just in case anyone reading this is not familiar with sport RC flying, the elevator actually makes the turn when the plane is in a steep bank. If rudder is used at all, it's used in the opposite direction of the turn just to keep the nose up. Indeed, some jets started coming out without any rudders at all, just fixed vertical fins. The AMA, I believe, now has a rule that functioning rudders must be present.)

So, I'd be interested in hearing what others have to say. Right now, I believe ArduPilot will give you either rudder or aileron, not both (correct?). If it gives both, it seems it would be based on a single, but mixed, signal. Would there ever be a need or benefit to having independent rudder and aileron control? I'm sure full-scale UAVs have this, but it might be a bit too much for an amateur UAV.

Thanks,

Paul

Hey Guys! (meant in the most gender neutral of ways),

I have taken my first real step toward building a DIY UAV! This will be boring to most of you, but to someone as far behind the curve as I am, this is HUGE. This community has come so far, and in such a relatively short period of time, that autopilots for RC planes are almost plug-and-play. However, I am determined to learn the basics of process control before moving on to an autopilot. After all, that's where you had to be a little over a year ago to even consider a DIY Drone.

I didn't start out with a LEGO Mindstorms, like this site's founder did, but I did get a Parallax BASIC Stamp Discovery Kit, which I believe was his next step. I don't plan to attempt to make an autopilot out of this controller--it's just for learning.

Now, I want you to pretend that the green LED to the right of the resistor (that's a 470 ohm resister, by the way) in the above photo is blinking once per second. I did that! Yes I did.

I'l like to say "stay tuned," but my projects tend to span years it seems. Maybe I can speed things up this time.

Paul

This article was brought to my attention. It might be of interest here. The gyro in the article is made by STMicroelectronics. There is another post (click HERE) about the first-ever 3-axis digital gyro made by InvenSense.

Click HERE to read article in IEEE Spectrum magazine.

Paul

DIYDrones got a brief mention in an article in Spectrum, the magazine of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). The article is about first-person-view (FPV) flying, but the author mentions he read about FPV here and at FPVPilot.com.

DIY Eye in the Sky

Get a first-person view from the air with your own RC drone