Blogs

Yet another recovery system...

Posted by Petr Dvorak on December 1, 2014 at 5:30am

Here is a short video of what we have been working on this year...

UAV Ballistic Recovery System Development tests from LeteckyUstav on Vimeo.

Galaxy GBS 10 Mulicopter
UAV Parachute Ballistic Rescue System
Development  tests
www.galaxysky.cz

Certified aerospace testing facility
Institute of Aerospace Engineering
Brno, Czech Republic
June - November 2014

Designed and tested to
RTCA-DO-160 standards
Patent pending
coming soon ...


Tags: ballistic, dropsafe, fme, iae, indet, rce, rpas, skyeye, uas, uav
E-mail me when people leave their comments –
Follow

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

Join diydrones

Comments

  • Petr Dvorak December 2, 2014 at 5:09am

    Doug: there is already a selection of CO2 systems, so we wanted to do something different:-)

    General advantages of the pyro-actuated system over CO2-propelled as I see them:

    - faster

    - lighter

    - more reliable

    Don't know about the price and safety - once you factor in the valve/pyro-actuator used to trigger the CO2 cartridge, I believe the things start to look differently.

    Basically - we believe pyro-actuation is the most viable concept ... and it is always better to have more solutions to choose from, right?

  • Petr Dvorak December 2, 2014 at 2:24am

    Hans: on the ground a safety pin is present that effectively short-circuits the pyro, preventing any current in the circuit that could potentially cause a deployment.

    Regarding the EMI issues (which are relevant only once the system is armed / in flight) the system is designed with these in mind, featuring optocouplers and other principles (sorry I am not and expert in this therefore can't give you more detail at the moment). If I use the automotive analogy again - one doesn't need to pull a safety pin prior to crashing in one's car, yet the airbags, belt pre-tensioners etc. will work. And personally, I am not afraid of these being triggered accidentally in the middle of a peaceful drive. Therefore - this can be done safely.

    For transportation in a commercial aircraft there will probably be a safety container for the pyro-actuator to assure compliance with the respective regulations. However, this is yet to be confirmed.

  • Jethro Hazelhurst December 2, 2014 at 1:41am

    400g is a good number ;-)

  • Hans Miller December 2, 2014 at 1:32am

    Also, how is the system made safe against accidental firing in what is a very RF rich environment?

  • Hans Miller December 2, 2014 at 1:27am

    Ok. With respect: How is your system made safe and armed? How do I travel by commercial aircraft if I equip my UAV with a system like this?

  • Petr Dvorak December 2, 2014 at 1:10am

    Ali: Thanks. Sure it can be used on fixed wing platforms. If you are able to fit it in (at the moment the outer dimensions are 100mm in diameter and 100mm height), it shall work even better than with the multirotor - simply because you typically have higher initial velocity when deploying the parachute in a plane. That will reduce the opening time of the parachute.

  • Petr Dvorak December 2, 2014 at 1:05am

    Thanks Hans. BTW there is a very good chance you have at least half a dozen exactly the same pyro-actuators in your civilian car ....

  • Hans Miller December 1, 2014 at 9:11pm

    Good luck getting anyone sane to buy a system that uses pyro for deployment, whether it's ejection, or just cutting lines. Pyro is simply not suitable for the civilian sector.

  • Johnatan December 1, 2014 at 9:23am

    Great!

    I hope it can be used on planes as well.

This reply was deleted.