All Posts (11086)

Sort by

3689675749?profile=original

Following up with the PixHawk Fire Cape (PXF) series that was started a while ago, I'm happy to announce the PXFmini, an open autopilot shield for the Raspberry Pi. This autopilot shield allows anyone to create ready-to-fly autopilots with support for Dronecode’s APM flight stack priced at only 69 €. The shield has been designed with low cost in mind and specially for the Raspbery Pi Zero (it is also compatible with other Raspberry Pi boards). Find below some of its features:

 

A tiny yet powerful design

The PXFmini shield weighs only 15 grams and on it’s 31mm x 71 mm embeds all the power electronics necessary to comply with most of the existing components for drones using its 2xI2C and UART ports.

The design is based on previous iterations with proper APM upstream support and provides 8 PWM output channels as well as a PPMSUM input.

 

A shield for sensing

PXFmini includes a 9 axes IMU (MPU9250), a digital barometer (MS5611) and an ADC for voltage measurements.

 

An improved experience

Forget about breaking those DF13 connectors. We’ve decided to bet on the new JST GH connectors (adopted by the Dronecode Foundation) to provide an amazing new experience. We’ve also partnered with manufacturers to provide DF13 to JST GH converters.

 

Open design

All the schematics are open for you to hack around. They’ll be released as soon as the boards start shipping. Shipping will start in early February 2016.

 

We made a short clip closing the year where we show the board:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXZb2gN9SEg

 

Thanks everyone and merry christmas!

Read more…

Holidays Greetings!

There is much interest in seeing demo of our $50 pre-order NS-HP RTK receiver on a quadcopter, so we tested last week on a less windy day (with up to 4.5mph wind). A compass module and 5Hz version of NS-HP RTK receiver replaced the original GPS and compass inside the 3DR Iris. These two videos show the result we obtained with default values without any tuning.

Read more…

Snickerdoodle NASA CFS and RTEMS

 Wow! All I can start off with about Snickerdoodle is BAM! In your face computing power!

3689675450?profile=original

 This is what the next generation of DIY Drones and Robotics looks like! All I can say is AWESOME!

 This product is so new and so innovative it's unbelievable!

 Guy's I've been doing research lately looking for hardware for a cubesat project (small satellites in low earth orbit) and trying to figure out what combination would best serve that purpose but this product is excellent for drones!

 That's not all!

 I've found some open source software at NASA! 3689675667?profile=original

Here we go again with the BAM! Check this out! Open source middleware from NASA for flight control!

Which works on top of!

RTEMS!

3689675573?profile=original RTEMS is FREEWARE which was developed for U.S. Army Missile Command and RTEMS initially stood for Real-Time Executive for Missile Systems, then became Real-Time Executive for Military Systems before changing to its current meaning. How cool is that?

An inexpensive and innovative OPEN solution with the "Right Stuff" to take drones and robotics to the next step!

Here we have a triple threat!

 Something drones need to progress, more room to develop the applications you want! And the power to carry them out! In a very small package! This combination is pure dynamite for a progressive drone with CERTIFIED software that will get drones what they want politically as well as provide real stability and safety based on certified and tested software.

 One more thing I might add is there is a protocol specification    SPA ( Satellite Plugnplay Architecture - AIAA S-133.)
It's an open standard, Basically, each component (IMU, Radio, RCS, etc) has a small processor
on board that 'knows itself' with its capabilities and calibrations.While many use ARMs and stuff, there were some examples of AVRs.

 If you add that to the mix all external hardware becomes plug n play and as you grow you can add hardware and there is no need to configure it. The little processor on the hardware negotiates with the software and self configures.

GO GET IT! :)

Relevant links:

http://krtkl.com/ (pronounced critical)

https://cfs.gsfc.nasa.gov/

https://www.rtems.org/

http://aiaa.kavi.com/public/pub_rev/SPA_S-133-4-201X_PR.pdf

Read more…

BeastTX - Let's redefine the way to fly!

Merry Christmas and a happy new year!

We are almost ready to start with our all-in-one solution, the BeastTX, at Kickstarter. At the same time we introduce a new productline for automated flights. The D.O.C (Drone Operation Controller) is not a simple remote-control. It combines the groundstation, remote-control, video-transmission and mobility in one device. However the best part is, that you are able to fly automated UAVs with only one person 100% legal. Check out our facebooksite and homepage for more details. Let us redefine the way of fly with UAVs in 2016 together at Kickstarter...

The BeastTX appears as a DOC in 2016. This Trailer is a foretaste of the Kickstarter-Project starting at 1st quarter 2016 ! 

www.luftfotos24.de/beasttx

www.facebook.com/luftfotos24

Best regards

Luftfotos24 - Team

Read more…
3D Robotics

3689675484?profile=original

Congrats to the Dronecode/PX4 team for a series of new releases.

The PX4 1.1 code is now out with these new features:

  • Switch to CMake build system
  • Significant improvements in the user model / interaction (requires QGroundControl v2.8.0 or newer, using a daily build is recommended)
  • Full VTOL support for all three major VTOL design types enabled (Tailsitters, tiltrotors, plane + quad combination, all flight modes, still under heavy development)
  • Rattitude mode for FPV racers: Combination of attitude and rate control
  • Better altitude hold (significant improvements, but more improvements pending)
  • Support for coaxial helicopters
  • Full native SITL on Mac OS and Linux: http://dev.px4.io/simulation-sitl.html
  • Snapdragon Flight support (there is a next-generation version currently being worked on)
  • Autonomous takeoff and landing on runways for planes
  • Full support for UAVCAN, including UAVCAN-enabled motor controllers and automatic Firmware upgrades via UAVCAN (if you connect an ESC to the system, it will always be auto-upgraded)
  • New board architecture: FMUv4, with the Pixracer being the first board of the new generation:http://dev.px4.io/hardware-pixracer.html

And the QGroundControl GCS now supports Android (along with Mac OS, Windows and Linux as always). App to be distributed via Google Play soon.

Read more…
3D Robotics

The economics of drone delivery

3689675430?profile=original

Does drone delivery make economic sense? The answer, in this good analysis at Flexport by Dan Wang, is that it certain limited conditions with the right combination of market density or poor existing infrastructure, it might. Excerpt:

Drone deliveries look like the future: unmanned quadcopters rapidly delivering packages to our doors, eliminating both wait times and the cost of human labor.

But from an economic perspective, it’s easy to see how drone delivery could be an elegant technological solution in search of a problem.

That’s because the economics of last mile delivery are driven by two factors, route density and drop size. Route density is the number of drop offs you can make on a delivery route, often called a “milk-run” in industry parlance. Drop-size is the number of parcels per stop on the milk run.

If you make lots of deliveries over a short period of time or distance, the cost per delivery will be low. Likewise, if you drop off lots of parcels at the same location, the cost per parcel will be low.

Drones perform poorly on both of these economic aspects of last-mile delivery. The current prototypes that companies have unveiled usually carry just one package, and after the drone makes its delivery, it has to fly all the way back to its homebase to recharge its batteries and pick up the next package.

Compare that to the current status quo: delivery trucks. A delivery truck from UPS makes an average of 120 stops a day to deliver hundreds or thousands of packages. Don’t they seem to be better than drones?

How short-distance drone deliveries work

In late November, Amazon released a slick video demo of Prime Air, a drone delivery system designed to “get packages to customers in 30 minutes or less.” It comes on the heels of a similar production from Google’s Project Wing, which showed a drone delivering dog food in Queensland, Australia.

Both these companies and others say they expect to be flying soon.

We approached these companies’ claims with skepticism. After all, in Amazon’s demo, a drone that the company says can fly 15 miles delivers a pair of soccer shoes. But what if you don’t live within 7.5 miles of an Amazon warehouse? And will Amazon keep drones on standby for when you order 50 pounds of diapers? Drone delivery is still speculative, and Amazon and co. aren’t revealing all their plans. But a few simple statistics show that distance and weight may not hold back drone delivery.

In official documents, Amazon has written that 86% of its packages weigh under 5 pounds. As for distance, Walmart has noted that 70% of Americans live within 5 miles of a Walmart. This is great for the prospect of drone delivery. Amazon’s fulfillment centers are not as ubiquitous, but the company has shown willingness aplenty to move its products and warehouses closer to the customer.

If products start close enough to consumers that drones can deliver them in 30 minutes, we may very well see drone delivery even if it costs more than the humble UPS truck. “Faster delivery has always been a goal,” says Logan Campbell, the CEO of Aerotas, a drone consultancy. “Seven day delivery was common. Now we’ve become used to Amazon Prime 2-day delivery.”

There haven’t been many analyses of drone air freight costs. The ones that do exist suggestion that drones have the potential of being both faster and cheaper than delivery costs.

In a report by ARK Invest, Tasha Keeney suggests that Prime Air could cost Amazon only 88 cents per delivery. If Amazon charged customers $1 per delivery, Keeney estimates, the company could earn a 50% return on its investment in drone infrastructure while offering same-day delivery that is significantly cheaper than current alternatives.

The analysis is still mostly speculative. Keeney imagines that 6,000 operators who earn $50,000 per year will operate 30,000 to 40,000 drones. Each drone will make 30 deliveries per day. Her analysis ignores depreciation, and questions like: “How will drones avoid airplanes and deliver packages in Manhattan?” And there’s another core issue: $12.92 is the price UPS charges to consumers, but its actual marginal cost of delivering one more package along a route they are delivering to already is probably closer to $2. When push comes to shove, will drones be able to compete? The rest of her analysis incorporates the costs of electricity, backup battery packs, bandwidth, upgrades to facilities, and so on.

Keeney’s assumptions also stick to the middle ground: She presumes that Amazon will gain permission to fly drones out of sight, with each operator responsible for 10-12 drones, but not that Amazon will soon automate the entire process. That said, other analyses, which assume that more pilots will be needed, put the cost closer to $10-$17 per delivery.

Delivering blood samples in Lesotho

An experiment from the other side of the world offers some validation of ARK’s rosy prognosis.

The drone startup Matternet is not just planning a drone delivery network. It has already run one—in Lesotho, a landlocked country surrounded by South Africa.

Matternet has delivered crucial supplies (and chocolate) via drone in Haiti after the earthquake, and when the founders wanted to prototype a drone network, they turned to Maseru, the capital of Lesotho. In Lesotho, almost 1 in 4 adults has HIV, and even in the capital, paved roads are scarce, which makes it difficult to transport goods. So Matternet’s drones delivered blood samples from clinics to hospitals where they could be analyzed for HIV/AIDS.

Blood samples were perfect cargo: small, light, valuable, and time-sensitive. Since Maseru has little air traffic and the routes from the clinics to the hospitals did not change, most of the process could be automated. The drones flew without a human pilot and had clear landing areas where they recharged automatically. Matternet CEO Andreas Raptopoulos says it took their drones 15 minutes to fly 4.4 pounds of cargo 6.2 miles, and that the Maseru network successfully covered an area 1.5 times the size of Manhattan.

It was a good price point. Even though the pilot took place several years ago, Raptopoulos saysthat each delivery cost only 24 cents.

Test cases for drone deliveries

The first legal delivery in the United States via drone took place on July 17, 2015.

That day, a drone operated remotely made three trips to transport medicine from the Lonesome Pine Airport in Wise, Virginia, to a nearby fairgrounds. The demonstration was the result of a partnership between the drone startup Flirtey and 2 organizations that provide healthcare in rural, underserved areas.

The flight demonstrates two aspects of the future of drones and air freight: that technology is not the limiting factor, and that drones’ most obvious appeal is not for personal deliveries.

“The technology is here,” says Logan Campbell of Aerotas. “You see fully autonomous flights already” for uses like surveying construction sites, farmland, and mining operations.

“It’s gotten incredibly easy to fly,” adds Roger Sollenberger, spokesman of 3D Robotics, whose free, open source software powered Flirtey’s delivery drone. 3D Robotics’ drones, he says, make it so easy to program flight paths that the average parent can use it to record family moments.

Instead, the real challenge is the regulatory environment. The FAA has banned all commercial uses of drones in the U.S., and while the agency increasingly grants exemptions, the Flirtey flight is the only freight exemption that allowed a real delivery rather than testing in unpopulated areas.

The experts we spoke to expressed cautious optimism that the FAA, which is working on guidelines for drone deliveries, will let them fly. The FAA currently requires companies with exemptions, like Amazon, to have an operator with a pilot’s license keep each drone within line of sight—a mandate that makes deliveries completely uneconomical.

Can drones substitute roads?

In the meantime, the first drone deliveries will probably look more like Matternet’s drone network in Lesotho and Flirtey’s medicine drop in Wise, Virginia. It’s much easier to operate and gain legal permission to fly in open skies, and the economics are particularly compelling.

As Raptopoulos of Matternet points out, Google and Amazon’s plans ignore drones’ best feature: they can go where there are no roads.

“One billion people in the world today do not have access to all-season roads,” Raptopoulos tolda TED audience in 2013. “We cannot get medicine to them reliably, they cannot get critical supplies, and they cannot get their goods to market in order to create a sustainable income.”

For the Matternet team, the most interesting question was not the cost per delivery. They wanted to compare the cost of the drone network to the cost of building the roads Lesotho so badly lacks.

The American Road and Transportation Builders Association estimates the cost of a “new 2-lane undivided road” at $2 million to $5 million per mile. And the drone network in Maseru? “Less than a million dollars,” Raptopoulos said in 2013.

Comparing a drone network to roads that can transport buses, delivery trucks, and bulldozers is not an apples to apples comparison. But given that building and maintaining roads is a long and expensive process, drones could offer a quick and cheap way to (imperfectly) connect the billion people identified by Raptopoulos as cut off from most of the world.

DHL-deutsche-posthttps://www.flexport.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/DHL-deutsche-post.jpg 667w" sizes="(max-width: 667px) 100vw, 667px" />

A drone delivery test by German Deutsche Post AG in December 2013. Photo by Frankhöffner

“Many in the industry think delivery will take a different feel from Amazon,” says Campbell of Aerotas. “More specialized cases like delivering vaccines that need to be refrigerated to regional hospitals… Niche deliveries where speed is critical.”

In these cases, for cargo that is small, light, valuable, and time-sensitive, cost is much less of a factor. A drone delivery may save a life by getting delicate medicine to a rural patient, or keep an oil rig running by delivering a key piece of machinery.

Even in less extreme cases, drones are appealing because route density and drop size are less relevant. Instead, drones just need to beat the cost of private couriers, which cost at least $10 to $50, even within dense urban areas like San Francisco.

Hospitals that need delicate medicines. Oil rigs that need replacement parts. Residents in remote Alaskan towns that need key supplies. Companies that need timely data about their supply chains. Expect these (noncommercial) efforts to be the early adopters of drones and drone delivery.

When is the future?

Drones are in a situation similar to the one faced by self-driving cars. Companies have demoed the technology, so the real obstacle is the legal and regulatory environment. In both cases, this means integrating the technologies into daily life could take a long time—or it could happen very quickly.

Current drone economics are good for deliveries that take less than 1 hour. Are people willing to pay a major premium for the service? Perhaps. It may not be too late to order Christmas presents on December 23, 2020.

Despite drones’ current inability to match the efficiency of a delivery truck’s milk run, the economics of delivering air freight by drone seem compelling. That’s why Amazon and Google are investing in the R&D. That’s why Matternet is testing drone deliveries with Swiss Post and Swiss World Cargo. And that’s why the drone community expects deliveries to happen—even if not as quickly as executives like Bezos promise.

In the meantime, drone deliveries will probably get their start in remote areas like Lesotho, or in use cases like flying vital machine parts to oil rigs and mines, or by collecting data on shipping to make it more efficient.

Read more…

Deep Drone v2

In a last post I discussed my little flying object detector project that I’ve been doing for fun. While it worked it relied on communication with an external laptop in order to work (the on board odroid was not powerful enough to run the convnet model).

Hence, what better excuse to buy an NVIDIA Jetson TK1 dev board which should have more than enough juice to run everything on board the drone itself. I then added websocket support to track detections in real time.

It took some fiddling to get the wifi to work with the Jetson and Im still surprised at how quickly the wifi degrades (even though Im using the 5GHz band to avoid collisions with the Tx/Rx). But it did work in the end.

Still lots to do and too little time, but we keep chipping away. In particular the awesome folk from ErleBotics were kind enough to send me a Brain2, looking forward to try that out as well.

Original post: http://dirkgorissen.com/2015/12/24/deep-drone-v2

--Dirk

Read more…
3D Robotics

Dronecode membership grows almost 3x this year

3689675457?profile=originalWe're adding Dronecode members faster than we can update the website ;-) We'll be at nearly 50 companies by the end of the year, a three-fold increase since this time last year. Great work is being done by the PX4 and APM teams, and integration with ROS is already paying dividends. The Airspace Management Working Group is focused on making the Dronecode stacks ready for emerging rules on drone integration into the airspace. The Messaging Working Group is extending MAVLink 2.0 to the cloud. And the Hardware Working Group is expanding the stack from small racing copter boards all the way up to high-powered computer vision platforms. 

Want to participate? Start here.

Read more…
3D Robotics

3689675395?profile=original

It's hard to get accurate, up-to-date and comprehensive statistics on the drone industry, but Quartz has done an admirable job of looking at the US government import data:

There is no comprehensive way to track the precise volume and value of drones imported to the US. Consumer drones are hard to track in trade figures because they can be classified as toys or even as video cameras by customs officials.

However, we do know that through October 2015, US buyers brought in at least 24,070 helicopters weighing less than 998 kg (2200 lbs) this year, according to US Census Bureau data. That’s up 14% from the same period last year.

Most drones weigh significantly less than 998 kg (many less than 1 kg), so this category of goods is broader than just unmanned helicopters (or quadricopters or helicopters), and includes certain light, manned helicopters. However, small consumer and commercial drones likely make a significant part of it, as the average price of the goods imported under this category has dropped to levels far below that of even the cheapest manned craft.

3689675520?profile=original

As you can seen in the chart above, the average price of goods imported under this heading have historically been measured in hundreds of thousands of dollars. Prices, as shown in a detail below, have dropped to around $1,000.

3689675413?profile=original

Venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield and Byers estimated global drone shipments will hit about 4.3 million units in 2015, up from 1.6 million in 2014. The firm also estimated that 35% of consumer drone revenue worldwide comes from the US.

Read more…

FPV cam

I had to hack on the code to fix rotation switching, and added instructions for others who want to build themselves since it took me a little bit to figure it out.

If you are using Plane, can you test this build to make sure I didn't break anything while removing dead code and cleaning all compilation warnings?

https://github.com/marcmerlin/MinimOSD-Extra/blob/remove_ms_rot/Released/FW%20%26%20Char/MinimOSD_Extra_Plane_R808.hex

If that one doesn't work, or you are really attached to the original APM mode switch, try release 807 instead, but 808's switch rotation support ought to work on the mode switch too, so no reason to have 2 sets of code, which I why I deleted the mode switch rotation code:

https://github.com/marcmerlin/MinimOSD-Extra/blob/remove_ms_rot/Released/FW%20%26%20Char/MinimOSD_Extra_Plane_R807.hex

Blog post:

http://marc.merlins.org/perso/rc/post_2015-12-20_Hacking-MinimOSD-Extras-to-do-what-I-needed-thanks-to-OSS_-Mode-Rotation-with-Channel-Toggle.html

Changelog:

R808 - 2015/12/20 - Marc MERLIN <marc_soft@merlins.org>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Mode switch rotate code removed. Please use toggle switch rotate and assign to mode
switch channel (this saves space without removing functionality).
No new functionality, cleanups and removed all compiler warnings (not flight tested):
- chan_raw changed to an array to save program space
- all %f variables sent to printf are cast to double
- glide != 'inf' not valid C, likely a bug. Changed to glide != INFINITY
- TODO: remove this? if(rssiraw_on == 9) rssi = chan_raw[8];
- removed warnings on missing {} in if if else.
- All "string" cast to (char *)"string"
- Removed unused variables in OSD_Vars.h

Binary sketch size: 30,532 bytes (of a 30,720 byte maximum)


R807 - 2015/12/19 - Marc MERLIN <marc_soft@merlins.org>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Previous rotation switch didn't quite work as well as I was hoping. This new
one will rotate OSD if you flip to any other position more than 200ms away from
the current one, and come back within less than 1 second.
This should work with all switches and positions and allows you to use
another switch and activate a function you don't want, but only for
a fraction for a second, come back, and generate an OSD flip in the
process.

Binary sketch size: 30,718 bytes (of a 30,720 byte maximum) (pfew :) )


R806 - 2015/12/13 - Marc MERLIN <marc_soft@merlins.org>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rotation switching only rotates when switch changes states between low/mid/high.
This allows reusing a switch that has another function for OSD rotation.
You can rotate the OSD by flipping the switch to any other state and leaving it
there or coming back to the original location within 2 seconds.

Binary sketch size: 30,656 bytes (of a 30,720 byte maximum)
Read more…

Paparazzi UAV Release: v5.8 Stable

3689675137?profile=original
Season Greetings,

Just in time for the holidays we are happy to announce the release of Paparazzi v5.8_stable.

Check out the v5.8 branch from git to stay on this stable branch (which as usual will get some important fixes backported) or use the master branch to follow the latest development.
With contributions from over 20 people, we fixed a lot of bugs, improved things here and there and have quite a few major additions compared to v5.6.

Just to pick out a few:
- ADS-B support
- improved use of optic flow for velocity estimation
- improved mavlink support
- possibility to reduce RAM and Flash usage by compressing sine table
- hence support for naze32, CC3D and CJMCU boards
- flip mode for multicopters
- INDI guidance loop
- lots of improvements/additions for computer vision modules
- high speed logging to SD Card via SPI
- improve support for Bebop and add Bebop2
- guided mode for rotorcrafts

Please see the CHANGELOG for a more detailed list of changes and new features.

Enjoy,

The Paparazzi UAV Team

Read more…
3D Robotics

3689675311?profile=originalGood article from Scientific American on the jurisdictional conflicts between private land and public airspace: who owns the air 400 ft above your house?

On the evening of July 26th, in Bullitt County, Ky., William Merideth’s daughter came in from the backyard and told her father that she’d just seen a drone fly over their neighborhood. Merideth, 47, walked outside and watched a Phantom quadcopter glide down their street, then grabbed his shotgun. When the drone flew over his property, he blasted it down.

Soon, four men drove up to Merideth’s home. One of the men, David Boggs, had just bought the drone and says he was demonstrating it to his friends and family. Merideth told local TV news station WDRB that when Boggs and his friends arrived at his place, he warned them, “If you cross my sidewalk, there’s going to be another shooting.” Boggs called 911 and 30 minutes later, police arrested Merideth.

The two men disagree how low Boggs flew his drone above Merideth’s home—Merideth estimates about 100 feet or less, while Boggs has data that places it above 200 feet. The drone’s exact altitude may not seem crucial, but it is unclear if landowners get to decide who can fly a drone over their property at 100 or even 300 feet, because no one has actually decided yet who owns this slice of airspace (whether you’re allowed to shoot down a drone hovering over your property is an even more complicated question).

Today thousands of people and businesses across the country fly drones, and that number is set to explode: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) anticipates that this holiday season people will purchase as many as one million drones. In an effort to control this flood of flying machines the FAA announced this week that it would require recreational drone users to register their aircraft. But a big question with major implications for the drone industry is far from being resolved: Who owns the airspace above private property? As Stuart Banner, a University of California, Los Angeles, law professor, puts it, “Drones are forcing people to think about this issue for the first time since airplanes were invented a century ago.”

“To the heavens and down to hell”
Before airplanes and drones existed, people owned everything above and below their land—according to the law, their rights extended “to the heavens and down to hell.” But modern aviation changed this definition in a big way. In the early 20th century Congress declared the air a public highway, which limited land rights so that people were not trespassing every time they flew. That public highway has generally been considered 500 feet and above.

But airspace from the ground up to 500 feet is a gray area—no one’s ever had to fully settle who owns this airspace. Ask someone at the FAA and they’ll tell you that the agency controls (but does not own) airspace down to the ground. Yet it’s clear that landowners have some claim to the air. “Everyone agrees that the owner of land also owns the airspace above the land,” Banner says.

There’s also the U.S. Supreme Court case involving a chicken farmer,United States v. Causby. During World War II, the army took over a municipal airport and started flying noisy aircraft over Thomas Causby’s land as low as 83 feet, which scared the hell out of his chickens—150 of them flew into the wall of their coop and died. He sued the government, and the court decided in his favor, so the government had to reimburse Causby for a “taking” of his property. “The Supreme Court said that landowners have as much as can be used in connection with the enjoyment and use of the land,” says Greg McNeal, a professor of law and public policy at Pepperdine University, “In Causby, it was 83 feet. But it’s an open question above that.”

Until recently, people have had little reason to care what happens in the air above their property: there hasn’t been enough going on at low altitudes for them to notice. Over the past couple of years, though, that has changed. The FAA has already granted more than two thousandexemptions to businesses for commercial drone use. Amazon, Google and Walmart are among the companies that want to use the flying machines for home delivery. Plenty of Americans dislike the idea of drones flying over their backyards. But is there anything they can do about it?

Because there are no rules to say whether piloting a quadcopter over someone’s property is trespassing, state and local governments have started making their own. In 2013 Oregon passed a law that lets a landowner sue someone if the person flies a drone below 400 feet over her land more than once without permission. California lawmakers approved a bill this summer for a drone no-fly zone up to 350 feet above private property (Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed the bill). The city of Saint Bonifacius, Minn., has banneddrones from flying in city airspace below 400 feet (with a few exceptions), and many other cities and town have passed or are considering restrictions. “The advent of drones may make the FAA more inclined to press for low-altitude regulations,” says California State Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson (D–Santa Barbara), who introduced the now-vetoed drone bill, “But historically, state and localities have mainly regulated activities taking place closer to the ground.”

Yet the FAA says it controls airspace down to the soil, and that its authority generally trumps state or local laws. The FAA just released a fact sheet of its views on state and local drone regulations, in which it stated, “A navigable airspace free from inconsistent state and local restrictions is essential to the maintenance of a safe-and-sound air transportation system.” The agency recommended that any state or cities considering laws on restricting drone flight altitude consult with it first.

The FAA hasn’t blocked any of the private property restrictions yet, but if it did, state and local government would probably push back, especially because state law—not federal—determines property rights. “Are all those cities and counties just going to roll over and let the FAA do what it wants?” says Troy Rule (pdf), an associate professor of law at Arizona State University, “Oh no—they’re anticipating they have some rights.” Rule and McNeal say it is not obvious that the FAA’s authority overrides everyone else’s in this scenario. “Anyone who says there are clear answers to how these questions will be resolved is advocating more than they are informing,” McNeal says.

Gray skies
This issue could turn into a major headache for the drone industry. It will be more difficult for companies to deliver packages to your doorstep with drones if they have to comply with a mishmash of standards that change from state to state and town to town. Plus, what if you live in an apartment and you give Amazon permission to deliver a package but your upstairs neighbor won’t permit it? “If you’re Google and Amazon, think about the advantages of just the FAA having authority over all the airspace down to the ground,” Rule says, “They can fly their drone anywhere they want, as long the FAA gives them permission.” (Amazon did not respond to requests for a comment and Google declined to comment).

State and local laws that ban drones from flying over property also create problems for everyone else who wants to use them, like realtors who want to take aerial photos or journalists who need to cover breaking news from the air or activists capturing a protest on video.

For now, businesses, landowners and everyone else is stuck waiting for a verdict on who owns the airspace below 500 feet, and what exactly that ownership entails. But in Merideth’s case, he and Boggs got a definite answer to their dispute. A Bullitt County judge cleared Merideth of all charges in October, saying Boggs’s drone had invaded his privacy. The judge, as quoted by the local news outlet WDRB, put it bluntly: “He had the right to shoot this drone.”

Read more…
3D Robotics

Impressive web services interface for ROS

From the ROS blog (The Open Source Robotics Foundation, which makes ROS, is part of Dronecode).

I have developed ROS Web Services to provide new abstractions to ROS using SOAP and REST Web services. The objective was to provide an additional software abstraction layer on top of ROS to allow a seamless interaction with ROS even for non-roboticians. We can say that ROS Web services is another alternative to rosbridge and rosjs which use the Web to interact with ROS. 
Using ROS Web services layer allow any developer with no background on robotics to develop Web service client (SOAP or REST) to monitor and control ROS-enabled robot through simple interfaces.  
A paper presenting ROS Web services  is published in The Journal of Software Engineering for Robotics. In the paper, I present an object-oriented design of software meta-models for the integration of both Web services into ROS and we validate it through a real implementation on a service robot. Implementation was performed using ROSJAVA under Hyrdo version.
 
A brief description is also available here. 
I still did not release the code due to lack of time, but should post it on GITHUB soon. Any comment on this will be welcome. We are working now on extending ROS Web services with new features and we plan to apply them in ROS-enabled drones.
Read more…

3689675178?profile=original

We are launching the beta program for Flyt: Drone Applications Platform. To sign up, please visit: http://www.flytbase.com.

What is Flyt?

Flyt platform consists of an advanced flight computer system (FlytPOD) and its operating system (FlytOS), that allow developers and researchers build and deploy custom drone applications for variety of use-cases, such as, precision agriculture, surveys, delivery, aerial photography, inspections, etc. It is built on proven components to seamlessly handle all the complexities of making drones work, and provides the right toolset to developers to efficiently implement high-level application logic.

The key features provided by the Flyt platform are:

  1. Open APIs to write custom drone applications in Python / C++ / REST / ROS.
  2. Plug-n-play payload support: easily integrate your application specific payloads (cameras, sensors, actuators).
  3. Octa-core processor: implement image-processing, SLAM and other computationally intensive algorithms, onboard your drones.
  4. SDK and sample apps for Web/Mobile: create custom UI for your applications.

Why Flyt?

Flyt is built by the young multidisciplinary team of researchers at NavStik Labs. Having worked with various drone developers and researchers across the world, we realised that although the technology has matured to enable use of drones in a variety of commercial applications, it was still quite challenging to build one! The developers need to deal with a number of layers (in hardware and software), before they can get started with the real work of building the business application. Further, we could not find any suitable flight-computer, available off-the-shelf, that a developer can get started with. This was the genesis of Flyt.

Flyt offers a radically different approach to building drone applications. The communication architecture has been designed ground-up, to allow seamless data-sharing between onboard apps and ground (web/mobile) apps. This allows easy integration of custom payloads (sensors, actuators), as required for the application. ROS and OpenCV are an integral part of the platform, making it extensible and compliant with standards. Advanced capabilities, such as, onboard image-processing, swarm, SLAM, AI / ML, cloud-connectivity, etc. can be easily integrated on Flyt. The innovative FlytConsole app makes it easy to configure/manage your FlytPOD through a web/mobile interface.

With Flyt, we hope a number of developers and researchers will be able to jump start their drone projects. A large number of common components, needed for any advanced drone application, have been pre-implemented in the framework, which are exposed through open APIs. SDKs and sample-codes make it easy to build custom onboard and web/mobile apps, to get the drones working for you!

Tech Specs:

 

Hardware (FlytPOD):

  • Processors: Octa Core - A15 @2GHz, A7 @1.4 GHz, and ARM Cortex-M4 @180MHz
  • RAM: 2GB
  • Graphics: Mali T628 (600 MHz)
  • Storage: 32 GB
  • Sensors:
    • 3-axis Accelerometer
    • 3-axis Gyroscope
    • 3-axis Magnetometer
    • Barometer, GPS
  • Support for: Dual GPS & Mag, Gimbal, LiDAR, Px4Flow, Camera
  • Communication: Built-in High Power WiFi - Dual Antenna, ext. 3G/4G dongle, ext. radio options.
  • Interfaces:
    • GPIOs, ADC, UART, SPI, I2C, CAN
    • 2 x USB3.0 + 1 x USB2.0
    • HDMI Out

Software (FlytOS):

  • Linux: Lubuntu 14.04
  • ROS Indigo, OpenCV 2.4.11
  • FlytCore v1.0, FlytConsole v1.0
  • OpenWRT for networking
  • C++, Python, ROS, RESTful APIs
  • SDKs for Web/Mobile
  • Support for Multirotors, Fixed-Wing
  • Authentication, Security and Updates Management

 

Launching Beta Program!

We have completed the internal trials and are launching the beta program. We will be working closely with select beta-flyters, over next few months, to get their drone applications up and running. We hope to gather a lot of valuable feedback and fine-tune the platform, to suit their needs, during the course of this program.

We are looking to engage with researchers and developers who are keen on building advanced drone application for various use-cases. If you would like to participate in the beta program, please visit: http://www.flytbase.com

We are working on extensive documentation, user manual, tutorial videos, and sample onboard/web/mobile apps to help you get started!

We are all ears for any comments or feedback. Please feel free to get in touch with us at admin@navstik.org!

Read more…
3D Robotics

3689675192?profile=original

From DefenseOne (note: we're posting this because it is both very interesting on the GPS-spoofing technology issue and is not about military use of drones, but rather security). Excerpt:

As the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency, or CBP, has upped its drone patrols along America’s Mexican border, narcotics traffickers have responded with expensive technology of their own.



“The bad guys on the border have lots of money and what they are putting money into is into spoofing and jamming GPSsystems. We’re funding some advances so we can counter this,” said Timothy Bennett, a science-and-technology program manager at the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees CBP. Those bad guys aren’t ISIS, just traffickers, Bennett said on Dec. 16 at the Center for Strategic and International Studies “It’s more about trafficking drugs and people,” he told Defense One. “We know who’s over there. We can guess who’s doing it.”

Bennett said CBP has a rapid and growing need, especially for “small” unmanned aerial vehicles, or UAVs. But unlike larger drones designed to military specifications, many small UAVs are far more vulnerable to hacking and location spoofing. Consider how easily Chinese cybersecurity researchers Lin Huang and Qing Yang with Qihoo 360 were able to disrupt the geofence on a DJI Phantom drone by spoofing GPS, which is illegal in the United States.

“The manufactures know it’s an issue. They’re not going to advertise it as an issue. It becomes cost-prohibitive. They’re not going to, all of a sudden, put it in their aircraft because it does drive the price up,” Michael Buscher, CEO of Vanguard Defense Industries.

Vanguard makes a drone called the ShadowHawk, a popular purchase among local police forces near the border. Buscher couldn’t say how many CPB units or border law enforcement agencies do use the drones, citing non-disclosure agreements, but it was among the first UAVs to be approved for purchase with DHS grant funds, including in border areas.

The ShadowHawk uses military-grade encryption and changes GPS frequencies every half second, according to Buscher. Other drone makers looking to sell to DHS have approached him to ask about hardening their aircraft against attacks. “We’ve been contacted and they ask us what kind of military-grade encryption that we use. We tell them what the cost is and where we are purchasing it from and then it becomes cost-prohibitive for them,” he said.

“It’s the spoofing that’s bad. That we’ve got to look into. They can make you think you are someone else,” Bennett said. “For small [UAVs], it’s a bigger deal. They can’t do the secure GPS. There are a lot of anti-jamming systems right now that can detect it but they’re big and heavy. So you’ve got something that weighs 25 pounds, you add five pounds, and it affects its payload or it affects its duration. So the big thing now is getting that [detection] capability on these small ones in a way that doesn’t add weight to it.”

DHS was unable to say just how often smugglers tried to jam or spoof border-watching UAVs. But Bennett said the attacks are hindering law enforcement abilities to map drug routes. “You’re out there looking, trying to find out this path [they’re] going through with drugs, and we can’t get good coordinate systems on it because we’re getting spoofed. That screws up the whole thing. We got to fix that problem,” he said.

Debugging DHS Drones

.....

Today, the drone grants that DHS is awarding to law enforcement agencies, while smaller than the Reaper, aren’t large to enough to buy the sorts of UAVs that can withstand penetration and spoofing attempts. “We’ll have departments call us and say, ‘Hey, we got a DHS grant for a drone: $25,000.’ [But] our cost starts at $120,000 just for the cameras. The grants that [DHS] is providing, it’s setting them up for failure … what they can purchase with it is susceptible … limited in range and capability.”

Bennett didn’t discuss the report but did lay out a number of steps that DHS was undertaking to improve the way border guards use drones. The agency has launched a project called Robotic Aircraft for Public Safety II, or RAPS II, to get more small drones to border agents. (The first RAPS, launched in 2012, explored the use of small drones for first responders.) The initial RAPS IIdemonstration session is scheduled for Jan. 11 at Oklahoma’s Fort Sill, where more than a dozen companies will meet to test 20 small drones in day and night conditions.

DHS is also funding new research and development to improve its border monitoring drones. The agency wants UAVs that can detect motion, then decide whether to alert a sensor operator, potentially cutting down on operator costs.

“The big thing for air and marine CBP in general is detecting motion on the ground. We’re helping fund moving target indicator systems in the MQ-9 and others so that they will be able to see … a man on the ground, follow them,” Bennett said.

DHS is also interested in drones that can hover far longer than even the most advanced and fuel-efficient military UAVs. “Other next-generation unmanned systems will conduct a broad range of missions with application to the [Homeland Security Environment]. For example, significant experimentation is ongoing in high-altitude, long-endurance (HALE) aircraft that could remain in flight for weeks at a time,” reads a DHS report (written almost a year ago but released to the public on Dec. 16).

The report also says that privacy concerns may curtail the use of drones over U.S. soil. “Already we’ve seen companies selling persistent surveillance, wide area surveillance solutions,” Jay Stanley, a senior policy analyst from the American Civil Liberties Union, said at the CSIS event. “Mass surveillance by use of drones is both something very far away but also very near … The technology will move very quickly.”

Read more…
Developer

We tried to put a smooth motors transition in the "PX4 VTOL" code.
This video shows the results we obtained after a little tuning, using a "Pixhawk flight controller" and "U-Blox M8N gps".
Special thanks to Roman Babst and Lorenz Meier, who are working hard to make their code safe and powerful.

Marco

Read more…