Drones
-
So does anyone here own a quadcopter or hexicopter - a 'drone'? My hexicopter frame arrived this morning, so all I need to do now is add motors, motor controllers, RC stuff, batteries and write some software for the Arduino Mega board I've got for it. I've already got the GPS module and ultrasonic ground detector. All good classic nerd stuff. But I do have a concern in my head, what if I lose control and it takes out a 747, or falls out the sky and kills a badger or something? Not helped by an article in today's paper about the first prosecution going through the UK courts. There's also this: http://droneflight.co.uk/pages/summary-of-uk-legal-requirements[^] So a risk evaluation is in order. Whichever way you cut it, 6 350W bladed motors hurtling around on the whim of some half-arsed coding could have consequences. I don't want to end up in Court charged with not writing unit tests. Alternatively perhaps I should throw caution to the wind, ignore the nanny state and make something cool. Thoughts/experiences welcome.
Regards, Rob Philpott.
Rob Philpott wrote:
Alternatively perhaps I should throw caution to the wind, ignore the nanny state and make something cool.
Go for it!
New version: WinHeist Version 2.1.0 Beta Have you ever just looked at someone and knew the wheel was turning but the hamster was dead? Trying to understand the behavior of some people is like trying to smell the color 9. I'm not crazy, my reality is just different than yours!
-
So does anyone here own a quadcopter or hexicopter - a 'drone'? My hexicopter frame arrived this morning, so all I need to do now is add motors, motor controllers, RC stuff, batteries and write some software for the Arduino Mega board I've got for it. I've already got the GPS module and ultrasonic ground detector. All good classic nerd stuff. But I do have a concern in my head, what if I lose control and it takes out a 747, or falls out the sky and kills a badger or something? Not helped by an article in today's paper about the first prosecution going through the UK courts. There's also this: http://droneflight.co.uk/pages/summary-of-uk-legal-requirements[^] So a risk evaluation is in order. Whichever way you cut it, 6 350W bladed motors hurtling around on the whim of some half-arsed coding could have consequences. I don't want to end up in Court charged with not writing unit tests. Alternatively perhaps I should throw caution to the wind, ignore the nanny state and make something cool. Thoughts/experiences welcome.
Regards, Rob Philpott.
I stick to traditional helicopters. One main rotor and a tail rotor are enough. At the moment I fly my old Blade 450 3D and am getting a T-rex 450 Sport to fly with an Airwolf body. Here is one of the first shaky air pictures from the Blade 450: http://de.tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2mpcrh1&s=8#.VBsZjJ3wC70[^] Before you cause some grief: have you learned to fly yet?
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
I hold an A-7 computer expert classification, Commodore. I'm well acquainted with Dr. Daystrom's theories and discoveries. The basic design of all our ship's computers are JavaScript. -
Mount an M249 Saw on it, everybody sayin something against flying gets fired :-D
if(this.signature != "") { MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature); } else { MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found"); }
I will bring along Heli von Richthofen and then we will duke that out in the air.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
I hold an A-7 computer expert classification, Commodore. I'm well acquainted with Dr. Daystrom's theories and discoveries. The basic design of all our ship's computers are JavaScript. -
And on the other side "If decapitated, please return to " with a different address.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
-
That is different. For one Car insurance is a legal requirement.
Dave Find Me On:Web|Facebook|Twitter|LinkedIn Folding Stats: Team CodeProject
So an unlimited liability is only worth insuring against if it is a legal requirement?
-
So an unlimited liability is only worth insuring against if it is a legal requirement?
No, it's about assessing risk. Hazard effect, probability, controls and residual risk factors. If you deem it necessary then insurance. Legal aspects only swing that decision in some case. for example Nobody says you have to take Fully comprehensive, you could just as easy take 3rd party, it is an assessment.
Dave Find Me On:Web|Facebook|Twitter|LinkedIn Folding Stats: Team CodeProject
-
No, it's about assessing risk. Hazard effect, probability, controls and residual risk factors. If you deem it necessary then insurance. Legal aspects only swing that decision in some case. for example Nobody says you have to take Fully comprehensive, you could just as easy take 3rd party, it is an assessment.
Dave Find Me On:Web|Facebook|Twitter|LinkedIn Folding Stats: Team CodeProject
It's the third parties I'd be worried about. Imagine the front page of Daily Wail:"Irresponsible Drone Flight Ruined My Life!" Pouting teenager with bound-up head in picture, embraced by pouting mother. "Their case has been taken up by the solicitor behind the cruise ship class action, Sir Barrabus Gob-Bollock, of Gob-Onn-Eeww and Company. He is pressing for unlimited damages and a ban on unsupervised drone flights unless the operator has a British Membership Of Membership Associations Certification Award (Part II)." As you may imagine.
-
Rob Philpott wrote:
They also enable the rather wonderful e-cigarette too which could, if they let it, save millions of lives make billions of dollars a year for the tobacco companies.
http://www.drugfree.org/join-together/tobacco-companies-move-into-e-cigarette-business/[^]
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
-
They bought it so they could shut it down. http://gizmodo.com/the-maker-of-blu-e-cigs-is-lobbying-to-ban-vaping-1633442788[^]
Not quite - they bought it and are trying to shut down the competition's products.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
-
Well that's my thinking, in a remote area the chances of actually hitting anything are slim. Video will have to wait to tonight - no youtube here :( Indeed, fly home and height limiting are in the brief, but what if the board crashes? Need to check the specs but I think the PCM signals are hardware generated and hence there's a danger of the instantaneous power becoming a continuous power and dreadful things happening.
Regards, Rob Philpott.
Rob Philpott wrote:
but what if the board crashes?
That's why the aerospace industry is so extreme about all the testing and analysis. In their case, lives are on the line. In yours, they only could be on the line. Drones should be legally classified as clay pigeons. I'm all for people getting them and playing/learning with them. I'm not for people putting cameras on them and invading my privacy. Unfortunately, those can't be separated. Clay pigeons.
We can program with only 1's, but if all you've got are zeros, you've got nothing.
-
So does anyone here own a quadcopter or hexicopter - a 'drone'? My hexicopter frame arrived this morning, so all I need to do now is add motors, motor controllers, RC stuff, batteries and write some software for the Arduino Mega board I've got for it. I've already got the GPS module and ultrasonic ground detector. All good classic nerd stuff. But I do have a concern in my head, what if I lose control and it takes out a 747, or falls out the sky and kills a badger or something? Not helped by an article in today's paper about the first prosecution going through the UK courts. There's also this: http://droneflight.co.uk/pages/summary-of-uk-legal-requirements[^] So a risk evaluation is in order. Whichever way you cut it, 6 350W bladed motors hurtling around on the whim of some half-arsed coding could have consequences. I don't want to end up in Court charged with not writing unit tests. Alternatively perhaps I should throw caution to the wind, ignore the nanny state and make something cool. Thoughts/experiences welcome.
Regards, Rob Philpott.
Before you go overboard, you might want to take the fact that you are creating an avionics system into consideration and that while it may not be mandated that you follow government standards for development due to the type of aircraft it is that avionics software development standards exist for safety reasons. You can find out more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avionics_software[^] You will probably want to familiarize yourself with the DO-178B standard for civil aircraft: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DO-178B[^] I've had a little experience with these in a previous job. If you want to be safe you have a lot of good learning ahead of you :-) Additionally, you could always try to break into the avionics industry this way!
-
Not quite - they bought it and are trying to shut down the competition's products.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
