Best Way To Build A DIY UAV? 259
Shojun writes "I am very interested in building my own UAV. Not just one that can fly around happily, but one that I can program to say, take photos every second as it does a barrel roll under a bus (ok, that part may be a pipe dream). I have enough embedded programming experience — it's the hardware which I'm uncertain about. I can go the kit way, and then build the remaining stuff, or get some Dollar Tree Foam boards and build it all. I'm in favor of ease, however. Once the plane is built, buying a dev board seems like a possibility, but I wonder whether it's overkill. Alternatively, if there was a How-to-build example on the net for such an activity that I could adapt, to the degree that I could then program in even completely hardcoded flight instructions, I can certainly take it from there. Thoughts? Has anyone here tried something like this before?"
Make darn sure the Feds don't mind! (Score:2, Insightful)
I'd make sure the Feds have no problem with you running something like this around. Best to make sure you won't get shot down/at.
Re:Make darn sure the Feds don't mind! (Score:5, Insightful)
Best to make sure you won't get shot down/at.
The Feds? No. Even the Feds don't have the power to stop a populace from flying their UAVs. Shooting down a model plane is more dangerous than the plane itself, so I don't see it becoming practice. What you are going to see is laws prohibiting *ownership* of UAVs and parts to build them. Most likely, these will come under the blanket of anti-terrorism laws.
Re:Make darn sure the Feds don't mind! (Score:4, Interesting)
As you rightfully point out, though, once people appreciate that the difference between RC planes and a cruise missile is a smattering of electronics and a hand grenade, I think they'll tighten the screws. It might start with parts, but the stuff you need to make a UAV/missile is very similar to what goes into many many other things (eg. gyroscopes, accelerometers)
Re:Make darn sure the Feds don't mind! (Score:4, Interesting)
http://www.interestingprojects.com/cruisemissile/ [interestingprojects.com]
It was remarkable not only that it was exceedingly cool, and perhaps the ultimate DIY hack ever, but that it flew right in a legal sh1tstorm before it even took off. This, in a country (NZ) with relatively deregulated airspace.
The result is the government really did not like this, and moved to stop him actually testing this, including some pretty underhand ways of shutting him down (threatening to call in all his Tax debt all at once). As a result he got some very high profile prime time publicity in this country at least. Basically his point was, anyone could do this, and he set out to prove just that. Rather successfully. But this fellow is not exactly your average terrorist but a rather a patent-holding backyard engineer. I still don't think even highly resourced terrorists would go down this route, so perhaps he wasn't right after all, and was just asking for trouble.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
A UAV is a collision hazard.
The difference between RC aircraft and a UAV is that with an RC aircraft someone is flying it in a wide open area where they can see it from the ground and steer it away from hitting anyone or anything. You can't say that for a UAV unless you have a bunch of high resolution cameras sending video back to you in real time. That would make it pretty heavy. Above certain surprisingly low weight limits, you'll need to coordinate your activities with air traffic control. Chances are th
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, the FAA has a system in place to introduce new UAVs in a legal fashion. Unfortunately, the current system requires that every new UAV go through this process. My company has been on the waiting list for ~2 years to have our UAV made legal. They specifically told us that they will only certify 4 UAVs per year, and they will give priority to "established" companies. Basically, Boeing or Northrup Grumman can get their UAVs certified, but a startup company has no chance.
New regulations are just around t
+5, Sad (Score:2)
We need a new moderation tag for posts like these. I've seen +5, Funny, and in this case, I'm proposing +5, Sad.
It's just a sad statement. I don't find it terribly insightful, but I'd give it +1.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd make sure the Feds have no problem with you running something like this around. Best to make sure you won't get shot down/at.
People fly R/C all the time. There are clubs world wide and there are governing bodies which regulate a wide variety of things - where you can fly, how large your model can be without needing to be certified, what radio frequencies are permitted. What he's describing is more complex than R/C but there won't be much additional regulation to comply with and the "Feds" won't be inter
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't think that if ballons are OK that a pre-programmed autopiloted powered plane would be out... but that is probably too common sense for the .gov
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What he's describing is more complex than R/C but there won't be much additional regulation to comply with and the "Feds" won't be interested unless he does something that violates the existing laws.
There are no existing laws or regulations that allow UAVs to fly in US airspace. There are, however, specific exemptions for hobby aircraft -- the essential difference under the current regulations is hobby vs commercial. A hobby UAV is allowed, but a commercial UAV is not allowed.
My company designs small UAV helicopters and flight control computers -- technically, we break the law every time we have a flight test. Luckily, the FAA are under a mandate to develop draft regulations in the next 6-9 months th
and be very careful about where you fly (Score:2)
best case is they shoot the plane down worst case they track down and shoot YOU
when in doubt NO FLY
Re: (Score:2)
Of which there are quite a lot, particularly pertaining to autonomous operation. "Make sure the Feds have no problem with you" could be interpreted as "know the law and don't break it."
If he wanted to say "know the law" he should have said so clearly instead of "Oh my god! Robot plane! Feds will want to hunt you and your plane down and shoot you".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, if you're talking about full sized aircraft it's a minefield. For small hobby UAVs flying at the local r/c club (which seems to be what this story is about) it's less complex.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Controlled airspace is really easy to avoid. Just don't go more than 600 feet above the ground or within 3 miles of an airport. That will get you around 95% of the controlled airspace. It's all clearly marked on aeronautical charts. Just go to your local airport and ask any local pilot to pull out a sectional chart and explain how your local airspace works to you.
Re:Make darn sure the Feds don't mind! (Score:4, Funny)
The problem is if the plans become too useful. The idea with gps 'anyone' could make a cruise like device with 'okish' optical payload.
Get it up high with a motor, drop the motor and let it cool off. Could it almost be stealthy? Let if drift over an area of interest.
The camera would click away. You could build a cage around it to mess with radar. A hole for the 'off' cell phone to transmit from.
Most intrusion detection systems would be radar based, optical or looking for heat.
You have no heat, mostly wood. Would a big wooden eagle fool a optical over flight AI?
Fire it off over a suspected 'Area 51', ie a new/old US base that seems to have much more activity.
Become the Gary McKinnon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_McKinnon) of the UAV world.
Have a cell phone inside to 'call' its gps location after x hours to come pick it up. Recover and publish via TOR
Then the feds would have to do something about the wetware.
Some subtle pranks to get you depressed.
Then you would be "DC Madam ed" or join Costas Tsalikidis, the Greek telco whistleblower who was found hanged.
Adamo Bove head of security at Telecom Italia who exposed the CIA renditions via cell phones 'fell' to his death.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd be more worried about the local rednecks shooting it down.
The local or state authorities will have no problem so long as you stay within the existing guide lines for model planes and wireless transmissions (assuming you want to send video). Also don't break local laws with it (or piss off the neighbours, a model plane with a camera could easily be misconstrued as stalking
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Correct, all air traffic globally is regulated by international law, and in the USA the airspace is administered by the FAA. Unless you go to a huge hassle to get an airworthiness certificate and licenses (a big hassle, and probably impractical unless you are a professional or seriously hardcore enthusiast), you MUST comply with the existing exceptions for radio controlled craft. This means:
Line of sight. You must stay within line of sight of the aircraft, and you also must be able to take control of t
I hate Slashdot editors... (Score:2, Informative)
I shouldn't have to look up acronyms because an editor fails at adding one to the summary. Since I had to look it up anyway -- for those as clueless as me, UAV means Unmanned Aerial Vehicle.
Re:I hate Slashdot editors... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:I hate Slashdot editors... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not a basement, it's a command centre
die hard fan?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Ideally though the documentation should be so good an API user doesn't need to even open the source files.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It is fairly easy to confuse UAV with AUV (Autonomous Underwater Vehicle), which is basically the same bot, but different fluid.
Welcome to the 21st century (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Since I had to look it up anyway -- for those as clueless as me, UAV means Unmanned Aerial Vehicle.
Please hand over your geek card. Your privileges have just been revoked.
Re: (Score:2)
otherwise known as D.I.Y. DRONES...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if you don't know what UAV is, this discussion is no place for you; sounds fait to me.
Re: (Score:2)
while you're at it could you clarify, DIY? Come on wikipedia is there for a reason, /. editors are not here to hold your hand, if you don't understand an acronym the article is probably not for you, should kernel articles explain what VM,CFQ,kexec are?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Paparazzi Project (Score:5, Informative)
http://paparazzi.enac.fr/wiki/Main_Page [paparazzi.enac.fr]
Open source autopilot/software/hardware design for small UAVs. Check succes stories and links on their webpage for a quick overview of what (quite a lot!) can be reasonably easily achieved.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Very interesting, but only plumbers like Mario can have pipe dreams.
Re: (Score:2)
Cool stuff. Looks like a degree in aeronautics and electrical engineering wound not be a bad thing either. But then, you'd be doing it for others as well...
UAV? Or...? (Score:2)
Hell, UAV? How about building a cruise missile in your garage. Take pictures while barrel rolling under a bus, orrrr, take pictures while breaking the sound barrier. Check it out: http://www.interestingprojects.com/cruisemissile/missilemanbook.shtml [interestingprojects.com]
Re:UAV? Or...? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
You linked to a news article about his link, goofball.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Q) What countries have more relaxed UAV regulations?
A) Australia and New Zealand are famously progressive in their UAV policies. Other countries, such as Mexico, have been know to be relatively friendly, too.
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?s=31fcf01ee166e7be6375a4830cd4fd5e&t=831627 [rcgroups.com]
Re: (Score:2)
How about attaching the cruise missile to the UAV?
If I were to try this... (Score:2, Interesting)
Try AUVSI ideas? (Score:4, Informative)
Link to old contest stuff [angel-strike.com]
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The forums on the diydrones website (same website that this slashdot questions linked) has all the answers to the questions asked. It might take a few hours to search through those forums and understand enough about what you're reading to find the answ
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
the focus has generally been on helicopters, simply because you can get them to stand still... doing a good inertial autopilot on an airplane is significantly more challenging.
No, the focus has been on helicopters because airplane autopilots are a done problem. Most commercial airline flights can go from takeoff to touchdown without human intervention -- human pilots are pretty much the backup system these days. Not true for helicopters. The Bell 429 has an autopilot -- it smooths out inputs and cancels wind gusts and such, but it can't take full control. And I think Sikorsky might have something similar, but in general helicopters don't have autopilots. B/c it's a freaking hard
forums. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:forums. (Score:5, Informative)
Bullshit.
People build and fly unmanned aerial aircraft all the time. There are weight and altitude limits, but there's no limit against small (say, under 55 lbs) aircraft at low altitudes (say, under 400 ft above ground), flown by radio control viewed from the ground, or from downlink FPV video, or even partial or full autonomy if you can achieve it. Might want to browse the AMA for sanctioned fields, but you don't have to fly at a group-sanctioned nor government-sanctioned location.
I always wonder why they'd still call it a V-for-Vehicle since there's no passengers, but that's another story.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
That is not completely true.
There may be local or state laws to prohibit personal UAV's in the USA.
Just as there are zoning laws for RC planes and choppers.
And lets face it, you very well fly a real plane or chopper out of your garage normally.
But there is no National laws or FAA regulations prohibiting small R/C class planes and choppers being setup as UAV's.
But I do believe at some point the FAA would get involved in an ultra light size or better UAV.
Because now your talking about real safety issues.
The place you want to visit (Score:2, Informative)
You want to visit DIYDrones.com
It's a very active community that has a lot of resources for people entering the UAV scene.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, Slashdot is great, but you can sign up on DIY Drones and get much better responses from people with more experience working directly with, well, do it yourself drones.
On another note, I've been sort of working on my own UAV for a little while now. You can get lots of parts from Sparkfun, ranging from the Ardupilot to GPS's to microcontrollers that you
Have tried it, and it is awesome. ND Aero Eng (Score:5, Interesting)
Here was my team's plane: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eW68B3DnNWA [youtube.com]
If you're interested in actually constructing the structure by yourself, I'd definitely suggest picked up a book on model airplane construction. Hobby shop dudes are also a big help, just go in and throw some ideas out and most hobby store owners will be very enthusiastic. And, if you're _really_ interested, I'd suggest Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach by Daniel Raymer. Link: http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&id=1396 [aiaa.org]
Oh, also, flying a model aircraft requires a hell of a lot of skill- we get the awesome dudes down at the South Bend RC Plane Club to fly ours.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
For more info on programming flight control systems and simulations, see Flight Stability and Automatic Control, by Robert Nelson. http://www.amazon.com/Flight-Stability-Automatic-Control-Robert/dp/0070462739 [amazon.com]
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Model Aircraft Aerodynamics by Martin Simons is am excellent reference for antone wanting to design and build model aircraft/UAV.
20 Years ago Martin got an invitation to speak in Washington, where when he arrived he was surprised to find himself speaking to the top airforce brass. At the time he could not work out why-
as UAV became more common he found out!
Re: (Score:2)
Here was my team's plane: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eW68B3DnNWA [youtube.com]
lol, did the camera man have some of that Red Bull cola? ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
Not to get into an AE pissing contest but NCSU did that project for their 2003-2004 senior design course. That was a few years before I graduated but I remember seeing them fly and it was really impressive. One of the many videos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RX47ofUrTHQ [youtube.com]
It's good to see other schools requiring building and flight testing though. Too many times I've run across engineering students and/or recent graduates who have a lot of theoretical background but don't actually have any idea of how much
Had a look at Mikrokopter ? (Score:4, Informative)
Have a look at this project: http://www.mikrokopter.de/ucwiki/en/Mikrokopter-Get-started [mikrokopter.de]
They offer assembly instructions and software.
Some pictures: http://gallery.mikrokopter.de/main.php [mikrokopter.de]
and videos: http://www.mikrokopter.de/ucwiki/VideoListe [mikrokopter.de]
ArduPilot? (Score:2)
Almost everything you need ready-made.
http://diydrones.com/profiles/blog/show?id=705844%3ABlogPost%3A44814 [diydrones.com]
Start with simple r/c (Score:4, Insightful)
I hope you have a few spare thousand dollars.
From your post you clearly know nothing about r/c aircraft. Learn to fly an r/c aircraft well without crashing. Go find a club and an instructor who'll teach you. Also get hold of a good simulator unless you want to spend thousands. That'll take you at least 6 months, probably closer to a year. (Longer if you don't have any aptitude for it). Flying r/c planes takes more practice and skill than you might think. It'll also cost more than you think. Once you have an appreciation for the difficulties of flying R/C you might stand half a chance programming one with a robotic interface. You'll also want to be able to take over manually from time to time when you're programming the thing so if you get something slightly wrong you've got some chance of saving it.
You could also learn about the robotics more simply with an r/c car. R/c cars can move slowly without any risk of falling out of the sky. Some of what you learn will translate to air, other parts won't.
If you want something off the shelf, I did read about robotised r/c helicopters for commercial applications like security but I think they cost in the 10's of thousands. I think you STILL need to know how to take over manually.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Or he could buy something like the Easy Star and learn to fly it in an evening or two.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Huh? took me 2 days to learn to fly RC, and that included a few repairs to the ol Soar Birdy.
There are now many cheap virtually indestructable models made from EPP foam available, no need to spend thousands.
Re: (Score:2)
Huh? took me 2 days to learn to fly RC, and that included a few repairs to the ol Soar Birdy.
Can your electric foamy carry a GPS, camera and other electronics you'd need to make it autonomous. I'm sorry but you're flying the absolute bottom end of the scale and you have decided that means you have "learnt to fly RC". There are many very cool planes out there that you wouldn't have a hope of flying without a lot more practice. That includes some of the most basic non-foam and glo fuel planes.
There are now ma
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Your ignorance of models is revealed by the fact you dont even know what a soar birdy is. It was an all built balsa and ply 2 ch floater common some years ago.
Actually, I designed and built kevlar, glass and carbon moulded F3B models 25 years ago, winning a round of the OZ nationals so I might just have more of a clue than you about model aircraft.
Any of my F3B models could carry all the stuff you mention, it would be lighter than the designed ballast it carries.
I have flown glo powered pylon, pattern and m
Re: (Score:2)
Your ignorance of models is revealed by the fact you dont even know what a soar birdy is. It was an all built balsa and ply 2 ch floater common some years ago.
Oh yes, of course. My entire knowledge of R/C aircraft should be judged by my lack of knowledge of a single model that was common where YOU live "some years ago". I need to go back to r/c school right now. I suggest you google the phrase "people skills".
Actually, I designed and built kevlar, glass and carbon moulded F3B models 25 years ago, winning a
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If you bothered to read and comprehend my post and the one I was replying, you would find you claimed one needed to spend thousands of dollars to learn to fly RC, which is evidently wrong.
The soar birdy was an american (Joe Bridi kit) basic 2 ch design sold in the thousands, and would be known by anyone with a long term involvement in RC.
I still have the models I made 25 years ago in perfect condition, and fly them about once a year,
dut to a heavy instructing commtiment and time spent flying real sailplanes
Re: (Score:2)
That hard? I mean i know it being remote control will make it more difficult, but flying gliders is a piece of piss, surely there are motorized glider R/Cs and learning to use them cant be too hard?
Re: (Score:2)
That hard? I mean i know it being remote control will make it more difficult, but flying gliders is a piece of piss, surely there are motorized glider R/Cs and learning to use them cant be too hard?
You'd be very surprised. You have a number of things you need to train yourself to do correctly before you can fly an RC plane. Someone else pointed out that there are easier electric foamies out there. That's true but I'd dispute that they are "virtually indestructible" or that once you learn them you'd have the
Re: (Score:2)
it will likely be close to $1000.
I am personally heading down the same path you direct (but cheaper), bought a $200 electric plane, with the FMA co-Pilot [fmadirect.com] to learn to fly the RC plane (after a couple 15 minute sessions playing the RC sim at the local hobby shop.) These sensors then work with the arduPilot [ning.com] once you are a competent pilot. Total cost for the training aids, plane, gps+board... sub $1000
cant yet comment how well it works, just got the plane in the air (2 feet), now getting the FMA co-pilo
UAV tried to kill me (Score:5, Informative)
Unless you have extensive experience designing them, I would recommend going with a kit plane for hardware rather than trying to build one from scratch out of foam boards. The reason for this is that you will start out with a design you know is flyable and has the stability properties you want. One of the classic errors in model-scale UAV design I've seen people make is trying to design the craft from scratch only to discover that their control surfaces are poorly sized, the thing is dynamically unstable, and it requires hand-made spare parts after every flight.
I think an ideal platform for a UAV like you describe would be a foam flying wing with maybe a 3-4 foot wingspan. The flying wing design would at least in theory allow you to decouple some equations which would be difficult to do in traditional fused aircraft and impossible to do in helicopters. Also, unibody construction makes it easier to land without landing gear. Landing without some pretty complex rangefinding hardware is tough, even for a computer system. Doing a skid landing on that huge wing surface with a rear-facing prop will add some margin of error to your landing sequence. If possible, get an ARF (Almost Ready to Fly) model. They come with airframe, power system, and sometimes all the servos. All you need to add is the radio equipment (I assume you are going to have a manual override backup. No, really. You're going to want a manual override.). Expanded polypropylene foam is actually more durable than a lot of people give it credit for, and replacement parts for these aircraft are easy to find.
Re:UAV tried to kill me (Score:4, Funny)
Next time, disconnect the Skynet interface.
Re: (Score:2)
"Informative"? Jeez, does somebody out there think that Skynet is real?
Stumbling blocks (Score:2, Insightful)
Go to (Score:3, Funny)
You might try instructables.com.. They have a section with this kind of project.
Get an RC plane (Score:2, Insightful)
It seem like the obvious approach would be a fairly large RC plane and mount a second the camera (perhaps on a servo) and a tv transmitter on it. You downlink the video to a laptop that then uses some sort of usb connection to a gutted rc controller, either with servos moving the sticks directly, or better yet, bypassing the potentiometers and variably outputting voltage directly to the control board.
It seems like the hardest thing is avoiding (auto)pilot error. I don't have any experience with RC planes
Re: (Score:2)
Although there is a case to be made for doing the math on the ground, for right now it's probably bett
Communications is a problem (Score:2, Interesting)
But how do you keep in communication with it? Military UAV's most definitely use satellites.
Re: (Score:2)
We already have cheap and ubiquitous way for transferring data while on-the-go: cellphone network. I'm thinking about implementing it at some point in UAV that I'm toying with.
Granted, there are countries with spotty coverage...but there are also those where, even if 3G range is limited to aglomerations, 2G/GPRS is practically everywhere (or at least - I've never seen "out of range" on my cellphone; also, beeing somewhat above ground will help reception on an UAV)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Dial-up modem connected to a gutted iridium phone? Is that technically workable?
The hobbyist term for a UAV is... (Score:2)
...an R/C plane. There are any number of magazines and books describing the construction of such, covering many different types for many different needs. Any electronic project you might wish to mount on the plane would be its own project and more an electronics problem then a problem in constructing the plane (the weight would have to be strictly controlled, of course); cameras are a popular one and you could probably find many plans, notes, and tips in the above mentioned R/C resources.
Autonomous glider (Score:5, Interesting)
I have no particular interest in building aircraft, and still thought that page was a good read.
Start With a Slow Stick (Score:5, Interesting)
Not sure if you already have radio-controlled airplane experience. If you do not, I have a very solid recommendation for you:
A world-class starter platform for both learning to fly and lifting is the Slow Stick. It is one of the most popular planes with RC hackers, is cheap as dirt, has solid lifting potential (and upgrades can make it a real monster), and has lots of commercially available upgrade parts.
I'd go with a slow stick glider, and add a cheap brushless motor for starters (in fact, that's precisely what I have about six feet behind me for my first aerial photography platform). That will give you a good mix of cheap and solid lifting potential.
As for the forum, Slashdot is a good place to start for all things geeky, but the specialist forums you're looking for are at RCGroups:
http://www.rcgroups.com/ [rcgroups.com]
Here's the main starter thread for Slow Sticks:
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=122951 [rcgroups.com]
Admit your noob-ness, ask for advice, be respectful, weather the occasional ornery response with good humor, and you can learn everything you want to know at RC Groups.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Here's a thread on someone else's experience seeking the same objective:
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1054800&highlight=uav [rcgroups.com]
I gotcher UAV right here... (Score:2)
Here's yer UAV: it's a long piece of string and a big kite with digital camera and an Eye-Fi card taped to it. Have fun and make sure you're home in time for supper, young man.
You really need to get liegality (Score:2, Interesting)
if your in the US your getting into a legal shit storm, look here:
http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/design_approvals/uas/reg/media/frnotice_uas.pdf [faa.gov]
and here
http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/1ACFC3F689769A56862569E70077C9CC?OpenDocument&Highlight=91 [faa.gov]
other than that, it is an interesting controls project, most interesting part will be getting accurate sensor information without spending a ton on a decent gyro...
build a simulator or you will wreck a lot of airplan
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Under 400 feet, 3+miles from any airport, not over any built-up area, and not annoying anyone (such as your local sheriff deputy who doesn't know or care about the limits of FAA regulations), those regs you cited do not apply.
On the other hand, it might be more fun to start this hobby within an organization that can get FAA 8130s, has a real budget, a CNC machine shop, chip fab plant, money, a big place to fly with Air Force approval, money, etc.
I work at a place that could get the COA/special 8130/7177 and
Build your own damned UAV! (Score:2)
I'm not sure if the original poster is with Al Queda ("wikislamofacism.com tl;dr lol") or a Bond Villain (too lazy to Google for "world domination").
Errm... R/C Model Airplane as a start? (Score:2)
http://www.drones.com/RC-faq.html [drones.com]
Cheers,
Dave
get a park flyer first (Score:2)
first step, get a park flyer
learn how to fly a park flyer first. they are the easiest to fly and the most rugged.
once you learn how that particular plane flies, next step is to start automating some of the control surfaces.
I suggest you start simple, program simple a simple take-off and then relinquish to manual. (make sure you program a throttle cut-off if you don't receive manual input in x time.)
once you get that down, work next on a simple park circuit.
As for hardware, the simplest design is a board t
arduino + wii controller (Score:2)
The arduino is a wonderful microcontroller for this sort of thing. It's cheap, it's available in small form factors, and it has pwm outputs that can be used to control servos.
I've also heard that some people have had success interfacing a wii controller with the arduino. If it's not to heavy, that might serve as a good, inexpensive accelerometer.
Some brands (Score:2)
I used to work on autonomous UAVs as an engineering competition project in college. This was a couple of years back, so the technology's probably changed a bit. But here's some advice to get you started.
First of all, I would not bother trying to program the entire system myself. There's an awful lot to do, simulation is challenging, and failed tests are expensive and will set you back a lot of time. So you should focus on integrating existing stuff as much as possible. There'll still be crashes/failures/etc
DIY UAV (Score:3, Informative)
I had intended to build one, but my working budget went from a little something to less than nothing due to job changes. I still keep my eyes open to what can be done though. Right now, it's a mental exercise.
The most important thing to remember is, as a hobby toy, unless you want to get in serious trouble with the FAA, you must follow a few rules. This is probably not all inclusive. It's just what I can think of off the top of my head from my own research. Find a local R/C group, and reference the FAA pages for more information.
The FAA has a notice on UAV's here [faa.gov].
1) It can not go over 400 feet.
2) You must stay out of any airspace that an aircraft may be flying in. That is, stay out of the approach and departure areas of any airport. Someone just got in trouble for this, where they had an R/C airplane with a camera that filmed a commercial airliner flying by. It was several seconds between the time the aircraft passed, and the wake turbulence knocked his R/C plane out of the air, which would imply a decent separation, but still, stay away from aircraft.
If you haven't gone through private pilot flight school, you may not be aware of the airspace restrictions. Stop by a local small airport and ask. There will always be someone with time on their hands that will love to talk to a newbie.
3) It can never leave your sight,
4) You must have control of it at all times. That is, your remote control must be able to override anything it wants to do.
6) Watch the frequencies that you're using. If you're on R/C frequencies and TX power, you're safe, but play nice with other people who may be flying. Don't hog a bunch of frequencies because you need them for additional controls. If you're working with other frequencies, check the licensing on those. You don't want to piss off the FCC too.
Now I'll go into the territory of ignoring FAA and FCC rules. Don't do it. Don't get caught doing it. Don't tell random strangers that you're doing it. Sure as hell don't post youtube videos of it, because you'll have feds in your livingroom with a no-knock warrant and a one way ticket for you to Southeastern Cuba.
For mine, I looked at a variety of options. If you search around enough, you'll find people mid-sized R/C airplanes (say about a 3' wingspan) with embedded PC's to do their dirty work. I didn't find this totally practical both from the OS standpoint and the interfaces. I want lots and lots of standard interfaces, and I want flexability to use anything I can. I intended to use a small x86 platform machine, running from a flash card (SD/MMC/CF). Delicate parts will get broken quick. Embedded or x86, you'll probably want several onboard to handle different functions. They'd need to be networked together so you can exchange data. For example, one reading your sensors, one to control the servos, one for comms, etc, etc.
I wanted to have the ability to carry at least a couple camcorders, and USB webcams. Every ounce of weight you add means you need the aircraft to support it. That means it needs a good amount of lift and thrust.
I'm assuming you've flown before. If you haven't, go to a local small airport and go for your private pilots license. That will include both ground school (the book work on how things work), and flight (actually working an aircraft). To program an aircraft for perfect conditions is one thing. Making it takeoff, fly, and land in less than ideal conditions is another. What happens if the wind picks up, and you have to slip during your landing? If you haven't programmed for it, either you'll end up way off course if tracking to a GPS coordinate, or you'll get blown way off of the field, probably into something less tha
Re: (Score:2)
Runs Linux? Pfft.
I like Linux as much as the next guy, but... as long as your UAV can follow Max Guevera [wikipedia.org] around taking photos, AND turn people into mimes [yourprops.com], you're all set.
Re: (Score:2)
If you use linux you might want to check out http://ktechlab.org/ [ktechlab.org]. It is a circuit simulator for PIC micro-controllers, where you can write your PIC code in either C, a flowcharting language, or in assembler. You can attach circuit elements to the PIC like potentiometers, resistors, capacitors, and other components to build a circuit around the PIC to test the software you have written even before you go anywhere near hardware. It also supports several PIC burners too, aparently - for when its time to produ
Re: (Score:2)
Overpriced. An A$900 controller, other posters have already linked to sites that offer or specify far cheaper hardware, the iphones 2.0 Mpixel camera with no zoom will be useless for still shots, Autofocus will also let you down as I haven't seen a phone camera that can do decent action shots (the plane will be moving) you'll require an external device for video capture and by the same token, transmission of that video. Plus you have to pay for the iphone SDK and get the App through the Ap