[Noisebridge-discuss] occucopter hackers

Christina Olson daravinne at gmail.com
Thu Jan 5 19:00:39 UTC 2012


i guess it depends if you want to do more of an engineering project or
actually get usable video footage within a reasonable time frame.  And
i'm not an engineer of flying things but it seems like the time and
effort that will get sunk into making a flying contraption with a
camera strapped to it not only fly but get actual usable video thats
not too shaky would not be worth it and then you'd realize at some
point you didn't get what you originally came for which was video
footage because you got distracted by making something.  which
normally wouldn't be a problem but in this case you guys seem to have
a tangible goal.



On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Jake <jake at spaz.org> wrote:
>> I still don't think it's a good idea, nor do I think it will please law
>> enforcement for obvious safety reasons.
>
> damn, you woke up on the wrong side of the bed.
>
> yes, i am expecting to have to write an autopilot program from scratch.
>
> by neutrally buoyant, i mean slightly heavier than air.
>
> it's an airplane, so it has to move forward to fight gravity, and when it
> is told to stay in one place it should end up flying directly into the
> wind.  If the wind is faster than what is needed for zero climb/fall it
> can aim its prop down to reduce lift, and if the wind is too slow it can
> automatically circle the spot.
>
> yes it will have a battery, and use electricity.  It will also carry an
> android phone.  I don't think this is too much weight for a balloon.
>
> other people have talked about a tethered balloon.  I am not stopping
> them, however I want something a lot better.  I understand that I will
> need to write software.
>
> I am not trying to please the cops.
>
> If anyone wants to help design the envelope shape, please contact me off
> list.  I'm looking to copy this design:
>
> http://solarship.com/
>
> -jake
>
> On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Corey McGuire wrote:
>
>> What is the expectation of flight time?  If it's anything longer than 20
>> minutes, may I suggest an alternative?
>>
>> K.I.S.S.
>>
>> Balloon with tethers.
>>
>> Nothing relying on power and control is going to either withstand wind, have
>> endurance, be lite enough to fly, or is going to stay in one spot.  And
>> nothing is going to have autopilot/autohover for less than $2000
>> (http://www.mikrokopter.de/ucwiki/en/KomplettsetUebersicht) unless someone
>> is willing to spend a lot of DIY time.  One cannot will a device into
>> existence that posses enough of all of these traits to beat a balloon with
>> tethers.
>>
>> Besides, you'll need someone on the ground focused entirely on flight.
>> Being that third person view in three dimensions is a challenging task,
>> you'll find that most people get exhausted after almost no time at all.
>>
>> If you are still sold on the "something powered" solution...
>>
>> How do we fix flight time:
>>  *  Small blimps bob around like a buoy.  You'll get sea sick trying to
>>     watch the video.  Not only that, they'll sail off unless you have a very
>>     decent power supply.  Also, anything neutrally buoyant in open air?  How
>>     are you going to get it back down?  I invite you to solve this problem
>>     FIRST.
>>  *  Anything battery powered is straight out.  Lifting a battery in to the
>>     air means short flight times - period.  Grow the battery, increase the
>>     amount of work required to fly.  Quickly, your battery outweighs it's
>>     capacity.
>>  *  Fuel poses another problem.  You can't simply turn fuel craft on and
>>     off.  If your craft goes out of control, then you have a spinning saw
>>     blade looking for a target.  There are solutions...but will they work to
>>     the satisfaction of, say, the police?  Believe it or not, there are laws
>>     to this effect, and they usually require flying outside city limits.
>>  *  Anything "copter" or "rotor" is going to eat through fuel because they
>>     do not benefit from the mechanical advantage of wings.  Basically,
>>     flight time requires wings.
>> Once you've solved flight times, control is still a problem:
>>  *  Who is going to put the craft in a steady hover/flight pattern?
>>  *  Will you have a rotation of pilots?
>>  *  You can afford an auto pilot?  GREAT!  YOU still need to know how to fly
>>     and YOU still need to watch your craft at ALL TIMES.
>>
>> So far, through investigating this, I have found the following recipe:
>>
>>  *  http://diydrones.com/profiles/blogs/ardupilot-mega-home-page
>>  * http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__17227__Phoenix_2000_EPO_Composit
>>     e_R_C_Glider_ARF_.html
>>  *  http://coxengines.ca/product.php?productid=453
>>
>> I still don't think it's a good idea, nor do I think it will please law
>> enforcement for obvious safety reasons.
>>
>> My recommendation? Balloons with tethers.
>>
>> --
>> Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler - Albert
>> Einstein
>> Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo Da Vinci
>> Perfection is reached not when there is nothing left to add, but when there
>> is nothing left to take away - Antoine de Saint Exup?ry
>> Keep It Simple Stupid - Kelly Johnson
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss



More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list