Drone Flies Into an Active Volcano [video] • Hacker News Board

Re: Drone Flies Into an Active Volcano [video]

#41

Post by fnordfnordfnord » Wed, Mar 12, 2014, 5:04 PM UTC

nlh wrote: post #18

This is supremely cool. Tangential stupid question: Obviously there's been a ton of buzz lately (and innovation) in the drone space. What's the big technological driver that's allowed / caused this to happen? I don't know the details of the internals but it seems that the tech has been around for a while (radio controlled planes, servos, helicopters, smallish cameras, etc.).

I agree with other posters that it has been the culmination of several things.

Batteries with high energy:weight.

MEMS sensors (thanks, nuclear weapon stewardship programs) http://mems.sandia.gov/

Cheap, open-ish, powerful SoC microprocessors, and the community of hackers (lots of help, and easy tools that lowered the learning curve).

Development of better "linear" circuits like advanced brushless motor controllers and chargers.

Growing robust hobbyist electronics tinkerer marketplace.

Maybe cheap 3D printing too, making prototyping easier/faster/better/more fun.

Re: Drone Flies Into an Active Volcano [video]

#42

Post by cscheid » Wed, Mar 12, 2014, 5:04 PM UTC

lmm wrote: post #23

nlh wrote: post #18

This is supremely cool. Tangential stupid question: Obviously there's been a ton of buzz lately (and innovation) in the drone space. What's the big technological driver that's allowed / caused this to happen? I don't know the details of the internals but it seems that the tech has been around for a while (radio controlled planes, servos, helicopters, smallish cameras, etc.).

The multi-rotor drones are basically uncontrollable without computers; you need a reasonably powerful processor, which in turn means a fairly high-capacity battery. I think a lot of the innovation has come from mobile phone tech; there's now a lot more demand for small, light, high-performance processors, batteries and cameras, and so while much of the tech is not really new it's a lot more available to hobbyists tha…

The set of (say) 4 motors consumes much more power than the on-board computers. Brushless controllers these days handle 20 amps at around 5 volts for a total wattage of 400W(!) . The on-board computer power doesn't even count.

Of course, you're right that powerful computers are needed. But it's more about miniaturization for weight purposes.

Re: Drone Flies Into an Active Volcano [video]

#43

Post by sopooneo » Wed, Mar 12, 2014, 5:10 PM UTC

nine_k wrote: post #24

nlh wrote: post #18

This is supremely cool. Tangential stupid question: Obviously there's been a ton of buzz lately (and innovation) in the drone space. What's the big technological driver that's allowed / caused this to happen? I don't know the details of the internals but it seems that the tech has been around for a while (radio controlled planes, servos, helicopters, smallish cameras, etc.).

I'd say Lithium-ion batteries, cheap and power-efficient controllers, cheap sensors (orientation, acceleration, GPS), and the quad-copter layout. With them you can build a device which is lightweight enough to fly for tens of minutes, and can easily orient itself. This lets you control it with high-level commands. You can say "fly there, face north, stand still", something you can't usually say to a traditional helic…

Exactly. Everything that the global smart-phone market pushed the prices down on.

Re: Drone Flies Into an Active Volcano [video]

#44

Post by Shivetya » Wed, Mar 12, 2014, 5:10 PM UTC

dronehire wrote: post #36

doctoboggan wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cell phone industry has massively driven down the costs of the gyros and accelerometers needed to easily fly a quadcoptor. You also mentioned tiny cameras, another component that benefitted from the economies of scale of the cell phone manufacturers.. For example, you can buy a quadcoptor that fits int he palm of your hand for less than $40: http://www.amazon.com/Estes-4606-Proto-Quadcopter-Black/dp/B...

This is correct. In addition to the plummeting cost of sensors, communities such as DIY Drones and OpenPilot have made enormous contributions to the accessibility of this technology, by developing open-source autopilots that rival the capabilities of very expensive proprietary products.

the day isn't that far off where robots get set off to do work either hazardous, monotonous, or even just require constant precision, with regards to vehicle operation. As I posted before and I got the book idea from another here, Red Mars has a great amount of imaginative use of robotic vehicles and manufacturing.

Just like with this drone, besides eliminating some safety concerns we eventually will eliminate the other costly part, not having enough time to do all we want. With enough drones there won't be much we cannot do for time, just money will come up to the forefront.

Re: Drone Flies Into an Active Volcano [video]

#45

Post by grinich » Wed, Mar 12, 2014, 5:12 PM UTC

mikeyouse wrote: post #21

uptown wrote: post #3

The Phantom 2 are pretty great drones ... but they're also prone to "fly away" where they decide to take-off on their own - ignoring your commands. There's a bunch of videos on YouTube showing people's Phantoms flying away. Like this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkQ9eB7M7iQ This video purports to help prevent that from happening, though it's not guaranteed to prevent your $1000 drone from making a break for it…

Watching an uncontrolled drone strafe an overpass at street level and split power lines for a commuter train, really increases my sympathy toward those who want to regulate these.

We really should also regulate pigeons.

Re: Drone Flies Into an Active Volcano [video]

#46

Post by bstew » Wed, Mar 12, 2014, 5:18 PM UTC

TheLoneWolfling wrote: post #29

Losing a drone is a lot better than losing your life. Teleimmersion gear + a drone like this = ?

Probably pushing around $2k if they got an aftermarket transmitter and FPV gear. You can get the whole setup to do this for about $1200 with everything you need but I assume they probably used some pricy extras.

Re: Drone Flies Into an Active Volcano [video]

#47

Post by sopooneo » Wed, Mar 12, 2014, 5:20 PM UTC

Aardwolf wrote: post #35

Amazing! How are the images collected? Is it streaming while the drone flies, or do you have to get the drone back "alive" to retrieve the data from it? How do you control the drone, that is, do you get a first person view of the drone while you control it, or do you have to go with looking at it in the distance?

Typically your video transmitter streams a low-res version, while an HD version is stored in an onboard SD card to be retrieved after landing.

Re: Drone Flies Into an Active Volcano [video]

#48

Post by baddox » Wed, Mar 12, 2014, 5:30 PM UTC

doctoboggan wrote: post #27

nlh wrote: post #18

This is supremely cool. Tangential stupid question: Obviously there's been a ton of buzz lately (and innovation) in the drone space. What's the big technological driver that's allowed / caused this to happen? I don't know the details of the internals but it seems that the tech has been around for a while (radio controlled planes, servos, helicopters, smallish cameras, etc.).

The cell phone industry has massively driven down the costs of the gyros and accelerometers needed to easily fly a quadcoptor. You also mentioned tiny cameras, another component that benefitted from the economies of scale of the cell phone manufacturers.. For example, you can buy a quadcoptor that fits int he palm of your hand for less than $40: http://www.amazon.com/Estes-4606-Proto-Quadcopter-Black/dp/B...

By the way, that's the best toy quadcopter I've ever used (sample size of 4), and to say it fits in the palm of your hand is overstating its size. Three or four of them would easily fit in the palm of your hand, or the quadcopter and its tiny controller: http://cdn9.modelairplanenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11...

Re: Drone Flies Into an Active Volcano [video]

#49

Post by dronehire » Wed, Mar 12, 2014, 5:30 PM UTC

nsoldiac wrote: post #38

I'm a Phantom owner and I'm skeptical about those flying time numbers. I get 15-18 minutes on the drone by itself, but if you add the weight of the gimbal and camera (~0.5lb) the flight time goes down at least 4 mins, AND the gimbal needs power from the drone's battery too. I've heard the Phantom's flying time with the working gimbal is more like 6-8 mins. But if you know what kinda shot you want, that could be more…

Do you own a Phantom or Phantom 2? The latter, which is referred to in the linked article, uses a much higher capacity LiPo battery (5,200mAh vs 2,200mAh) and consequently has double the flight time. However, you are correct in stating that adding a gimbal and camera will reduce flight time.

Re: Drone Flies Into an Active Volcano [video]

#50

Post by mberning » Wed, Mar 12, 2014, 5:33 PM UTC

Killah911 wrote: post #6

Footage got better by turning the sound off. I wonder if editors in general have poor taste in music or are simply trying to convey their excitement thru dub step background music.

The fact that you think glitch mob is dubstep leads me to believe that you are extremely out of touch.