Elephant in the room - Quadcopters...

whatever said:
I think drones are a great solution to the problem of people in the sharks environment ( I'm a surfer from way back),
To spend 1/4million dollars on one drone is absolutely crazy waste of money.
I think each surf club could get local schools involved, theirs likely plenty of drones already being used by students.
If each surf club had a nice big screen, i'm sure there would be plenty of volunteers could be trained quickly to use cheap drones for video survellience of the beaches. All they would need is a couple of quad copters, plenty of batteries ( on charge) to keep the drone in the air. Senseless waste of money, each beach that has a clubhouse needs its own set of quads/batteries, and people who can fly them ( volunteer schoolies would be ideal)
Grizzl-E said:
150 minutes on a camera equipped quad copter? The current record is just over 180 minutes for a stripped down quad with using a hydrogen fuel cell for power. I may be wrong but I haven't seen anything close to helicopters for flight times in the world of multi rotors. Though I do agree that price is just silly.
I think you would be surprised how much money we waste down here in AU... Local gov spent almost a 1 billion dollars to cancel a contract to build a road, then it turns out the road is really needed http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/east-west-link-remains-a-high-priority-says-infrastructure-umpire-20160216-gmv9h6.html
Now folks are very unhappy due to the massive traffic congestion due to the new road widening projects elsewhere that the East-West-Link was meant to alleviate.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/melbourne-motorists-facing-546-days-of-gridlock-for-tullamarine-freewaycitylink-widening/news-story/66ff825ab9c1dc9218b5be2d0ebe6393
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/national/melbourne-motorists-facing-546-days-of-gridlock-for-tullamarine-freewaycitylink-widening/news-story/66ff825ab9c1dc9218b5be2d0ebe6393
Its kind of funny to see these really unhappy faces of drivers who unwittingly voted for this and threw away a billion dollars of tax payer money because of easily absorbable headlines.

Also the AU government sees its beaches as an important tourism attraction and the shark nets are falling apart/dodgey/killing dolfins and sea turtles etc so they want to look at alternatives. They pay people to look after nets that don't fully work so the drone might very well be cheaper..

Also looking at the Westpac logo on the drone it was probably one of Australias biggest banks who paid for it as charity.. Westpac have a bigger market cap then Ford and GM combined at 105billion dollars
https://www.google.com/finance?q=ASX%3AWBC&sq=westpac&sp=2&ei=FSnZVuChFImT0ATDooKYAw
http://www.lifesavingvictoria.com.au/www/html/1404-westpac-lifesaver-rescue-helicopters.asp

See this video below on shark nets to protect beach goers in Australia (its ad free) if it doesn't work for you let me know and I will chuck it on youtube.
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2016/02/08/4400419.htm
 
[youtube]bBjtHXCXvjA[/youtube]
 
Hehe... Heard somewhere "The difference between a man and a boy? The price of his toys." :twisted:
https://www.touchofmodern.com/sales/riviera-d2cd2f50-ab97-4b48-bf3b-9d09b714153a
Riviera
Starter Drones
Are you ready for your first drone? The Riviera collection of flyers is a great choice for looking around — after all, there's so much on offer. From the Voice Control Quadcopter to its camera-equipped Falcon cousin, there's more to explore than ever before in the world of personally-controlled craft.

photo


"Cheapest" right now? The Riviera RC Pilot Drone + Wifi FPV Camera $119.99 (was $149.99)
88f6d885f3842e188a45fca6691d715b_small.jpg


:)
 
I wouldn't get that drone. Many other better options for cheaper. Wi-fi fpv sucks as the range isn't much more than 50 ft. This is a cheap brushed quad. You can get the eachine 250 sized drone for the same price RTF.
If you want to go cheap, brushed you can get an 5.8 ghz FPV quad for around $50 off banggood or any similar website.
 
Totally agree Dirk. I do avoid brushed RC aircraft. Sometimes they work flawlessly for long time and sometimes they die with often disastrous results.

Stick with brushless motors and yes, wifi is very poor FPV transmission medium.
 
^^ Hehe Old Guy had to look that up: First-person view (FPV), also known as remote-person view (RPV), or simply video piloting.

:)
 
[youtube]OazFiIhwAEs[/youtube]
 
`Cause I suspect some here may appreciate smaller, lighter, more energy efficient (?) vehicles...
[youtube]vFtNqKNOL7w[/youtube]

(ED: Yah. I know... it's another darned Stinko-Mobile (TM), but still... the possibilities?)
 
I was going to post the video above. They had an article on the verge.com about it. Very questionable if that is real or not. I don't think edf motors put out that much thrust. Probably just a promo stunt. The guy is the inventor of the jet surf hover boards. Would be cool if real!
 
Hehe... Well, on YouTube message to poster there "Zero Siix" asking re method of propulsion, response was to see http://zapata-racing.com/flyboard-en/

... watt page is all about the Flyboard® Legend from Zapata Racing from France. Zapata also on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/pages/ZAPATA-RACING/181423698582027

Seems like they have two core products (?) the "Flyboard" then in 2014 they released their "Hoverboard". Really though, despite that vid can only find "hydro-propeller" machines.

Sigh
 
Just read an article with Zapata stating the video above was in fact real. Don't know why but I'm still skeptical of the whole thing.
Taken from theverge.com:

Sean O'Kane: So there’s three parts to this, right? The board, a fuel tank, and a remote?

Franky Zapata: Yes, the thing I have on my back is like a Camelbak but it’s full of kerosene. Jet A1.

What kind of controls are on the remote?

That's just throttle for the four turboengines on the board. Two more are on the sides for stabilization.

When did this project even begin?

We've been working on it for four years. We tried to figure it out that by using the original Flyboard and just pushing air inside the hose. After that, we took two years to create the great turboreactors, and to create the algorithms to stabilize the Flyboard.

SIX ENGINES, A LOGIC BOARD, AND A BACKPACK FULL OF KEROSENE

When did you make the first flight?

The first working flight? It was just a month ago. And then when we were about to fly again we did a video, and we put that on YouTube. So it’s really new. It’s extremely new.

Can you tell me more about how it works? How many engines are in there?

We have four engines inside, and the power is 250 horsepower each. It’s about 1,000 horsepower total.

How do you keep it stabilized? Is there something helping you other than you just shifting your weight?

It’s a logic system inside the board that helps stabilize the machine. It’s extremely hard to stabilize, so yes it’s not only my balance. For example, we use like the same kind of electronics like you use on a drone to stabilize. The problem is to create the algorithms, the right algorithms, to combine the intelligence in the board and in your brain. So we spent about four months to make that work.

What are those algorithms controlling to help stabilize, is it just thrust level?

No. We adjust the top speed of the small turbines on the side, and also the inclination of the turboreactors itself. So it’s like we have six systems working together plus my brain and my legs.

So it will actually change the angle of those turbines?

Yes, it changes the angle of the turbines, it changes the angle of the thrust nozzle, we adjust also the power for each engine, and also we adjust the thrust of the side turbines, the small ones.

Would anybody be able to ride this without any Flyboard experience?

Oh, no. It’s impossible to ride it before you have a minimum of 50 or 100 hours in the original Flyboard with water. Also, if you want to try it, you must have seven lives, like the cat. [Laughs]

Did you test it over water as a safety precaution?

Yeah, we used water for the safety. Honestly, the whole system should be able to land if you have one turboreactor fail. So I’m able to stabilize it even if I lost one engine and we had enough thrust to get down and land. If one turboreactor fails it’s fine, because we have four turboreactors, and we can fly with three. And inside the remote we have three different Wi-Fi channels, plus we have three sensors. Everything is threefold, and they speak together, so in case one fails, the two also know which one failed, you know? So that’s the reason why we decided to fly for a few months over the water, but we are almost ready to fly above the ground in the next few months.

IT’S IMPOSSIBLE TO RIDE IT BEFORE YOU HAVE A MINIMUM OF 50 OR 100 HOURS IN THE ORIGINAL FLYBOARD WITH WATER

What happens if you do wind up in the water?

Nothing really serious, there’s no danger for me, because I fell in the water honestly three days ago. [Laughs] Three days ago I crashed in the water because we tried to — you know we’re going to do the hoverboard farthest trip. The last one was 275 meters, and we will break it by 10 times longer. We will do about 2 miles. We will cross 2 miles with the Flyboard Air at about 60 to 80 kilometers per hour. And we were training for that, and the last time trained we trained with 80 kilometer per hour wind. And we didn’t realize that when we have wind we go through more battery for the stabilization system. So just five seconds before I landed on the platform, I go out of battery. And the machine starts to turn like a torpedo, like if you lost the small rotor on a helicopter. I started to turn like [Franky makes a noise, "Shooooh!"], and I had no choice but to kill the engine just before I landed in the water. I broke all the electronics on the board, so it will cost me money, but the rest of it is fine.

Is this the only version right now?

We have just the one machine, because it’s just been working for four weeks. So now we are prepared to build another one, just for the media attention, because honestly we didn’t know that the media would be so excited about the project. At the beginning we just did it just to show people what we can do, and just to show our patience and what we achieved. But we didn’t realize that everyone wants to see the Flyboard Air for real, so now it’s not just something for us.

At the same time, we’ve finished the research and development on a new project that will use the same kind of board and the same kind of technology for the stabilization, but it will be much easier for the general public, and also certainly for the army, or for security, so we have something for this. We can use the technology to maybe change the way that people travel, hopefully.

THE NEXT ONE "WILL BE SOMETHING THAT EVERYBODY CAN RIDE"

What would be the biggest differences between this version and that one?

It would be something you can sit on it, something easier, I cannot talk to much about it because patents were not filed yet, but it will be something that everybody can ride. At the moment the Flyboard Air is something like, if you want to ride it, you have to spend 100 hours on a water Flyboard, plus you have to learn how to use it for another 20 hours, and you can still make a mistake and fall. So the goal for the other one is to have something extremely small, extremely stable, and something that you can take to go and buy your bread in the morning.

So what’s the plan for the this current version then?

Honestly? I don’t know. [Laughs] You know when you decide to have a child, you decide to have a child because you want it. You don’t decide to have a child because it will become a surgeon, or a lawyer. For us it was the same thing, when we decide to create something, we create it, and after we just follow what ways the project can go.

Today, we know that people are really interested in it. For me, today it’s a dream because I really realized my dream to fly. And we are receiving attention from crazy companies, maybe even to put it in production. A week ago it was just for me, you know? Today, for sure, we will be able to use this technology to help the new project. But if everybody wants it, if everybody wants a Flyboard Air, we have to work with the government, we have to work with liability, we have to work on a thousand things. But why not?

I was skeptical when I first saw it because of the way the video was edited, and because it’s just a very unbelievable thing to look at. What was your reaction to the people calling "fake"?

I said that we achieved our goal. [Laughs] Because it’s exactly what we tried to do. We covered every mechanical aspect. The plan when we decided to create the Flyboard Air, it was crazy hard because we wanted to make something extremely small, something that looks like a skateboard and not like a helicopter. It would be easy to build something that was like 2 meters and able to fly, it would be easy to do that. But our goal was to make something so small that people would believe it’s a fake, or it’s just an animation. And so when people said that, honestly, we are happy about that. We achieved our goal. Because when people see it in person, they will go crazy. That’s cool.

"MY GOAL IS TO RIDE IN THE CLOUDS."

Zapata Racing is already teasing more footage is coming, what will you be releasing?

We plan to release footage about every month. Then in 16 days we will break the world record when we cross 3 miles on the French coast from one city to another city, and we will land in the middle of the city in front of the public. And after that, we have crazy things. You won’t believe it. [Laughs] We will fly the clouds. My goal is to ride the clouds. Do like snowboarding in the powder, but I want to do it in a cloud. That’s my dream, and I will do my best to realize that.

Is there a safety system for these crazier flights, like a parachute or something?

Yeah, before going high in the sky we will use a parachute. But over the water, I have already fallen many times at over 85, 90 kilometers per hour when doing my testing. So I know you can fall at about that speed without too much injury. The machine is capable of going 90 to 100 miles per hour, but in my tests with my ability I didn’t pass over 55 miles per hour. That’s the maximum speed I reached three days ago. I think before the end of the summer I will be able to reach 80 miles per hour.


This interview has been lightly edited for clarity.
 
I find it hard to believe, just not near enough rotor area. Look at the lightest/smallest one person ultralight helicopter out there, and the diameter of the main rotor it takes to lift a payload like a human. The stability of the thing is also ass backwards, you want pendulum stability, the rotor on top, see any flying helicopters with the rotor on the bottom?

Then again, damn it, parts of it look real ....the dust blowing up below him, BUT, it, the dust, wasn't acting like I'd think it would in reaction to the machine. It would have been easy enough to have something out of the camera POV blowing the dust around. I also didn't see any effect like a helicopter leaves when he was over the water, the water didn't show any signs of thrust hitting it. This guys has the tech to design AND manufacturer "turboreactors", what ever they are, with varible pitch turbine blades no less?! How much kerosene would 1000 horsepower suck? A lot more then he could carry in a backpack.

I just watched it again, now I'm confused even more! MAYBE IT'S REAL!
 
This could just as well go in the 'It was Bound to happen' thread, but it is about drones. You just KNEW there'd be a head on with an airliner sooner or later. I wonder if it had delivered the package already.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/17/europe/london-heathrow-drone-strikes-plane/index.html
 
I also have no opinion on whether this is real, but to play devil's advocate and run some numbers for fun:

I'd guess turboreactor is just a poor translation of turbojet, and large model scale turbojets are available off the shelf (eg http://www.jetcatusa.com/images/Engine%20Data%20Sheet%207-14-2015.pdf though the largest in the list still seems a bit underpowered for this application). I don't think he's talking about varying the blade pitch on the turbine, just gimbaling. I guess some of the open source multirotor projects can deal with gimbaling, since model scale tri-copters and tilt-rotors exist. Gimbaling seems like it could be a reasonable way to compensate for a turbine throttle response that isn't fast enough to balance a twitchy human-shaped inverted pendulum. It also sounds like the two stabilisation motors might be electric, since he ran out of battery for the stabilisation system and crashed. That could just be due the energy requirements of the gimbaling motors of course; they'd have to be pretty serious beasties (Possibly prohibitively?).

1000bhp ~= 750kw, and 1kg of Jet-A contains about 46 MJ ~= 13kwh of energy, so assuming 100% efficiency, 13kwh/750kw = 0.01733 hours (about 1 minute) of runtime. Probably more like 10 seconds with more reasonable efficiency assumptions for small turbines, so about 6kg for a minute of flight time. Alternatively, using the fuel consumption numbers for the largest JetCat engines in the table I linked above, gives 1300ml/min at max RPM, so 5.2l/min for 4 engines. That's about 4kg worth for a minute.

4 to 6kgs would comfortably fit in a small backpack, so a minute of flight time doesn't seem completely out of the question. If you're mad enough to fly around with 5kg of kerosene strapped to your back, a couple of feet away from 4 or 6 hot turbines. The potential for a Rapid Unplanned Disassembly seems high.
 
Hehe... "Rapid Unplanned Disassembly"
 
[youtube]5g3OvO_2EY0[/youtube]
 
[youtube]8sdUZqOoAq4[/youtube]
 
[youtube]JhmEtDm5anQ[/youtube]
 
13310477_10153423515100989_3194514527182687521_n.jpg


Oooops.
 
Looks like somebody flipped on RTH (return to home) and didn’t account for altitude and tower being in the way on the return path.

[youtube]EFOzHC9RhW4[/youtube]

Hopefully nobody on the ground was hit by debris.
 
A recent shark attack ( a few days ago) in western australia, the authorities went out and killed the shark.
A much better solution is prevention of attacks via quadcopters, heres a very nice video from east coast of nsw australia,
showing a couple of large sharks near an unaware lone surfer. Low cost involved in this type of surveillance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRu4fKBo-aY
 
Back
Top