Yep, safe to fly in controlled airspace.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ozy and BEagle, please do not be too hard on the lad, for he see's the golden future. Unfortunately, like a lot of the ones before him over the years, they imagine it is but one short step from in theater to in the real world.
When the powers that be saw we could do something, and they wanted more, they just couldn't get their minds around the fact that capabilty cost is not linear, it's expotential ++.
When this topic arises, as it always does, I am reminded of one day back in the late 1980's. I had never before seen a "Telex", haven't since. But on this light pink piece of hand delivered paper was a pricing/delivery request for an RPV, capable of oth, awacs, realtime video/linescan, unearthly endurance, on and on. The ob generating capabilty to drive all the gubbins would require a 747 at least. But the last sentence really brought home the lack of understanding of the true capabilities: "Air, sea and soil sampling".
Now, how do you top that. Someone out there, at that time, thought it perfectly feasable for an RPV! I laughed long and hard and still, like now, smirk at the thought.
I think the folks like LJ don't really take into account the major leap in true airworthiness required to do what they propose, along with the costs involved to reach and then operate at that level. There is a cost point that I believe the unmanned folks will exceed in their endeavour, and that's the manned one.
Economics will be the deciding factor, and bandwidth.
Can I have change for a fiver?
When the powers that be saw we could do something, and they wanted more, they just couldn't get their minds around the fact that capabilty cost is not linear, it's expotential ++.
When this topic arises, as it always does, I am reminded of one day back in the late 1980's. I had never before seen a "Telex", haven't since. But on this light pink piece of hand delivered paper was a pricing/delivery request for an RPV, capable of oth, awacs, realtime video/linescan, unearthly endurance, on and on. The ob generating capabilty to drive all the gubbins would require a 747 at least. But the last sentence really brought home the lack of understanding of the true capabilities: "Air, sea and soil sampling".
Now, how do you top that. Someone out there, at that time, thought it perfectly feasable for an RPV! I laughed long and hard and still, like now, smirk at the thought.
I think the folks like LJ don't really take into account the major leap in true airworthiness required to do what they propose, along with the costs involved to reach and then operate at that level. There is a cost point that I believe the unmanned folks will exceed in their endeavour, and that's the manned one.
Economics will be the deciding factor, and bandwidth.
Can I have change for a fiver?
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: The higher plane of alcoholism..hic.
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Naysayers!
Folks,
I'm not suggesting that the 2011 model of the Nissan Altima will give you the self drive / auto drive option, but are you HONESTLY telling me that your car won't drive you before you're in a pine box, then I think (IMHO, as always, although not sure about the H bit) you are joining a long list of historic naysayers.
With the rate of acceleration of technology and the avid interest (DARPA is the best example) then it will happen... or are they just going to give up?
As for pilots always being up front:
- If pilot error drives insurance rates, there may be an opening.
- Wherefore art though Flight Engineers and Navigators (or even lift operators come to think)?
- What's taking the next generation of crews to the space station (I mean after the Russians)?
I could easily foresee a 'safety pilot' having a monitoring role in an unmanned cargo plane
And yes, I do have 2500 hours (and an extra 1500 unmanned)... but nice cast. BEagle does have a lot more though
I'm not suggesting that the 2011 model of the Nissan Altima will give you the self drive / auto drive option, but are you HONESTLY telling me that your car won't drive you before you're in a pine box, then I think (IMHO, as always, although not sure about the H bit) you are joining a long list of historic naysayers.
With the rate of acceleration of technology and the avid interest (DARPA is the best example) then it will happen... or are they just going to give up?
As for pilots always being up front:
- If pilot error drives insurance rates, there may be an opening.
- Wherefore art though Flight Engineers and Navigators (or even lift operators come to think)?
- What's taking the next generation of crews to the space station (I mean after the Russians)?
I could easily foresee a 'safety pilot' having a monitoring role in an unmanned cargo plane
And yes, I do have 2500 hours (and an extra 1500 unmanned)... but nice cast. BEagle does have a lot more though
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FFS, how funny, we actually have an Altima, H1 and a Nissan truck that have the manned/unmanned capability. You can even "drive" them unmanned by a handheld game controller, watching the video feed, although the braking function is a tad harsh, being none progressive. The Avalanche has over 100,000 miles, probably the highest mileage road going manned/unmanned around, used as a test bed.
It is amazing, one does not appreciate how much information the human brain analyzes and acts correctly on (most of the time) when driving. The computing speed/power and sensor capability required to replicate it (again, most of the time) is absolutely, pardon the pun, mind boggling. Not to mention the cost.
And aside from the complexities of "driving in formation with hundreds of other idiots at high speed" then throw in road conditions, weather conditions, sensor degradation (dirt, mud, snow, salt etc.) stir it all up with a dose of emf, throw in a few pedestrians and you have an insurance companies nightmare, not to mention manufacturers liability.
But until you have sat behind the wheel of a manned optional unmanned vehicle in the u/m mode whilst it is "driving itself" you have no idea how unnerving it truly is, even when you know most of the time it goes where it's supposed to. I foolishly asked if it could do it as well in reverse as in drive, never again.
And yes, to join the clan, I too have hours in the air, years in RPV/UAV and years in UGV.
Experience is the knowledge that indeed, the last time I did this, that happened. And it does.
Have to be down to around 4 quid by now.
It is amazing, one does not appreciate how much information the human brain analyzes and acts correctly on (most of the time) when driving. The computing speed/power and sensor capability required to replicate it (again, most of the time) is absolutely, pardon the pun, mind boggling. Not to mention the cost.
And aside from the complexities of "driving in formation with hundreds of other idiots at high speed" then throw in road conditions, weather conditions, sensor degradation (dirt, mud, snow, salt etc.) stir it all up with a dose of emf, throw in a few pedestrians and you have an insurance companies nightmare, not to mention manufacturers liability.
But until you have sat behind the wheel of a manned optional unmanned vehicle in the u/m mode whilst it is "driving itself" you have no idea how unnerving it truly is, even when you know most of the time it goes where it's supposed to. I foolishly asked if it could do it as well in reverse as in drive, never again.
And yes, to join the clan, I too have hours in the air, years in RPV/UAV and years in UGV.
Experience is the knowledge that indeed, the last time I did this, that happened. And it does.
Have to be down to around 4 quid by now.
Ozy
No MS Flight Sim for me and the last time I saw BEagle (or the side of his head!) was sitting in echelon in one of Her Majesty's finest aluminium pursuit ships waiting for gas.
As someone still in the military I am not surprised by the "in denial" comments of others that are not. The UAS/RPAS is here to stay, like it or not.
By the way BEags, I'm with you on the full autonomy thing for now - way too flakey at present. There was a recent demo of a Volvo with autonomous braking that didn't go too well. You can watch it on YouTube. The problem I have is that ABS and Electronic Engine Management was much derided in the 80s and early 90s - now most people wouldn't lose it for all the tea in China.
Whilst we're at it, I agree that "see (sense?) and avoid" is quite a way off, but flying under IFR is sooo much more easier than VFR in Class G. Hence Predators fly above 18500ft in the USA with all the CAT without the "chase planes" that have been mentioned.
Well, when you see me at the Cenotaph in my Bowler Hat in 15 years time you can all tell me I was wrong and I'll buy the naysayers a beer on the Tattershall Castle!
Somehow, though, I think my pension money will be safe ;-)
LJ
No MS Flight Sim for me and the last time I saw BEagle (or the side of his head!) was sitting in echelon in one of Her Majesty's finest aluminium pursuit ships waiting for gas.
As someone still in the military I am not surprised by the "in denial" comments of others that are not. The UAS/RPAS is here to stay, like it or not.
By the way BEags, I'm with you on the full autonomy thing for now - way too flakey at present. There was a recent demo of a Volvo with autonomous braking that didn't go too well. You can watch it on YouTube. The problem I have is that ABS and Electronic Engine Management was much derided in the 80s and early 90s - now most people wouldn't lose it for all the tea in China.
Whilst we're at it, I agree that "see (sense?) and avoid" is quite a way off, but flying under IFR is sooo much more easier than VFR in Class G. Hence Predators fly above 18500ft in the USA with all the CAT without the "chase planes" that have been mentioned.
Well, when you see me at the Cenotaph in my Bowler Hat in 15 years time you can all tell me I was wrong and I'll buy the naysayers a beer on the Tattershall Castle!
Somehow, though, I think my pension money will be safe ;-)
LJ
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: The higher plane of alcoholism..hic.
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
... anon
Oz,
You put it so well. The next gen of computing WILL do all of the above, and in a timeline far quicker than the 20+ years from ZX-81 to Pentium.
You can't expect technological advances to just stop here can you? Even if you don't believe in Moore's Law, can you not postulate that the next 10 years will bridge a gap as wide as probably 1970 - 2010: that's computers, GPS, the internet... all equivalent to being invented again in the time it takes to get Cameron's replacement in power?
Call it naive, hopeful, brave new world dreaming, or call it looking starkly at history and realizing that 'status quo' simply doesn't exist: someone is always moving the ball down the field.
You seem hard set in 'your ways': all good. I'll join Leon at Tattershall in 2025 and look down on my Toyota Electric Hover car self-parking in the 'autocar' slots.
Deep joy this.
FFS
You put it so well. The next gen of computing WILL do all of the above, and in a timeline far quicker than the 20+ years from ZX-81 to Pentium.
You can't expect technological advances to just stop here can you? Even if you don't believe in Moore's Law, can you not postulate that the next 10 years will bridge a gap as wide as probably 1970 - 2010: that's computers, GPS, the internet... all equivalent to being invented again in the time it takes to get Cameron's replacement in power?
Call it naive, hopeful, brave new world dreaming, or call it looking starkly at history and realizing that 'status quo' simply doesn't exist: someone is always moving the ball down the field.
You seem hard set in 'your ways': all good. I'll join Leon at Tattershall in 2025 and look down on my Toyota Electric Hover car self-parking in the 'autocar' slots.
Deep joy this.
FFS
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LJ, if we had to go to 18500 from scla the guys on the range(s) would be somewhat upset. And ABS, OBD, I,II and III along with the rest of the loop systems, lull folks into a false sense of security.
A young commisioned female took her GSA assigned vehicle back to the motor pool, completely beside herself. The tech inspector listens to her complaint that "It has no brakes". Asked if the light was on in the dash, she replied that she didn't know. It was patiently explained to her that indeed, she did still have brakes, however the ABS had shut down and she would need to "press really hard" to stop.
Anyone remember servo assist, when it didn't?
We have come to rely, and trust, in systems that do not require the operators to understand any of the basics, which leaves them without much clue as to what to do if the system fails.
A young commisioned female took her GSA assigned vehicle back to the motor pool, completely beside herself. The tech inspector listens to her complaint that "It has no brakes". Asked if the light was on in the dash, she replied that she didn't know. It was patiently explained to her that indeed, she did still have brakes, however the ABS had shut down and she would need to "press really hard" to stop.
Anyone remember servo assist, when it didn't?
We have come to rely, and trust, in systems that do not require the operators to understand any of the basics, which leaves them without much clue as to what to do if the system fails.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ffs, not you too! Prime examples of capabilities for marketing differentation rather than usefulness, installed in a rush! Better hope that hover switch is wired correctly, otherwise that would "suck".
"Out of the three cars we tested, the "Intelligent Park Assist" option in the Toyota Prius was the most elaborate, offering both parallel and back-in parking, where the car can back itself into a parking lot space. The vehicle's computer calculates the best parallel- or reverse-parking steering angles and displays an image of the best parking spot on a touch screen on the dashboard. Once the driver hits "OK" to select the spot, the computer sends a signal to the electric steering system and navigates the car into the space.
The BMW 5-Series and the Ford Escape operate similarly, but since the BMW is designed primarily for European countries that have no designated parking spots in lots, the company focused on developing a parallel parking system only, according to BMW spokesman Tom Plucinsky.
The Ford Escape's system automatically picks a parking spot without needing extra authorization from the driver. If the driver wants to park in a identified spot, he just presses the gas pedal and applies the brakes as needed until the car is parked.
But all three systems ran into problems when parking conditions didn't match certain specifications. The Escape, for instance, was confused when we wanted to park it in a spot that was near a double-parked delivery truck—the system failed to recognize a good parking spot only a few feet away. Since these systems detect every other car or person surrounding the vehicle, they often won't work if anything other than two ideally parked cars with adequate space between them are detected. In New York City, where cars need to be parked quickly and efficiently, and pedestrians and piles of trash line the streets, the need for perfect circumstances make it nearly impossible to rely on the self-parking system.
From a market standpoint, the self-parking systems are poised to become more popular, Mr. Brauer said. "Car companies are looking for ways to distinguish themselves from competitors and it's getting harder and harder to do that on traditional points like safety and reliability," he said.
But market research shows that it may take a while for self-parking systems to penetrate the mainstream consumer market. When consumers were surveyed about self-parking systems as part J.D. Power's June 2009 emerging technology report, which tracks the newest technologies in vehicles, self-parking garnered the lowest interest. "People felt they didn't need this feature, and many said they infrequently drove in areas where they would have to parallel park," said Mike Marshall, director of automotive emerging technologies at J.D. Power. The feature with the highest interest? Blind-spot detection".
"Out of the three cars we tested, the "Intelligent Park Assist" option in the Toyota Prius was the most elaborate, offering both parallel and back-in parking, where the car can back itself into a parking lot space. The vehicle's computer calculates the best parallel- or reverse-parking steering angles and displays an image of the best parking spot on a touch screen on the dashboard. Once the driver hits "OK" to select the spot, the computer sends a signal to the electric steering system and navigates the car into the space.
The BMW 5-Series and the Ford Escape operate similarly, but since the BMW is designed primarily for European countries that have no designated parking spots in lots, the company focused on developing a parallel parking system only, according to BMW spokesman Tom Plucinsky.
The Ford Escape's system automatically picks a parking spot without needing extra authorization from the driver. If the driver wants to park in a identified spot, he just presses the gas pedal and applies the brakes as needed until the car is parked.
But all three systems ran into problems when parking conditions didn't match certain specifications. The Escape, for instance, was confused when we wanted to park it in a spot that was near a double-parked delivery truck—the system failed to recognize a good parking spot only a few feet away. Since these systems detect every other car or person surrounding the vehicle, they often won't work if anything other than two ideally parked cars with adequate space between them are detected. In New York City, where cars need to be parked quickly and efficiently, and pedestrians and piles of trash line the streets, the need for perfect circumstances make it nearly impossible to rely on the self-parking system.
From a market standpoint, the self-parking systems are poised to become more popular, Mr. Brauer said. "Car companies are looking for ways to distinguish themselves from competitors and it's getting harder and harder to do that on traditional points like safety and reliability," he said.
But market research shows that it may take a while for self-parking systems to penetrate the mainstream consumer market. When consumers were surveyed about self-parking systems as part J.D. Power's June 2009 emerging technology report, which tracks the newest technologies in vehicles, self-parking garnered the lowest interest. "People felt they didn't need this feature, and many said they infrequently drove in areas where they would have to parallel park," said Mike Marshall, director of automotive emerging technologies at J.D. Power. The feature with the highest interest? Blind-spot detection".
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2007 I know, but watch the video of the Lexus self parking, the link is at the bottom of the article. I can't wait for the "autohover" video in the not too distant future!
The truth about the 2007 Lexus LS460 self-parking. (Video!) | Tech Talk Blog & Discussion at Automobile Magazine
Sorry ffs.
The truth about the 2007 Lexus LS460 self-parking. (Video!) | Tech Talk Blog & Discussion at Automobile Magazine
Sorry ffs.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A fair and balanced overview of the "autonomous" situation:
Trust: Greatest Obstacle to UAV Autonomy
Trust: Greatest Obstacle to UAV Autonomy
