Slashdot Mirror


Throw-to-Launch Spy Planes

mahonri5 writes "Miniture spy planes, developed by BYU and the Air Force, weighing only 3 oz, and having a 24 foot wingspan. Launched by throwing them into the air. And if that wasn't cool enough, you can fly them by laptop, PDA, or voice command. It does all the dirty work of flying on board, and you just tell it where to go. Best part, they've already been deployed. More at some Utah newspapers: here(1), here(2), or here(3)."

37 comments

  1. Wait a minute... by bunsonh · · Score: 0

    3oz and a 24 FOOT wingspan? something doesn't add up.

  2. 24 foot wingspan by Hard_Code · · Score: 1

    "Miniture spy planes, developed by BYU and the Air Force, weighing only 3 oz, and having a 24 foot wingspan."

    Damn, 24 feet, eh? Not that miniature... ;)

    --

    It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
    1. Re:24 foot wingspan by byronius · · Score: 3, Informative

      That should read 24 inches.

    2. Re:24 foot wingspan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      24 inches is still pretty huge. They must have answered those spams.

    3. Re:24 foot wingspan by mahonri5 · · Score: 1

      Whoops. I shouldn't post things when I'm half awake. Sorry about that. 24-inches. still dang cool though.

    4. Re:24 foot wingspan by GiantMonkey · · Score: 1

      Is that a miniature spy plane in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?

  3. 24 ft wing span? who cares? by shfted! · · Score: 2, Funny

    What? I've been making hand-launched planes that weigh less than 3 oz, with less than a single foot wing span that flew on their own as far as needed for years -- of course, my teachers hated me.

    --
    He who laughs last is stuck in a time dilation bubble.
    1. Re:24 ft wing span? who cares? by arunkv · · Score: 1
      For heaven's sake! It's not 24 ft but rather 24 inches! From the article:
      Complete with a 24-inch, collapsible wingspan, the plane can be piloted by a computer with a GPS system, thanks to a computer board developed at BYU.
      Even the pictures make that pretty obvious: [pic1] [pic2].
    2. Re:24 ft wing span? who cares? by cujo_1111 · · Score: 1

      Calm down. Go take a chill pill.

      The submitter stuffed up. They should check their measurements next time.

      --
      If I point out that you are incorrect, making me a foe does not make you any more correct.
  4. Just wait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    till Taliban finds out about them.

  5. Brigham Young Uni needs to learn how to code... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Server Error in '/' Application.

    Index was outside the bounds of the array.

    1. Re:Brigham Young Uni needs to learn how to code... by grolaw · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Nah,

      You didn't have your Mormon-tithe cookie set. You have to pay to play at the BYU website.

      _grin_

    2. Re:Brigham Young Uni needs to learn how to code... by grolaw · · Score: 1

      As for the "flamebait" issues, consider:

      http://www.byu.edu/about/factfile/mission.html

  6. Hey by smoondog · · Score: 1

    24ft? 3oz? We should use that material for the space elevator!

    -Sean

  7. 24 INCHES not FEET! by 74Carlton · · Score: 1

    Making a plane with a 24 foot wingspan that weighed only 3 oz, now that WOULD be impressive.

  8. An R/C airplane with a camera on board ... by dougmc · · Score: 1
    So it's an R/C plane with a camera on board. Nothing new there ...

    As for the autopilot, these two pictures show what looks like an awfully standard transmitter. Perhaps they've created some sort of spiffy autopilot, but they don't appear to be using it here. But even autopilots aren't new -- people have been doing that for years too, from systems that just automatically right the plane as needed, to full fledged auto-pilots where you just tell the plane what to do on a computer. And here is something in between -- a plane that crossed the Atlantic, where people controlled it directly only for takeoff and landing.

    In any event, even the planes themselves look pretty standard. This one looks like your basic flying wing (Zagi makes a very popular model) and this just looks like your basic small electric plane with a V-tail.

  9. Forest fires? by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

    I live where forest fires are quite common, and I can guarantee you that nothing this fragile would *ever* survive in the turbulent atmosphere generated around any decent sized fire.

    For that matter, at only 3 ounces, a craft like this would be unlikely to survive or be controllable in any place where there is a prevailing wind over ten mph or where there are decent updrafts (cities).

    I'd also love to know how they managed to get a CCD camera with decent lens (decent resolution) packed into less than 3 ounces (not sure how much less, but it's got to be a significant fraction of the total weight). I want one of those :)

    SB

    --
    It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    1. Re:Forest fires? by RNLockwood · · Score: 1

      I'm involved with imaging forest fires and I agree with you. Flying the UAV out of site of the controller is an FAA violation as well. The area around forest fires is closed to aircraft not under the control of the Tactical Air Controller so this adds another problem.

      To be useful it would have to have an imaging system far enough into the infrared to "see" through smoke and would probably have to be capable of providing images with more than 10 or 12 bits of data per pixel to avoid the condition where all kind of hot ground shows up as 0xFF and you can't tell the active fire front from the mearly hot ground behind it. We use 16 bits per pixel.

      The images become quite usefully when geodata is available with the image. I think that the cost and weight of such a UAV would be well in excess of $15K/3-ounces an not useful enough to for the agencies responsible for wildfire suppression to purchase the hundreds of them needed for a reasonable deployment.

      It's the coolest small UAV I've seen, though, since it requires minimal training for the controller. The total sytem cost skyrockets when you have to have 2 or more trained controllers per group of UAVs.

      --
      Nate
    2. Re:Forest fires? by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

      Thanks, excellent points, all.

      I just thought of something that these *might* be useful for, however; fire spotting in remote areas. If one could outfit them with solar cells to keep them aloft and a very simple temperature detector they could cover hundreds of square miles; one could automate them, having one local computer controlling several and reporting to a crew on detection.

      It's a thought....

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    3. Re:Forest fires? by RNLockwood · · Score: 1

      There are lots of labs working on projects like the one you describe, NASA comes to mind, but the FAA has lots of flight and operation rules regarding where and how high and requires visual contact at all times. Not good for fire supression activities.

      --
      Nate
    4. Re:Forest fires? by jovlinger · · Score: 1

      I'm suprised the FAA can't rescind those on a by-need basis for emergencies.

    5. Re:Forest fires? by RNLockwood · · Score: 1

      The tactical air controller could probably send one in since it would belong to the agency fighting the fire but it's too small to be seen by him or the water drop aircraft or the lead plane and you may have noticed that there have been some tankers lost in the last 18 months.b

      Typically visibility is bad sround the fire from all the smoke unless the fire is burning into the wind and the UAVs must be in sight of the controller.

      We fly our remote imaging aircraft at 16,500 and we are part of the fire supression.

      I still contend that the UAVs could only have a very limited role and that wouldn't justify the expense of obtaining and flying them for wildfire.

      --
      Nate
  10. 24-foot feet? by psyconaut · · Score: 1

    "weighing only 3 oz, and having a 24 foot wingspan"

    I was expecting to see a plane made of carbon nanotubes to achieve this...instead I see a plane that looks like the ones they sell at Toys'R'Us.

    I want my money back, damnit! ;-)

    -psy

    1. Re:24-foot feet? by transiit · · Score: 1

      Be sure to drink your ovaltine.

  11. ...okay, so? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    So BYU's a church school whose charter is partially religious. Is there anyone who didn't know that?

    Here's something you may not know. At just under 30K students, BYU is the largest private university in the nation.

    1. Re:...okay, so? by Excen · · Score: 1

      At just under 30K students, BYU is the largest private university in the nation.

      That's because anybody stupid enough to believe in their so-called theology would also believe that they have to eat, sleep, breathe, and learn in a fanatically mormon setting.

      --
      "No beer until you finish your tequila!" -Leela's Dad
    2. Re:...okay, so? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's always reassuring to see such expressions of tolerance and open-minded respect of faith on display here on Slashdot!

    3. Re:...okay, so? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > So BYU's a church school whose charter is partially religious.

      Partially? Partially??!!!?

      Yeah, like the Third Reich was partially fascist.

      I grew up near BYU, believe me, they're more rabid than you will ever know if you are lucky...

    4. Re:...okay, so? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've never been to Bob Jones University then.

      BYU's charter IS partially religious. It's also partially secular. Get over it.

      Third Reich, hm? Nice seeing religious tolerance in display on Slashdot...

  12. Towards the ideal by El · · Score: 1

    Get the toy manufacturers involved... if they can make a talking teddy bear for under $10, they should be able to make an unmanned drone that costs an order of magnitude more to shoot down than it does to produce -- thus effectively either successfully spying on everything our opponents do, or driving them into bankruptcy.

    --

    "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

    1. Re:Towards the ideal by jovlinger · · Score: 1

      You win the prize for most insightful comment of the week.

      Of course, shotgun shells are pretty cheap.

  13. unit troubles... by Cyber+Bear · · Score: 1
    It's 3oz. and 24 inches, not feet:
    With a 24-inch, collapsible wingspan the new plane can even be transported inside a slender tube.
    The slashdot editors should at least read the referenced articles...
  14. Best of all? by Rxke · · Score: 1

    ...they already been deployed? You call that good new? it made me shudder involuntarily, considering if i too, at last would not be better off starting to wear a tinfoil hat.

  15. AeroVironment Pointer by Animats · · Score: 1

    The the AeroVironment Pointer is a throw-to-launch spyplane that's been used since 1988. It's a bit bigger than this new toy, and is carried in a backpack. Special Operations types have been using the Pointer for years. It's great for looking over the next hill to find out what the enemy is up to. Flight duration is about an hour, although they have to use silver-cadmium batteries to get that.

  16. Wow! Giants! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you look at the photos, you can see people who dwarf the 24'-wingspan planes!

    Who knew Utah was inhabited by a race of giants?!?! I sure didn't.

    Huh. Learn something new every day.

  17. Using UAVs to break open North Korea by Christ0ph · · Score: 1
    How very cool! Maybe these could be used to help break the information blockade around North Korea!

    Come join the fun!

    ( http://www.freenorthkorea.net/archives/freenorthko rea/cat_breaking_the_information_blockade.html )

    Information NEEDS to be FREE!