Slashdot Mirror
Tiny Surveillance Aircraft Fly in Tucson
An anonymous reader writes "Science Daily reports that thirteen teams from the United States, Korea and Germany will be in Tucson April 9-11 to compete for $6,000 in prize money during the 8th International Micro Air Vehicle (MAV) Competition. MAVs are tiny, radio-controlled airplanes that carry video cameras."
According to the article, the research is not trivial because research "already has resulted in two master's theses [...] and future graduate research probably will focus on propeller design and ultralight control mechanisms."
Do we really need control systems this light? They have set a "wind date" for this competition for fear of a gust of wind destroying the MAVs; how will we make something reliable out of this?
Work sucked, until it became unemployment, when it became slightly more tolerable. -Tet
MAV- micro air vehicle Its just the people who want to use them that dictates they have cameras, all the early ones were purely micro air vehicles, nothing more, just people proving they could make stuff that small that flew under remote control. Why doesnt it surprise me that someone not only found a questionable use for them, but managed to subvert the entire acronym?
do they care that the technology they're helping develop will be used to KILL people in future wars, perhaps even against their own country?
I think nothing sums up the problem with american society today.
Actually as a country the USA does more to save lives than it does to kill. Groundbreaking research in medical and safety innovations, in search and rescue, being at the head of the forefront when natural disasters strike around the world, more donations to foreign nations in need for food, medical supplies and fresh water, and better care worldwide in general due to US invention.
I think if you look at the number of deaths it pales into insignificance. Let these kids play with their planes, it's all in fun
RST
Can I buy one of them for an affordable price without having to re-solve all the problems mentioned in the article?
What video-goggles are recommended?
Cool. I've stopped 2 kids from running out into traffic (both my own) and perhaps helped save many others by being volunteer traffic warden at their school. I figure with the blood donations I've given I've also helped save the lives of perhaps 3 other people in total. And no doubt having gone to defensive driver training I've perhaps prevented the death of an entire family over my 35 year driving history.
That's almost 10 people I've saved. By your logic, how many am I allowed to kill now "all in fun" ?. May I start with you?
If your very expensive micro/nano surveilance device was defeated by chick-a-dees? (or any other small avian). Really what would keep songbirds from trying to eat these? or raptors from taking down the bigger ones by mistake?
Now if only it was a Micro Upskirt Video Vehicle contest, the Japanese team would win for sure!
how will we make something reliable out of this?
Research is done in small steps, or did you hear the anouncement of a Warp engine in the next decade? Right now we are at "mega ultra sonic speed" for under 60 seconds. Next time it will be 5 minutes...
Grundgesetz * 23. Mai 1949 - 30. November 2007 - http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/
Fine. Will you approve then if the USA kills you in order to save other people? You will be glad then to acknowlege that your death would "pale into insignificance" compared to the good it came out of your sacrifice.
This kind of inmature reasoning is what keeps the society in a loop of war and hate.
Technology doesn't kill people. People kills people...
I think you're a bit late to start the moral debate over who's the greater evil: the developer of a potential weapon, or the users of the devices. This debate has been going on for some time.
:P)
I think it would be pretty damm difficult anyway, to kill someone directly with a "MAV" (although you could, with a bit of semantic jiggery-pokey define a lump of lead as a "micro flying vehicle"
There are far more destructive inventions up for the gold medal in this debate: nuclear weapons, the gun, TNT (old Alfred was clearly so upset when someone used *his* neat little invention for killing other people, he sponsored a prize for peace), etc etc.
We have had technology to snoop on each other from orbit for years now - our streets are lined with CCTV (well they are in the average UK city)so why get so fired up about a small aeroplane with a camera in it? Reconnaisance was after all, the first real military use for full size 'planes.
Do you really think "nothing" somes up the problem with American society Today? Surely there's always room for improvement!
When is the contest for Anti-MAV? Tiny rockets that shoot down MAVs.
Well, While I agree with your final conclusion, (the fun bit) I think perhaps its a good idea to take a look at some facts about where the US ranks worldwide in giving econonomic aid.
Its on position 20, with a very skinny $23.76 per person per year.
Number one is Luxemburg, with a whopping $352.30 per person.
All terribly off topic, but I had to...:)
The Bigger The Headache The Bigger the Pill
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/robotics/2 001/1/MicroWarfare/print.phtml
more on microjet at
http://defence-data.com/f2000/pagefa1006.htm
These little MAV video cameras can fly ANYWHERE!!!
3. Profit!
2. ???
1. On Soviet Slashdot, a Beowulf cluster of alien Natalie Portman overlords welcomes YOU!
You're right, technology should never be brought to war. We should go back to carpet bombing instead of laser guided munitions. We should go back to sending scouts in instead of video cameras, so they can get shot. Hell, let's go back to hand-to-hand bloodbaths.
Wars are going to happen, period. Politicians are just as willing to kill 1000 as 10 to achieve their goals. It's naieve to think that they'll be more likely to go to war because we have a camera in an RC plane.
The most likely result of having spy planes like this would be LESS casualties. Imagine being able to fly a video fly into a building where there's a hostage crisis going on and getting real time video. Imagine flying into a mosque and having video telling you who's in there, where, etc. The place could easily be filled with civilians, and we'd avoid attacking them. Or, it could be filled with armed troups, and we'd have proof to the world that we're justified in attacking.
Almost all war-related technological innovation of the last 50 years has been targeted at reducing civilian casualties, collateral damage, and exposure of our own troops to fire.
As a geek, i love it. Its a great challenge, a new thing... push on.
:)
As a citizen of this world and then of America, one can only make one observation about our world...
There never were civil rights. Its a myth because those who followed, never really beleived it applied to anyone other than themselves. Freedom is a radical experience where those with the most capital get as they please while others get monitored through mini airplanes
So get to work guys! Stop being so moral and ethical. Get rich and you too can have your civil rights... and imunity from the law.
Frankly i'm far more impressed with that recent soccer autonomous robot. As a big fan of robotics and the robotic soccer games.... I was just impressed to see what a civilization in love with technology and progress where intrigue and curiousity for the good of man kind dominates, build such a unique thing.
Sony and Honda have also done similar things. Its amazing how Japan has created so many wonderful things and how its embraced by their culture compaired to ours. We seem so quick to build new missles, spy planes etc...
Lets get started on a nice friendly game of autonomous soccer. We have our competitors in this country but... its a shame such a great and wonderfull acomplishment goes so unnoticed by our civilization.
Perhaps we just dont appreciate science and technology for the sake of creation enough. Perhaps we diserve to destroy our own culture and economy.
Vision-Guided Flight for MAVs
Looks like these little blighters can be tricky to fly, they are using a computer to track the horizon to help keep them level.
Yeah, right. If I can take down clay pigeons with one of these, then I can take down a MAV.
I always thought it would be beter just to shrink the camera, and transmitter/receiver so they are small enough to be carried by an insect (maybe a wasp or a locust) and let the insect carry the equipment around. Then the operator could provide sensory stimulus to the insect by radio feedback, and direct it (forward, backward, left, right, up down). Then there is no power supply to worry about (power drawn from the insect's own potentials or maybe peizo electric from the wing flapping) and the insect can refuel itself by visiting flowers/ jam sandwiches or enemy picnics.
Raymond Z. Gallun's story, "The Scarab," was published in Astounding in 1936 (and anthologized by Groff Conklin in Science Fiction Thinking Machines in 1954).
The story is set in the year 1987 and describes "a tiny thing, scarcely more than an inch and a half in length. The fancy of the craftsman who made it had given to the Scarab the form of the beetle of which it wa snamed. But its body had a metallic sheen, and its vitals were far more intricate than those of the finest watch."
It is capable of observing with its "quartz-lensed eyes" and sounds are "detectable to [its] sensitive, microphonic ears." It can fly at "terrific speed" to "the cold, unresistant texture of the stratosphere." It makes its way into meeting room where a dastardly plot is in progress. It is never made clear it relays information back to "the mind that controlled the Scarab," but when that mind "had seen and heard enough" it instructs the Scarab to land on the bad guy's neck and "a tiny part of a drop of liquid was injected into its victim's blood stream."
The good guys win.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
They'd better beware the high-powered lasers I test in my backyard, in my personal SETI program. I might have to sandbag the grounds with my local Quarterton Nudist meetings.
--
make install -not war
Grandparent poster referred to "the US", your statistics refer the the US Federal Government.
Contributions to charities by the US private sector are 2% of the US GDP, which far surpasses any other nation. Most of that goes to foreign aid.
Bill Gates and Ted Turner alone surpass most countries with the billions they've spent on health care for poor countries...and none of that money is counted in your very misleading stats.