Slashdot Mirror


World's First Lego Autopilot

zlite writes "What's the best way to create a UAV for less than $1,000? Use the new Hitechnic gyro sensor for Mindstorms NXT to create a Lego autopilot! This one can turn a R/C plane into a drone, keeping the aircraft level and returning it to the launch area. Add a Bluetooth GPS module and a microcam and you've got a fully autonomous surveillance platform."

108 comments

  1. Awesome by 26199 · · Score: 1

    But I'll reserve judgement until it actually flies :)

    1. Re:Awesome by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure that I'd call it autopilot. According to the article specifics it controls the rudder servo, but it also mentions something about 'keeping the plane level', so maybe it does other things as well.

      I'd also not say it is a drone. when activated the thing turns the plane 180 degrees from its current heading as measured by a magnetic compass.

      Cool, but there is still a huge amount of work to be done.

      --
      "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
    2. Re:Awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MacAulay Culkin in Home Alone is spinning in his grave right now.

    3. Re:Awesome by monkeydo · · Score: 1

      I'd also not say it is a drone. when activated the thing turns the plane 180 degrees from its current heading as measured by a magnetic compass.

      Which is beyond useless if there is any wind at all. If the plane is crabbing into the wind, and you flip the heading 180*, you'll be flying in the wrong direction.

      --
      Si vis pacem, para bellum
      The only thing more annoying than a Libertarian is an (un|mis)informed Libertarian
  2. Embed a Wiimote by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 1

    Get a bluetooth PDA as the controller and bobs your uncle.

    I was considering similar for my helicopter.

    --
    liqbase :: faster than paper
    1. Re:Embed a Wiimote by ch-chuck · · Score: 2, Interesting

      you mean like one of these ?

      --
      try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
    2. Re:Embed a Wiimote by proxy318 · · Score: 2, Funny

      My uncle's name is Bill. Who the hell is Bob?

      --
      Saying your "phone ran out of batteries" is like saying your "car ran out of gas tanks".
    3. Re:Embed a Wiimote by morphiussys · · Score: 2, Informative

      Probably, but a lot less expensive. Tho about the PDA ... for anything too far you would probably have to give it a program to follow rather than control it manually ... bluetooth, for as far as it works, only works in the general area.

    4. Re:Embed a Wiimote by clonmult · · Score: 1

      But be prepared for it to crash and burn once you go out of the 10 meter range .....

    5. Re:Embed a Wiimote by QuesarVII · · Score: 1

      Except bluetooth only has a 30ft range... real smart.

    6. Re:Embed a Wiimote by jordan314 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Not a problem if the PDA is also attached to the plane...

    7. Re:Embed a Wiimote by iocat · · Score: 1

      It's just something English people say. Replace it with an American phrase such as "It's on like Donkey Kong" and it suddenly all makes sense.

      --

      Dude, I think I can see my house from here.

    8. Re:Embed a Wiimote by proxy318 · · Score: 1

      I know dude, that was supposed to be funny.

      --
      Saying your "phone ran out of batteries" is like saying your "car ran out of gas tanks".
    9. Re:Embed a Wiimote by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      Not a problem if the PDA is also attached ...

      ...until you bump up against weight limits. RC aircraft can't lift a whole lot, unless you give it some big engines.

  3. illegal in US? Don't tell DHS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    I believe this is illegal in the US. Please don't tell the DHS or they will ban the LEGO mindstorm as a WMD.

  4. Best job in the world.... by Gilatrout · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I used to think that unit testing missle systems would be the best job in the world. Now that I'm older I realize the best job in the world was the one I had when I was a kid where I had a big bucket of Lego bricks and the only limit was my imagination.

    1. Re:Best job in the world.... by Sobrique · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Autonomous lego drone + home made explosives, and you've just revolutionised terrorism. I mean, who needs letter bombs, when you can just remote drone their house.

    2. Re:Best job in the world.... by mlk · · Score: 1

      Why do it in Lego? You don't need the re-configability of Lego, melted bits of plastic are just that.

      --
      Wow, I should not post when knackered.
    3. Re:Best job in the world.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why invent a new threat? Terrorists are perfectly capable of doing that now. Even more low tech., they're capable of producing mortar rounds. Those were pretty popular with the IRA on mainland Britain back in the early 90's.

    4. Re:Best job in the world.... by robably · · Score: 5, Informative

      Nothing is stopping you playing with Lego now, and the AFOL community (Adult Fans Of Lego) is one of the friendliest communities to be a part of. Visit Lugnet to see what's going on, upload your models to Brickshelf to share what you do with everyone else, check if there are any Lego shows in your area, and maybe join a local user group. Have fun.

    5. Re:Best job in the world.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      AFOL community (Adult Fans Of Lego)

      Slashdot: where each day brings a new synonym for "celibate".

    6. Re:Best job in the world.... by robably · · Score: 1

      Slashdot: where each day brings a new synonym for "celibate".
      Why so hostile, Mr. AC? Lego is the complete opposite to a celibate lifestyle, it's a family thing - the best reason to have kids is so you can play with Lego with them.
  5. HOMSEC! by db32 · · Score: 2, Funny

    The department of Homeland Security has been notified. Ownership of Lego's have officially been declared a crime to be prosecuted by the Patriot Act. This support of terrorist activities will not go unchallenged! Only the Feds are allowed to spy on the populace, the populace is not allowed to own these types of things.

    In all seriousness now, how long do you think it will be before someone gets arrested for doing something like this. I just listened to the story about crazyskimask.com and getting arrested for just wearing a skimask and taking pictures. Welcome to our new feardom :(

    --
    The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
    1. Re:HOMSEC! by Cheesey · · Score: 2, Funny

      The department of Homeland Security has been notified. Ownership of Lego's have officially been declared a crime to be prosecuted by the Patriot Act. This support of terrorist activities will not go unchallenged! Only the Feds are allowed to spy on the populace, the populace is not allowed to own these types of things.

      It's not just about spying! The evil terrorists might use them to fly bombs into things! Or evil drug dealers might use long-haul UAVs with GPS to smuggle drugs in from South America!

      Think of the children! It's a security crisis! If only there were some way to stop people inventing things.

      --
      >north
      You're an immobile computer, remember?
    2. Re:HOMSEC! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "If only there were some way to stop people inventing things."

      There is. It's called patents.

    3. Re:HOMSEC! by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1

      In all seriousness now, how long do you think it will be before someone gets arrested for doing something like this.

      Hopefully not too long. I think this development is actually the best thing to happen for public privacy in a long time.

      Long story short, eventually some hobbists will be very publically caught flying around neighbourhoods spying on peoples homes, movements, bedrooms, young children etc, etc, and there will be a sensationalist media outrage. In response, governments will draft laws that make this sort of thing illegal. And once that happens, law enforcement will have to get a warrent for it like everything else you can't do. For example, searching or bugging someones house.
      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    4. Re:HOMSEC! by noSignal · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well; you jest, but this has already been addressed by the FAA: http://cryptome.org/faa021307.htm. Under this policy, I believe that you could be arrested for flying an aircraft like this without explicit authorization from the government. I do aerial photography with rc helicopters for my wife's real-estate company and you wouldn't believe the crap I have to deal with when people see that I have a flying camera in their neighborhood.
      Personally, I'd rather use purpose built avionics in my models than try to jerry-rig lego sensors. I don't want to be liable if the electronics fail in my aircraft and it damages someone's property or worse.

    5. Re:HOMSEC! by db32 · · Score: 1

      law enforcement will have to get a warrent for it....

      You have been reading the news right? When dealing with the Patriot Act and the whole terrorism bit...warrents are not exactly required or enforced. Our new laws work great together, Patriot Act makes damn near everything an act of terrorism (see meth dealers being busted on terrorism laws) and then our wonderful government has allowed 90 days of unlimited warrentless wiretapping after a terrorist event. Combine these two to have 24/7/365 warrentless wiretaps because they can call damned near anything an act of terrorism. If they are arresting guys for taking stupid pictures of themselves in ski masks under anti terrorism laws... Well... Let's just say I'd feel sorry for the poor bastard who is the first one to get busted flying one of these things.

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
    6. Re:HOMSEC! by iocat · · Score: 1

      The way I read it, he's totally fine. The thing is going to just me a model plane right now, and always in his line of sight. It can't even land w/o human help. I've launched rockets that take pix of the ground (blurry, bad, 110 camera film ones), and no one's ever... hold on, there's someone at th- [no carrier]

      --

      Dude, I think I can see my house from here.

    7. Re:HOMSEC! by labnet · · Score: 1

      Ownership of Lego's have officially been declared a crime to be prosecuted by the Patriot Act So do I mod you Funny or Informative?
      --
      46137
  6. Autopilot by Migraineman · · Score: 4, Funny

    Add a Bluetooth GPS module and a microcam and you've got a fully autonomous surveillance platform.

    I think you misspelled "cruise missile."

    1. Re:Autopilot by HungSoLow · · Score: 1

      George must be informed! The Danes are planning an aerial assault using cleverly constructed children's toys! Maybe invading Denmark might win back some hearts and minds lost in the middle east?

    2. Re:Autopilot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was thinking of exactly the same thing. Only that one made entirely of legos wouldn't be able to go particularly far at supersonic speeds before it broke apart. But who says you can't use this as a guidance system for an existing rocket. The resulting missile would likely be unable to hit a moving target without sophisticated imaging software, but it'd be perfect for stationary targets. And the payload could be anything--explosives, radioactive material, some kind of biological agent. Of course, bluetooth's range is rather poor for anything big, but that why there are suicide attackers.

      I wonder if certain people should get some tea and biscuits ready to serve to the DHS agents that'll be dropping in...

    3. Re:Autopilot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just remember rule one:

      Pillage, then burn!

    4. Re:Autopilot by Synchis · · Score: 1

      I think you misspelled "cruise missile."
      Don't you mean "Tom Cruise Missile"?

      *ducks*
      --
      Thomas A. Knight
      Author of The Time Weaver
    5. Re:Autopilot by Kevin+DeGraaf · · Score: 1

      1. Nobody is talking about building a whole freaking missile/plane out of Lego, just part of the control system.

      2. WTF does Bluetooth range have to do with suicide attackers? The Bluetooth link they're referring to is between a GPS receiver and a flight control system carried on the same airframe, likely right next to each other.

      --
      We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked.
  7. LEGO skynet? by smellsofbikes · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Dude, if the robots that overthrow humanity are made of LEGOs, my head is going to explode trying to decide how I feel about the situation.

    MY LEGO assistant is only smart enough to try and grab rings and feed them into a spotwelder, but even that could be dangerous if the controller (my computer) turns to EEEVILE, as in fru-its of the deviiiiil.

    --
    Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    1. Re:LEGO skynet? by Mad+Man · · Score: 1
      Dude, if the robots that overthrow humanity are made of LEGOs, my head is going to explode trying to decide how I feel about the situation.

      Reminds me of something I posted five years ago:

      Re:Twenty Years From Now (Score:5, Funny)
      by Mad Man (166674) on Thursday May 23, @01:32PM (#3573780)

      Dialogue ommitted from The Terminator:

      "The Series 200 Terminators were made out of interlocking plastic bricks. We spotted them easily..."


      Hey, why come up with something original when I can go for the cheap laughs and karma-whoring?

    2. Re:LEGO skynet? by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

      The plus side is we can wipe out LEGO skynet or the Series 200 Terminator easily by spraying them with gasoline and watching them dissolve.

      The minus side is we'll've run out of gasoline by that time.

      Ride bikes. You're not just saving the environment: you're helping fight off the LEGO-based destruction of humanity.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    3. Re:LEGO skynet? by indifferent+children · · Score: 1
      my head is going to explode trying to decide how I feel about the situation.

      Easy, you just "welcome our LEGO-comprised overlords".

      --
      Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it. --Mark Twain
  8. huh? by djupedal · · Score: 1

    "Any ideas on how to solve the altitude problem in a Lego-friendly way?"

    I was impressed up until this point - the guy already has GPS onboard, which includes altitude parameters, and he doesn't know about it...?

    1. Re:huh? by Sobrique · · Score: 2, Informative
      I have a feeling that some GPS recievers are less enthusiastic about reporting altitude than others. I know the one I've got built into my sat nav doesn't seem to care.

      That's not to say that you can't tweak the firmware of the receiver or something, but it may not be _that_ easy.

      Of course, 'buy a gps which lets you do altitude' is also a solution :)

    2. Re:huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Absolute altitude is great -- right up until you try flying your bot in Denver and it dives into the ground to bring its altitude to what would be an eye visible range in the midwest.

    3. Re:huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      GPS Altitude is a rough approximation at best. The system was optimized for lat/lon position on the globe, not up-down. I've stood on the Blue Ridge Parkway and watched the ground soar up and down in a hundred foot range as I looked at my eTrex.

      For this reason, Garmin builds (built?) at least one eTrex unit with a barometer built in for accurate altitude readings.

      100 feet of slop is not good if you're trying to land the plane automatically.

      I'd imagine

    4. Re:huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      And the error on the altitude with GPS is likely to be twice as big as the horizontal error.

    5. Re:huh? by nten · · Score: 1

      GPS isn't good at altitude measurements, its accuracy in that dimension is significantly lower than in the other two. In addition as another poster mentioned its still just the height above the some earth model, probably the WGS84 ellipsoid. For long distance stuff you could solve the problem with a flash drive and some DTED downloadable (for now) from the survey folks. for more precise elevations I'd recommend a SALT (sonar altimeter, I just made that acronym up but it would work I bet).

      I just RTFA and someone suggested an ultrasonic "radar" (thats what pronouncing acronyms gets you) to solve the altitude problem. I think now however he is talking about pitch control using servos, he's not sure how to do it because lego pieces mostly attach in horizontal fashion so he has to do something weird to get a vertically moving servo arm to pitch up or down. I've got no clue on that one.

      --
      refactor the law, its bloated, confusing and unmaintainable.
    6. Re:huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I've stood on the Blue Ridge Parkway and watched the ground soar up and down in a hundred foot range

      I've done the same thing. Except I was on mushrooms.

    7. Re:huh? by Manhigh · · Score: 1

      Just have a servo deploy a parachute when youre above your landing site. Then you can forgive a few hundred feet of accuracy in altitude.

      --
      "Open the pod by doors, Hal" > "I'm afraid I can't do that, Dave" sudo "Open the pod bay doors, Hal" > alright
    8. Re:huh? by Alizarin+Erythrosin · · Score: 2, Informative

      GPS can be good at altitude measurements, except you need to use the P(Y) code, which is encrypted. You could get away with using carrier phase or differential or RTK but then you start getting into the realm of some quite expensive gear.

      The article just talks about a bluetooth GPS module, so I'll assume something commercial that likely includes WAAS. As he says, it'll be good enough to maintain flight but if he wants to land he'll need something more.

      --
      There are only 10 kinds of people in this world... those who understand binary and those who don't
    9. Re:huh? by arodland · · Score: 1

      Only if you favor errors in the high direction.

    10. Re:huh? by Manhigh · · Score: 1

      Well bias your altitude reading. Essentially raise the altitude of what the aircraft understands to be ground level. That way, if you come in at 400 ft +/-300 ft, you should be OK.

      --
      "Open the pod by doors, Hal" > "I'm afraid I can't do that, Dave" sudo "Open the pod bay doors, Hal" > alright
    11. Re:huh? by spikedvodka · · Score: 1

      The NXT kit has an ultrasonic range-finder in it... what the maximum range of that is, is a different story

      --
      I will not give in to the terrorists. I will not become fearful.
  9. VaporWarez by FirmWarez · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hmmm, HiTechnic says gyro "will be available soon" and the Lego blog says "I haven't received the gyro sensor yet, so I've got a light sensor standing in for it in the picture, but the mechanicals are pretty much in place.". Vaporware. Cool idea, but nothing more than a cool idea at this point.

    What will be interesting in all this is the complete stupidity that will follow. I work for an embedded systems contract design house. We tried to get some samples of the single chip gyros, what a royal pain! It seems somebody out there is terrified that "tear-ists" will buy the chips and build evil cruise missiles and such. Why did we try to get the parts? Because one of the guys needed to replace one in a $100 RC helicopter. So for now you can buy the helo, buy the Lego add-on, but forget about getting the gyros themselves unless you can prove you're not sellin' them to the KLF or whatever liberation front dujour. How long before some congressional idiot ("but I repeat myself" - Mark Twain) sees this and decides us lowly regular folks have no use for these devices at all?

    1. Re:VaporWarez by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aye, it ain't there. And he's only got a wing-leveling system in there. I'd be interested to see the flight tests, and how many times it takes before the darn thing ends up "ready for reassembly".

      As far as UAVs go, forget a cruise missile: that's way too complicated when old-fashioned hand-delivery or (mortar tubes for those hard-to-reach spots) are more cost-effective.

      Now, build one of those with 50-mile range (will settle for 10) and a contraband-class payload, and you'll find a use for it.

      Oh, but we fought the war on drugs and won. Never mind.

    2. Re:VaporWarez by twiddlingbits · · Score: 1

      Perhaps "Lowly regular folks" can get chips with less degrees of accuracy, just like when GPS was first made available to the public? Using these devices in an RC plane/cruise missile is only ONE use. You can do the same thing with on older gyro unit and some fancy DSP programming and whammo you got a "military device" with remote control or semi-autonomous. You can get the DSP chips on the open market or if you know what you are doing you can scavenge one from a cell phone. There are tons of uses for gyro chips, so I think this cat is out of the bag and soon enough the restrictions will be lifted.

    3. Re:VaporWarez by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is NOT Vaporware I have seen them and they are cool.

    4. Re:VaporWarez by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Word to the KLF.

    5. Re:VaporWarez by ozphx · · Score: 1

      Yes I propose all you yanks should sign a Declaration of Loyalty every time you go and buy a Wiimote ;)

      --
      3laws: No freebies, no backsies, GTFO.
  10. For god's sake, Slashdot.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Post some new news!

    Model helicopters and model thermal soarers both have used this technology for the past 20 years. In the case of thermal soarers, which may launch at over 1k ft, an Out-of Sight (OOS) control system is essential.

    What about that Canadian floating gliders to the edge of space on balloons and then having them find their way back home? http://members.shaw.ca/sonde/

    What about that New Zealander making a home built cruise missile? http://www.interestingprojects.com/cruisemissile/

    When I want to read history, I'll go to a history of technology board!

  11. Don't do this in Boston by us7892 · · Score: 2, Funny

    add a Bluetooth GPS module and a microcam

    I'd like to see a microcam video of a flight. Fly it over something interesting. If you do it in Boston, over City Hall perhaps, you'll be able to bring the entire city to it's knees, and the Mayor will be demanding $$$ from Lego. A state police helicopter, sharp shooters, the bomb squad...it'll all be on the 6 o'clock news...

    1. Re:Don't do this in Boston by 644bd346996 · · Score: 1

      I can se it now - shattered legos scattered across several blocks because somebody used a shotgun.

  12. 1000 $ ? by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

    This sounds pretty expensive to me. The mindstorm is overkill tho, you could simply use a basic PIC controller and a few servos. And I believe one can buy a basic plane for 100 or 200$...

    --
    The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
  13. Yaw, Pitch and Roll by DigitalReverend · · Score: 2

    I think using the lego gyro is a fantastic idea. Imagination is great. I must admit though that I am a bit confused, maybe it's me, maybe it's the way TFA was written, and I pray it's just a typo otherwise, someone is going to have a nice repair bill as an RC aircraft takes a nosedive through someone's roof.

    This autopilot only controls the rudder, keeping the plane flying level when engaged and returning to the launch area.

    According to WIKI http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_controls the rudder controls yaw, not pitch or roll. So I am not sure how the rudder keeps the plane flying level. Can anyone help?

    --
    I read Slashdot for the headlines, because the headlines, unlike the articles, are usually original and never duplicated
    1. Re:Yaw, Pitch and Roll by jackb_guppy · · Score: 1

      Actually, I see the gyro handling the information for level flight. The GPS would handle info for "steering". Because GPS updates are only once per second.

    2. Re:Yaw, Pitch and Roll by zlite · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Many high-wing R/C planes use the rudder for roll. They're inherently stable, and rudder turns tend to bank because the weight is under the wing.

    3. Re:Yaw, Pitch and Roll by element-o.p. · · Score: 1

      According to WIKI http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_controls [wikipedia.org] the rudder controls yaw, not pitch or roll. So I am not sure how the rudder keeps the plane flying level. Can anyone help?

      Yep. In most airplanes yaw and roll are somewhat coupled, the degree of coupling depending upon a number of aerodynamic factors. As zlite mentioned in response to your post, having the center of gravity below the wings in a high-wing design causes the airplane to roll a bit in response to yaw. Also, when you yaw an airplane, the outboard wing travels through a larger radius than the inboard wing, which means that the airspeed over the outboard wing is slightly greater than the airspeed over the inboard wing, which in turn means that the outboard wing generates more lift than the inboard wing. This extra lift means that the outboard wing will rise and the inboard wing will fall in response to a yaw. Consequently, while the rudder only directly controls yaw, the yaw tends to cause the airplane to roll as well.

      Yaw isn't used to control roll in full size airplanes because it's sloppy--you feel pushed to the outside of a turn if you only use the rudder--and because a combination of ailerons and rudder is more effective in turning an airplane than rudder alone (it's the horizontal component of lift caused by banking the wings that ultimately causes an airplane to turn).
      --
      MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
    4. Re:Yaw, Pitch and Roll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look at the control system depicted here, and weep - geeks!

      http://members.shaw.ca/sonde/

    5. Re:Yaw, Pitch and Roll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      When you yaw an aircraft you change the relative speed that the left and right wings are traveling through the air. Since the amount of lift produced by an airfoil is a result of (among other things) the speed of the airflow over the airfoil you are making one wing produce more lift than the other wing. In the case where you are using left rudder for example, the right wing will travel faster and produce more lift. The difference in lift between the two wings will cause the aircraft to roll. In our example, since the right wing is producing more lift, the aircraft will roll to the left.

      When the aircraft rolls, the lift vector (a mathematical construct that represents the sum of lift over the entire airfoil showing its strength and direction as an arrow sticking out of the top of the aircraft) changes from pointing straight up as it would in level flight to pointing somewhat to the side. You can view this lift vector as the force that is holding the aircraft in the air. This change in the direction of lift "pulls" the aircraft around in a turn. Since some of the lift that was previously used to support the weight of the aircraft is now being used to turn the aircraft the aircraft will descend.

      To understand how altitude is controlled you need to first consider the concept of trim. The aircraft is trimmed, or aerodynamically balanced, so that it will gently climb as long as power is being applied. When the power stops the aircraft will glide down. You can control the altitude of the aircraft by either starting and stopping the engine or, with a constantly running engine, by letting the aircraft fly straight to climb and turning it when you want to descend.

      The early R/C airplanes were single channel (rudder only) control. You could do some amazing aerobatics with them once you got the hang of it. On a good day you could actually intend to do the aerobatic maneuvers.

    6. Re:Yaw, Pitch and Roll by DieByWire · · Score: 1

      According to WIKI http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_controls the rudder controls yaw, not pitch or roll. So I am not sure how the rudder keeps the plane flying level. Can anyone help?

      You should be modded up for asking an intelligent question.

      Aircraft that use rudder for roll control do it by having a fair amount of dihedral (upward vee bend) in the wing. When the rudder yaws the aircraft, the outside wing effectively gets a higher angle of attack (bite of the air) and generates more lift, rolling the aircraft. To help you picture it, imagine an extreme example - an airplane pointing north but going east, and you can see why the wing on the right is going to lift.

      Model gliders often have polyhedral (more than one upward bend) to enhance the effect.

      The upside is simplicity. The downside (if aesthetics matter to you) is that it produces a really ugly turn.

      --
      Never shake hands with a man you meet in a fertility clinic.
    7. Re:Yaw, Pitch and Roll by DieByWire · · Score: 1

      Many high-wing R/C planes use the rudder for roll. They're inherently stable, and rudder turns tend to bank because the weight is under the wing.

      Having weight under the wings makes roll stability easier, but it's the wings dihedral (upward vee bend) that produces the roll effect with yaw.

      A Hawker Harrier (the British 'jump jet') is a high wing with an anhedral - the wings bend down. If you yaw left, it will roll right. In fact, with enough sideslip during a hover, they roll over. They're known to be easy to fly... and easy to crash.

      --
      Never shake hands with a man you meet in a fertility clinic.
    8. Re:Yaw, Pitch and Roll by kd5ujz · · Score: 1

      You get the roll from differing wing speed, in a right turn, the left wing will travel faster in relation to the airspeed of the craft( being further away from the center of rotation), causing more lift on the left side.

      --
      -William
      God is everything science has yet to explain.
    9. Re:Yaw, Pitch and Roll by VxSote · · Score: 1

      Not really. The other posters explaining the effect of dihedral are correct. The airspeed difference from one wing to the other while the aircraft is turning is very slight. The difference in angle of attack that is produced can be quite significant, on the other hand. Most "trainer" style R/C aircraft have significant dihedral to contribute to stability. Many "park flyer" models are actually controlled with throttle, rudder, and elevator only. IAAAE (I am an aerospace engineer), as well as an R/C pilot.

    10. Re:Yaw, Pitch and Roll by kd5ujz · · Score: 1

      I am just going by what I learned in flight school, and these web sites. I was taught that the dihedrial will only exaggerate the effect when in a side slip. Also, the shielding effect of the aircraft body will limit airflow over the trailing wing, thus decreasing lift.

      http://www.bmfa.org/faq/flight_controls.htm
      http://www.start-flying.com/new%20site/controlling _aircraft.htm
      http://selair.selkirk.bc.ca/aerodynamics1/Stabilit y/Page5.html
      http://www.auf.asn.au/groundschool/umodule8.html#y aw
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_controls

      --
      -William
      God is everything science has yet to explain.
    11. Re:Yaw, Pitch and Roll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, dihedral works by playing with the fact that the lift vector from each wing is perpendicular to the length of the wing (as well as to the Resultant Air Flow direction). When one wing drops, it is closer to giving its full vertical component of the lift vector against gravity, and the other wing is not. A quick way to calculate how much vertical component is happening in the lift is to imagine a light source directly above the plane, and look at the shadow cast by each wing. The more shadow, the more vertical lift component.

      As another stated, the rudder input works by accelerating the outside wing, giving it more lift and picking it up. Roll is the only thing that gives a turn, if you ONLY spin an aircraft then it will go backwards, until various stresses break it apart.

      The backwards yaw/roll relationship in the Harrier is surprising. I would sooner attribute it to the plane having such stubby, silly wings. I wonder if the Starfighter is the same way?

  14. OMGWTF!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lego has become a plaything for children of terrorists?

    Now I have to take away all the Legos from my children because I love them!

  15. The product page says something else. by LordVader717 · · Score: 1

    From what I can see on the Hitechnic page, it isn't a real gyroscope but just a "tilt sensor", which would limit it's capability.
    I'd like to see something working.

    1. Re:The product page says something else. by LordVader717 · · Score: 1

      Sorry, my mistake. I just found something on their page about a a single-axis gyro that's in development. But then, how come this gets a story? An blog entry by a lego enthusiast, about an idea of using a future product to try something cool? I want to see something.

  16. No Fate.. by streetphantom · · Score: 2

    No fate but what we make from lego.

  17. It's old history - it already exists... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    see here..... http://members.shaw.ca/sonde/ [members.shaw.ca]

  18. This is a great toy by jjthegreat · · Score: 1

    I would love to be able to do something like this. Add a wireless color camera, and you got yourself a cheap video surveillance UAV. However, this project is not yet complete and not a working model. Perhaps something like this would be better on http://hackaday.com/ rather than /.

  19. Article is misleading by Neil+Jansen · · Score: 5, Informative

    He won't be able to do much with a single-axis gyro. Also I didn't see any mention of an accelerometer, or an altitude sensor. He would be much better off (and save some money) by learning how to solder and use real components instead of the overpriced lego stuff. For example, my current RC autopilot setup uses 2x IDG300 dual-axis gyro IC's and an ADXL330 3-axis accelerometer. Also a SiRF III 20-channel GPS module, a pressure sensor for altitude, and a set of Nordic 2.4 GHz wireless tranceivers. Right now I have everything tied into an ARM7 but a Nano or Pico-ITX might be in my future.

    5-axis IMU ($109.95): http://www.sparkfun.com/commerce/product_info.php? products_id=741
    2-axis gyro (use with above to make a 6-axis (double up on one axis) ($69.95): http://www.sparkfun.com/commerce/product_info.php? products_id=698
    Altimeter: ($49.95): http://www.sparkfun.com/commerce/product_info.php? products_id=8161
    GPS receiver, SiRF-III ($55.95): http://www.sparkfun.com/commerce/product_info.php? products_id=465
    And finally, 2.4 GHz 1Mbit transciever to control it ($24.95 each): http://www.sparkfun.com/commerce/product_info.php? products_id=152

    Add a GWS slowstick RC airplane ($35) and miscellaneous electronic pieces for a grand total of $370 or so. Not to troll, but I really don't see why people invest so much in doing things in legos when there's so much real hardware out there to play with.

    1. Re:Article is misleading by bhima · · Score: 2, Informative

      Soldering, Wiring, Rudimentary EE skills
      non Wintel or X86 Linux programming / cross compiling
      Command Line only no GUI

      I think I summed that up nicely.... and for the record I found all of the above easier to learn than the modern IDE (Microsoft Visual Studio) and OS interaction.

      --
      Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
    2. Re:Article is misleading by repvik · · Score: 1

      And finally, 2.4 GHz 1Mbit transciever to control it ($24.95 each)

      You use a device with 125ft l-o-s range to control an airplane? You're not flying much, are you?
    3. Re:Article is misleading by Neil+Jansen · · Score: 1

      Good observation. That is correct, so far it hasn't made it out of my backyard. I have a long way to go before I'll safely let it out of my sight :)

    4. Re:Article is misleading by repvik · · Score: 1

      I was going to build a plane not unlike yours. I've been looking at a lot of stuff over at sparkfun, adding together weight and such. I haven't had the cash to do it though. My biggest problem is getting a remote control system with enough range, that I can integrate properly with the rest of the system.

    5. Re:Article is misleading by bugnuts · · Score: 1

      Right, this is currently vaporware, but it's a cool idea.

      Another guy that started this project is an old /. user and made an OSS project for UAVs. He has since commercialized it, but the OS project is still out there. The hardware is very cheap... like $150 iirc!

  20. Pilotless Drone! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    n/t

  21. Look out!!! by physicsboy500 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Spies!!! with tiny yellow heads!!!

    --
    The original generic sig.
  22. Bah! by jcr · · Score: 1

    In my day, we crashed our R/C airplanes! And we were grateful!

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  23. Re:illegal in US? Don't tell DHS by SvetBeard · · Score: 1

    Please don't tell the DHS or they will ban the LEGO mindstorm as a WMD
    You better watch out, Denmark or you'll be next.
  24. Re:illegal in US? Don't tell DHS by hey! · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Denmark? The propaganda machine is already rolling.

    Freedom pastries, anyone?

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  25. Couldn't you use a wiimote for this? by jordan314 · · Score: 0

    It's a little big and heavy, but I bet the three accelerometers and bluetooth capability (maybe with a computer controlling it via bluetooth) would have tremendous potential for piloting small aircraft.

  26. Mod funny! by EvanED · · Score: 1

    Whoever gave this an off topic mod needs a sense of humor.

  27. Paparazzi by nivix · · Score: 1

    I'd rather buy a gumstix board and run Paparazzi. The project looks really cool, and open source hardware schematics and software is available.

  28. Translation by Dr.+Cody · · Score: 1

    You're still going to be a huge nerd for playing with legos as an adult, but at least we have support groups for it nowadays.

    1. Re:Translation by robably · · Score: 2, Insightful

      at least we have support groups for it nowadays.
      "Hello, I'm Jim and I made a robot holding a sausage today."

      Seriously though, if someone's grown up and thinks they're too cool to play with Lego, it means they've still got some growing to do.
  29. Add a couple of Estes rockets... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...and you've got a pint-sized predator-drone.

  30. Eeep! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Quiet you! Or some Scientologist lawyer will deliberately misinterpret that as a threat.
    I wish I were kidding :(

  31. Having the post man deliver it by Colin+Smith · · Score: 1

    Is much easier. Honestly, when it comes to warfare technology is brittle, use the minimum required to accomplish the goal.

    However, as a drug delivery platform, I think it has potential. Replace plane with solar powered, hydrogen filled blimp big enough to lift 10kg 20kg and simply fly it into the country.

    --
    Deleted
  32. No story here.. Move along please.. by paxmaniac · · Score: 1

    Come on slashdot, this isn't a story. He hasn't built a helicopter, he hasn't thought about how he is going to carry such a heavy payload, he hasn't got a gyro, he hasn't put more than superficial thought into how to build an autopilot. How is this the "World's first Lego autopilot"??

  33. Auto-pilot? by WobindWonderdog · · Score: 1

    Meh. I'll be excited when they have self building lego. Then it'll be a short step to self-constructing nanobots... And then the world! But until then, very cool self building legos..

  34. Look Here For Modellers Already Doing This ! by cante · · Score: 1



        I have been Flying R/C airplanes and Heli's for over a decade and we have been using technology like this before I was around as others have posted but here is a link to a Ready To Fly (RTF) Trainer plane with AutoPilot Stabilizes in all three axis. Color video transmitters are readily available for cheap, even real time telemetry and GPS modules, depending on how much you want to spend you increase the quality and reduce the physical size and stealth capability (eg. electric vs. combution powered).

    http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=L XEXK2**&P=ML
    RTF Flight stabilise system (autopilot) >$350

    http://www.planetalk.com/videoacc.html
    Video Systems

    http://www.jcsportfliers.org/
    NJ based model club w/ links and photos of hobby

    http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/tt.asp?forumid=81
    Hobby - Aerial video forum w/ video links

    http://www.rcgroups.com/uav-unmanned-aerial-vehicl es-238/
    Link to Hobby related "modeler-built" UAV forum