UAV Helicopter Flies 12 Hours Charged By Laser

garymortimer writes "LaserMotive (who last year won $900,000 in the NASA Power Beaming Challenge, one of the levels of the 'Space Elevator Games') have teamed up with Germany's Ascending Technologies to create an indoor flight record for electrically powered multicopters. The flight took place at the Future of Flight Aviation Center in Mukilteo, WA. LaserMotive is a Seattle-based company developing laser power beaming systems to transmit electricity without wires, for applications where wires are either cost prohibitive or physically impractical."

Comments

The ultimate weapon

[Anonymous Coward]

Giant robots powered by laser via solar satellites. That's it folks, that's the next generation of military tech.

Re:The ultimate weapon

[TheRaven64]

If you can direct enough power through laser from a satellite in orbit to power a giant robot, then you don't need the giant robot.

Re:weight

[TheLink]

I've a few remote controlled helis. In terms of tech, they're rather pathetic compared to a housefly - which can navigate by itself, manage slight breezes, find its own fuel, even reproduce. They can fly for quite a lot longer than most battery powered RC helis.

All in a very tiny package. Fruit flies are even tinier...

So we've certainly got a long way to go in terms of technology.

Re:weight

[BrightSpark]

Of course, the payload would be tiny too, milligrams I would think. And you would have to hope there was no dung or fruit trees on the way. And you need to control what they think. Nothing insurmountable, but maybe but lets stick to what can do first :-)

Re:weight

[timeOday]

What I find amazing is how much better RC helicopters have become in just a few short years. In the 1980's, they cost upwards of $1000 and were incredibly difficult to learn and fly. People would spend months just learning to hover a couple feet off the ground (no exaggeration). And the radios were so prone to interference, that could crash you at any time.

Now, for $30 you can buy one that's much smaller, much lighter, yet much easier to fly (which is surprising since tiny craft are normally unstable). But the really small cheap ones fly for around 30 seconds. To fly for 12 hours isn't just a little better, it's a drastic improvement, about 100 times longer than even a hobby-quality helicopter.

That said, the FAA tends to frown on shooting powerful lasers into the sky for fear of blinding pilots. Perhaps they wouldn't worry about that in a warzone; then again usually all the aircraft above a warzone are our own.

Re:just what the tax payer needed

[EdIII]

You did not read the article then. Surprising, for a Slashdotter, I know.

If you had bothered to read the article, the Kingfisher LX-1 was designed for remote surveillance over the oceans. More impressively, power transfer is accomplished with the lasers attached to the heads of sharks. Now, if that is not an outside application, I don't know what it is........

--

This post brought you by Jack Daniels, makers of fine whiskey, and Coca-Cola, telling people to sit down with a Coke and shut the fuck up since 1886.

Because the laser would be all burninaty

[Sycraft-fu]

The max safe amount for a consumer laser pointer is in the 5-10mW range. Above that, serious and rather immediate damage can result from looking at it. Up in the range of 500mW they are dangerous to the point that reflected light can cause immediate eye damage. So you don't even have to look at the beam, just a specular refraction and still can get hurt. Also, this starts to get in to the "can set shit on fire" level.

Now consider that a laptop power adapter is generally in the 50-100watt range. In terms of lasers that would be "CO2 laser that blasts through steel as though it were butter."

To power anything more than a very trivial device, you'd have an unsafe level of laser power. Also it would be even worse than it sounds, because of course the receiver won't be 100% efficient.

Re:Because the laser would be all burninaty

[TheRaven64]

500mW is not dangerous. 500mW in a very small area is dangerous. For a laptop, the power receiving area could be quite large. Sunlight is approximately 1kW/m^2. Given a laptop area of about 0.05m^2 and a power consumption of 50W (100W is really high for a laptop, you'll be hard pressed to find one that uses more than 65W under full load and still counts as portable), that means that you'd need about the same amount of energy as sunlight to power it, with full efficiency.

I didn't TRFA, but last time I checked laser power systems had a transmission loss of close to 98%, which makes them somewhat impractical for laptop use. I would like wireless power, but I wouldn't like it enough to pay the electricity bill from a 2.5kW laptop.

Re:Because the laser would be all burninaty

[OeLeWaPpErKe]

Incidentally, this problem has been solved. Simply de-focus the beam at the sending end, and re-focus it at the receiver side (and do it with a diameter lens that nobody except godzilla has in their eyes - easy enough).

The goal is to spread, say 100W, in a beam that has a surface area of, say 10cm2. Since the aperture of the eye has a surface area of about 10mm2, the power delivered into the retina if someone were to glue their eyeballs to the transmitter would be 100W * 10cm2 / 10mm2 = 1W (and the eye will immediately respond by lowering that surface area to less than 1mm2, making the total delivered power less than 0.1W, and obviously, even with your retina glued to the transmitter you won't get anywhere near 10% efficiency).

Directly looking into the sun delivers about 2W to your retina (and will destroy it, but not immediately).

This is a big problem for the "solar panel in space" technologies. But it's not much of a problem really. If you were to send down 100 GW over a square kilometer, anyone could walk over the receiver perfectly safely without any protection. The power from the satellite would be a factor 1 million less than the solar irradiation (so you could send it quite safely over 10 square meters as well if needed).

This is illegal

[srussia]

Man Sentenced For Pointing Laser At Helicopter

Re:Kind of like NASA.

[TheRaven64]

Efficient laser power systems or room-temperature superconductors are required for building a space elevator. Nothing else looks feasible for powering the climbers (you really don't want them taking fuel with them, it would add a huge amount to the energy cost).

Clarification needed!

[Paradyme]

I understand the concept behind this, but how do they keep the sharks pointed at the helicopter?

Re:Clarification needed!

[ScrewMaster]

I understand the concept behind this, but how do they keep the sharks pointed at the helicopter?

Look, chum.

Re:Kind of like NASA.

[strack]

yeah theres nothing else that could possibly power them. like nuclear batteries, small nuclear reactors, sending electricity along the carbon nanotube cable itself, etc etc. indeed, 7000km is the effective maximum range for *cost effective* electrical cable transmission. along regular metal.

Re:The unstoppable weapon

[ScrewMaster]

You forgot about the shark, there has to be a shark involved for this to really work.

There's only a shark involved when it's been jumped.

There will be plenty of sharks about after the first patent infringement suit gets filed.

Re:The unstoppable weapon

[Shark]

Okay... Now I'm involved, you happy?

Compared to Microwaves

[Mapleperson]

How does this compare with microwave power transfer? Is there an advantage to using lasers?