Slashdot Mirror
From the Nuremberg Toy Fair, a New Linux System For RC Cars
An anonymous reader writes "Last weekend, during the Nuremberg Toy Fair 2012, I spotted a really cool new system for 'professional' RC models based on Embedded Linux. The WiRC allows you to control an RC car (or any other RC vehicle) with an iOS/Android device using WiFi. The core of this system is a 240 MHz ARM9 processor, with 16 MB SDRAM and 4 MB FLASH (with 2 USB ports and 802.11b/g WiFi, a microphone input and a Speaker output). It features 8+4 channels of output. A free software SDK is now in development to code your own transmitter applications."
-bash: rc: command not found
Put a little camera on it and an arm that I can control from my Xoom and watch out!
The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
might appreciate the vendor's site in English.
I would not trust the inconsistent latency effects of wifi (e.g. when it losses association and has to sign on, again). I'd rather have a straight transmitter, even if it is digital, not encrypted, but with encryption of a command summation.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
How long until there's an Android app that keeps a swarm of cars scurrying around me as I walk around?
Swarm of copters?
--
make install -not war
Rally cars? In Nuremberg?
In order to control any RC device like a car or some multi-copter even remotely professionally you need precise controllers, reliable connectivity and low latency, all of which any iOS/Android touch devices seriously lack, by design.
Even intermediate hobbyist senders (actually bidirectional these days for telemetry, FPV etc.) have precise and adjustable mechanical contol sticks, come with specialized circuits to bypass the controller's CPU where low latency is of importance and use frequency hopping RC for more reliability and to allow hundreds of pilots in a close range.
I guess it's a rally car, then.
I fly RC Helicopters and I would not trust something like this, period. We take signal quality very, very seriously. Any loss of signal and you are basically doomed the way we fly these days (low to the ground and stickbanging). Even the major manufacturers have signal problems, altough it's very good. Have never had any signal hickup with my Futaba 2.4 gear, but they have done everything in there power to make the signal as optimized for the application as possible. For a slow moving vehicle, sure. But anything flying, no thanks. Latency is another matter. 20ms stick to servo is considered good. The touchscreen alone is probably 100ms, Consider a car at 60mph, it will move several feets before even starting to turn at those latencys.
Cool, possibly. But more of a toy thing.
Hi, The parrot seems to be something you actually do control with a phone. It's most proably self-stabilizing and very easy to fly altough most certanly very innacurate. http://ardrone.parrot.com/parrot-ar-drone/en/
It is a "toy", I normaly don't recommed them as it's worlds apart what I fly, but you could probably get some enjoyment out of it. Don't set your expectation bar too high though...
If you are truly interessted you can buy quad-chassis, motors, speed controlers, flight computer (with gyros and other sensors), and there is open source software for it too. These are the real thing, but since I just fly regular copters I don't know much about them I'm afraid. http://aeroquad.com/ (Don't know if this is the best, but a place to start reading, if interessted)
For instance, one of my robots sends out three channels of live video
Of course an obvious (?) use of this would be to stream 3D video back to a 3D TV or any device that has a fast enough display to support shutter-glasses and navigate with the better depth perspective. Finally a use for those 3D televisions, and something to push processing power for video compression and ATSC encoding. Yes, it'd be fun to see the option of it putting out an actual broadcast-compatible signal too, so a tv could pick up video directly. Let the neighbors watch too. Sure, there are plenty of problems (size, cpu power and power consumption, FCC limitations, coordinating frequencies to avoid causing interference , signal-adaptive tv receiver circuits that don't like rapid changes...). A few good challenges help push the state of the art. Who knows, it might even result in digital TVs that are less affected by unstable broadcast signals when the wind blows nearby trees around.
Not only that, but guess what? You really don't NEED an entire OS to control an RC car or plane. Simple transmitters have been around since the 70's and the technology has gotten MORE SECURE, faster, lighter, and more power efficient. Adding an entire OS to the mix just ends up with code you don't need, to add delays and security vulnerabilities that you don't want.
Not everything needs to have an OS in it for god's sake!
Exactly I don't want to loose body parts because of some packet loss. A rc heli is pretty much a lawn mower flying upside down, getting hit by a rotor blade would not be a fun experience.
Got Code?
Have there been any public trials?
Nuremburg is famous for trials.