Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Ohio College Building Indoor Drone Pavilion

Posted by samzenpus on from the a-place-to-fly dept.

First time accepted submitter Greenargie points out this story about an indoor flying pavilion for drones being built at a college in southwestern Ohio. An indoor flying pavilion for students to test and fly drones will be built at a college in southwestern Ohio. Sinclair Community College officials say the 40-foot high pavilion resembling a traditional aircraft hangar will be built adjacent to a building in Dayton that houses some of its education and training programs in unmanned aerial systems and aviation. The indoor pavilion will allow students to fly drones without having to deal with weather issues or Federal Aviation Administration restrictions on flying them outdoors, said Andrew Shepherd, director of Sinclair's unmanned aerial systems program. Congress has directed the FAA to integrate drones into civilian manned airspace by next fall. The agency currently allows unmanned aircraft to be flown only under controlled conditions.

42 comments

  1. Why do we call remote quadrotors "drones"? by i+kan+reed · · Score: 2

    Did it just become cool to call every unmanned aircraft a drone, after we started murdering people with them?

    No one called toy helicopters drones 8 years ago. No one.

    1. Re:Why do we call remote quadrotors "drones"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Came here to post exactly this. Thank you.

    2. Re:Why do we call remote quadrotors "drones"? by bulled · · Score: 1

      Becase drone makes a headline more catchy than quad-copter or RC helicopter. No one outside of RC aircraft would click something like:

      "Ohio College Building Indoor RC Aircraft Pavilion"

      But call it a drone and now everyone is all over it.

    3. Re:Why do we call remote quadrotors "drones"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Drone implies some level of autonomy. A drone may be remote controlled, but at least some control functions must be automated. Many RC quadcopters indeed have autonomous flight modes, even cheap toy ones. "Position hold" and "path following" for example are quite common. A drone doesn't need to be able to fly fully autonomously to be called a drone. Even some quite large military drones can't start and land without a pilot.

    4. Re:Why do we call remote quadrotors "drones"? by jeffmflanagan · · Score: 1

      >Did it just become cool to call every unmanned aircraft a drone, after we started murdering people with them?

      No, it did not.


      >No one called toy helicopters drones 8 years ago. No one.

      And we still don't. You seem to be unable to tell the difference between an RC helicopter that can only be used in line of site, from a drone, a remotely operated vehicle with onboard camera that does not need to be in line of sight.

    5. Re:Why do we call remote quadrotors "drones"? by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Drone.. a convenient one syllable word with a nice ring to it. This is still the best one I've seen. One motor, and it can bump into things without crashing.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    6. Re:Why do we call remote quadrotors "drones"? by timeOday · · Score: 1

      What changed everything was the ability to operate beyond visual range - that was really limiting.

    7. Re:Why do we call remote quadrotors "drones"? by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

      I've been trying to make a point of acknowledging when people make good points in response to things I say.

      This is a pretty good point.

    8. Re:Why do we call remote quadrotors "drones"? by tlhIngan · · Score: 2

      Did it just become cool to call every unmanned aircraft a drone, after we started murdering people with them?

      No one called toy helicopters drones 8 years ago. No one.

      Because a modern quadrotor is much more functional than an RC helicopter.

      There is so much electronics in one that they literally do fly themselves. Push a button and they lift themselves off the ground and hover there automatically - something that no RC helicopter can do without continuous input by the pilot.

      So while you fly an RC helicopter, you pretty much just direct a drone - want it to move forward? You command it forward and it obeys (even figuring out "forward" - yes, a modern drone can determine which way you're pointed and determine that to be forward regardless of orientation).

      And drones with this capability cost under $1000.

      It's also why we see more incidents around - learning to fly is a skill and you generally have to practice it (with both time and cost). With a drone, you push the button that says "Fly" and short of sudden gusts of wind or eddies, they sit there in the air waiting for your command.

      And yes, there are projects that turn RC helicopters into drones, but they generally are far more expensive and limited. Quadrotors require a computer anyways due to their instabilities so it doesn't take much more effort to add in flying software.

    9. Re:Why do we call remote quadrotors "drones"? by ottothecow · · Score: 1
      While I agree with you (even fancy things like a Phantom DJI aren't really drones...they can return to you automatically, but they are still just remote control quadcoptors), this is a university doing it.

      Odds are that many of the people making use of this pavilion will actually be working on things that can be called drones. Seems like a perfect place to experiment with completely autonomous flight since you don't yet have to handle weather and you don't have to worry about bystanders.

      --
      Bottles.
    10. Re:Why do we call remote quadrotors "drones"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really because a drone is and has been defined as anything controlled remotely. Nowhere in the definition is the word "autonomously" found.
       
      http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/drone

    11. Re:Why do we call remote quadrotors "drones"? by mrops · · Score: 1

      $1000 is way too much. I can build one for $300 that can take off, take (waypoint/altitude) mission off an Android device or PC (wireless). Navigate all on its own, trigger a few relays or servos (to do what ever) come back and land. Fly time around 17-20 minutes with a payload of 500g and a total weight of say 1.5 kg.

    12. Re:Why do we call remote quadrotors "drones"? by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      $1000 is way too much. I can build one for $300 that can take off, take (waypoint/altitude) mission off an Android device or PC (wireless). Navigate all on its own, trigger a few relays or servos (to do what ever) come back and land. Fly time around 17-20 minutes with a payload of 500g and a total weight of say 1.5 kg.

      Well, $1000 is a nice limit showing how functional and automated/autonomous these drones are. Commercial ones are around $1000, and Arducopters can be built from $300-800 depending on all the features desired.

      Contrast this to an RC helicopter where the hobby ones are barely able to be bought for $1000 - when you have $400 radios and receivers, $200 engines, $300 kits, $100 gyros, etc (rough pricing). And there's a pilot in the loop - no such autopilot as on a drone.

      It's just like lasers - they're so cheap they're in "idiot" territory which is why the FAA and others are cracking down.

    13. Re:Why do we call remote quadrotors "drones"? by jeffmflanagan · · Score: 1

      >I've been trying to make a point of acknowledging when people make good points in response to things I say.

      Even though I was a dick in my reply. You're alright.

    14. Re:Why do we call remote quadrotors "drones"? by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Like has been said, my personal definition:
      RC Helicoptor/plane: Line of sight control, little to no payload capacity, mostly manual flight.
      Drone: Has capabilities such as beyond line of sight control(and preplanned routes count), automatic flight correction, designed for a task such as collection of video. Something other than 'fly around for the heck of it'.

      Upgrade a RC device enough that you can fly it out of view out of your view, around some object, then have it return and I'll upgrade it to drone status. That would probably consist of an extended range radio control system and a camera.

      If it's controls are advanced enough that you can 'pilot' it using your smart phone, it's a drone.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    15. Re:Why do we call remote quadrotors "drones"? by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      Originally, the meaning of "drone" in relation to vehicles meant it was autonomous, with no pilot at all. It had nothing at all to do with line of sight. But Now it is often used to mean remotely-operated craft, regardless of whether they have any autonomous capability, but that's very different indeed from the original.

      The word "drone" essentially meant "no human pilot", even a remote one. And it's still that way in a lot of dictionaries.

    16. Re:Why do we call remote quadrotors "drones"? by Deadstick · · Score: 1

      No one called toy helicopters drones 8 years ago.

      No, but there was an R/C model airplane club years ago (still is, as far as I know) called the Long Island Drone Society (LIDS).

  2. Hmmm ... by gstoddart · · Score: 1

    Congress has directed the FAA to integrate drones into civilian manned airspace by next fall.

    So, this is to allow mass, warrantless surveillance of the citizens?

    Or to allow the expansion of commercial interests?

    That seems to be the only two things Congress does these days.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:Hmmm ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Low Threat; the congress mandated something that couldn't be done in that timeline. The drone industry (as opposed to responsible hobbyists) is opposing every single restriction needed to integrate them into the airspace system. If it's flying, it needs a trained operator, AKA "pilot" who needs to be certified to mix it up with other aircraft in the airspace. If it has digital fly by wire controls, it needs to be built to the standards of digital fly by wire aircraft, complete with triple-string flight computers. That's "too expensive" to give you that level of safety. It must be demonstrably capable of detecting and avoiding other aircraft, just like pilots do. Not even close.

    2. Re:Hmmm ... by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      So, this is to allow mass, warrantless surveillance of the citizens?

      So what? It's also much easier to watch the cops from a safe distance.. Win-win...

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  3. PFAH! by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    Your toy airplane is weak if it can't hack it in a light breeze.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    1. Re: PFAH! by dj245 · · Score: 1

      It would be a lot easier to build, test, and debug a control system if you started with 0 wind and slowly increased to a steady wind and then later begin testing in gusts or random winds, wouldn't it? PID control fine tuning goes a lot faster when you have full control over the inputs.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    2. Re:PFAH! by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      Your toy airplane is weak if it can't hack it in a light breeze.

      If you're designing new drone prototypes, then yes, they can be weak. That is what experimentation is all about.

      But then again, this place will be equipped with a wind tunnel and those can simulate very high winds if required.

      Norris said the renovation will allow more UAS and aviation operations to be combined in one location, providing access to resources including aviation and flight simulators, avionics and engine labs and a wind tunnel.

  4. ffs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As a former West Chester, Mason, and Maineville, and Huber Heights resident of 24 years, Ohio, who moved to Houston 5 months ago:

    FUCKING STOP IT. Stop building stupid liberal shit no one asked for or wants. No esports stadiums, no indoor drone arenas.

    1. Re:ffs by ChipMonk · · Score: 1

      This isn't your despised "liberal arts." It's practical application of STEM. How the hell is a degree in 19th Century Colonial African Literature going to help someone build a better aircraft?

  5. So its a sports hall you can fly your RCs in by stiggle · · Score: 1

    We've been using sports halls to fly RC helicopters in for years - nothing new here.

    1. Re:So its a sports hall you can fly your RCs in by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      This, sir, is a pavilion!

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    2. Re:So its a sports hall you can fly your RCs in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like a sports hall, but you pay more to use it.

    3. Re:So its a sports hall you can fly your RCs in by KJSwartz · · Score: 1

      Finally a use of gladatorial games arenaes where the geeky players can WIN!

      Few things are more pathetic than student funded Megabuck Stadias dedicated to barely functional liberal arts students paid to play football, baseball and basketball.

  6. UAV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I saw a General Atomics MQ-1 Predator UAV once in person. That thing is bigger than I expected. I thought it was like twice the size of a model airplane.

    1. Re:UAV by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      How did you think it would carry an AGM-114 Hellfire? Or maybe my impression of model airplane size is too small?

    2. Re:UAV by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      People just don't expect 'drones' to be bigger than Cessnas, I guess.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
  7. A history of model planes in Ohio by Roblimo · · Score: 1

    My father grew up in Akron, OH, and in the 1930s it had the world's largest building - a no-longer-used airship hangar. My dad and his friends used the hangar to fly microfilm models - http://www.indoorduration.com/... - and I think this is the hanger -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

    So indoor model-flying seems to be an Ohio tradition. I know my dad enjoyed doing it as a teenager.

    1. Re:A history of model planes in Ohio by tomhath · · Score: 1

      Dayton is the hometown of the Wright Brothers. It's also home to the National Museum of the US Air Force and Wright-Patterson AFB. Lots of aviation history there.

    2. Re:A history of model planes in Ohio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The Birthplace of Aviation", as it used to say on our license plates.

      Dayton is the hometown of the Wright Brothers. It's also home to the National Museum of the US Air Force and Wright-Patterson AFB. Lots of aviation history there.

  8. Re:Why do we call remote quadrotors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They were called RC quadrocopters long before the media hooked onto the word "drone". Pushing a button to make them hover doesn't now make them "drones". They've always been able to do that. The Predator drone is an RC airplane really.

  9. Let's discuss this with the Orthodox Jews by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    Doing work on the Sabbath, even carrying one's child to the temple, is a violation of Talmudic law. What to do, in a practical modern society? The Hasidim came up with a Talmudic hack. Because work inside 'private' spaces such as homes or temples is permitted, they define entire cities as virtually indoors by setting up symbolic wire boundaries next to important roads into the delimited area.

    Could city ordinances be used in this way as a hack on our secular legal code to define symbolic indoor space to fly drones? The designation could be applied to parkland that is safely out of near-ground aviation pathways.

    Drone eruvin, here we come!

    1. Re:Let's discuss this with the Orthodox Jews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doing work on the Sabbath, even carrying one's child to the temple, is a violation of Talmudic law

      SNIP!

      And how long are you going to drone on about irrelevant topics?

    2. Re:Let's discuss this with the Orthodox Jews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually the symbolic wire boundary only permits one to carry things within its limits. Other Talmudically defined forms of work, such as cooking food, lighting fires (this is the one that forbids electricity) and so on are NOT permitted in private homes, regardless of any symbolic wire boundaries.

      So the symbolic wire boundary is only a loophole for the "thou shalt not carry stuff" prohibition, not the rest of it.

  10. Bahh.. students won't learn much by flying indoors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This sucks. We should all be able to fly outside. Now the FAA is pondering that we need a pilots license to fly within a 400' ceiling.

  11. So DoD stuff is "liberal"? by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    (Not sure if parent poster is serious, but oh well)

    It might be good to encourage the growth and accessibility to Dayton's remaining/growing industries instead of discouraging it. Unless you've been oblivious to the events of the last 10-15 years in the Miami Valley, you would notice that Dayton is missing some high-profile employers. Sinclair's program would do well to give greater access to the aerospace industry for people not fortunate enough to immediately get accepted to the University of Dayton or Wright State.

    Besides, you'd have to call the University of Dayton's aerospace partnership with GE (the Episcenter) "liberal" as well.

    If you're happy in Houston doing work with the oil industry (or even aerospace), I have nothing against you. I only speak of this for seeing what Dayton has been (an area led by manufacturing/electronics companies like NCR and GM) and what it will become (an area led by employers in technologically-intensive industries).

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.