Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Amazon Delivered Its First Customer Package By Drone (usatoday.com)

Posted by msmash on from the it's-coming dept.

Amazon legally delivered its first Prime order in the United Kingdom last week and is preparing to enter a pilot testing period for drone delivery in rural areas in the country in the coming weeks. From a report on USA Today: The test took place within five miles of its Cambridgeshire drone testing facility outside the university town of Cambridge. The test was done with the approval of Britain's Civil Aviation Authority, which Amazon says plans to allow it to deliver to rural areas once it has amassed sufficient safety data. The test of Prime Air, Amazon's would-be service to deliver packages up to five pounds in 30 minutes or less, took place on Dec. 7, Amazon said. It was for an Amazon Fire TV and bag of popcorn and took 13 minutes from the moment the customer clicked "order" to package delivery. So far the trial includes only two customers who live near Amazon's testing facility. The company hopes to add dozens who lives within a few miles in the coming months. There will be no surcharge for 30-minute drone delivery for these customers, the company said. The Seattle-based company has made available a video of the delivery.

51 of 90 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Taking bets by aicrules · · Score: 1

    because so many UPS trucks get shot each day?

  2. Re:Taking bets by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In the UK it might be a while because a lot fewer people own a gun and those that do are less inclined to break firearms laws. There is also a lot more acceptance of surveillance (something some people in the US will accuse Amazon of if they fly over their land, especially if camera equipped).

    Here in the US, more guns, more people willing to fire guns... yeah... it won't take long before someone claims it is invading their sky rights and shooting it down over privacy rights (or some teens just doing it for a lark).

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  3. Re:Taking bets by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

    I think if they hovered over people's property they would get shot more often.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  4. First Item Delivered by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It was another drone. At this rate, the sky will mimic the horde of flying Sentinels in the Matrix.

  5. All fun until it gets hijacked by CloneRanger · · Score: 5, Funny

    I would like to predict that eventually robbing a drone in mid-flight will occur. Have you ever seen seagulls trying to steal a piece of food from each other mid-flight?

    1. Re:All fun until it gets hijacked by RhettLivingston · · Score: 1

      Easily predicted. Search for "ups driver robberies". We don't have our extreme laws protecting the US mail without reason. Sounds like a good job for a drone.

    2. Re:All fun until it gets hijacked by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      We don't have our extreme laws protecting the US mail without reason.

      Out of interest, do the deagulls obey the law in the US?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    3. Re:All fun until it gets hijacked by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      We don't have our extreme laws protecting the US mail without reason.

      Out of interest, do the deagulls obey the law in the US?

      I don't think it's legal to fly over someone and crap on them, so I'd have to say seagulls break the law daily.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  6. Apart from the other criticisms by Jfetjunky · · Score: 1

    Apart from the very tired "But what about if someone shoots it down/steals it" criticism, I couldn't help but wonder to myself what happens if the land and/or landscaping around the property is less than ideal. Like un-mowed grass, or very rock/treacherous terrain. Perhaps it can drop the package from a small height?

    I won't deny it looks very cool. But I'm still holding out skepticism to how well this delivery model scales up to the volume amazon truly deals with.

    1. Re:Apart from the other criticisms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      There is a flat square with a type of qr code that each customer is given before hand. the drone lands on that square.

    2. Re:Apart from the other criticisms by omfglearntoplay · · Score: 1

      I feel the same way. Maybe smaller yards will be impossible. Perhaps their main concern is reducing costs to rural areas that have less population and more land. Not sure, but personally I never cut my grass "enough" and have a ton of trees and whatnot that could be tricky.

    3. Re:Apart from the other criticisms by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Apart from the very tired "But what about if someone shoots it down/steals it" criticism, I couldn't help but wonder to myself what happens if the land and/or landscaping around the property is less than ideal.

      I think the big problem is range. Landing the drone is fine out in the sticks, where people can prepare a small landing area clear of anynearby trees and wires easily. But in the sticks there aren't many houses within the operating range of the drone precisely because of that space. In a city, you have plenty of stuff within range, but landing is going to be very, very hard.

      On the other hand, bike couriers work just fine in cities. I seen tons of deliveroo bicycles all over the place so that's apparently cost effective enough and doesn't have the landing problem of the drone.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    4. Re:Apart from the other criticisms by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Well you don't know much. Airspace is a public asset. Rules are set by the FAA (in the US) and something along those lines in the UK. You don't own the sky....

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    5. Re:Apart from the other criticisms by lgw · · Score: 1

      You own the sky up to a certain height. You can't avoid trespass by jumping. How high, vs the very low ceiling for drone operation, will vary by location. The straightforward solution for Amazon is to fly mostly along roads.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  7. Re:Taking bets by Freischutz · · Score: 3, Funny

    I think if they hovered over people's property they would get shot more often.

    UPS trucks are not much of a challenge but those Amazon drones are a whole other story. Those suckers are fast and manoeuvrable, which is why I have an auto targeting 100KW EMP gun on the roof of my truck. It's given a whole new meaning to the word 'wardriving'.

  8. Amazon legally delivered its first Prime order by trevc · · Score: 2

    Amazon legally delivered its first Prime order in the United Kingdom last week Really??

    1. Re:Amazon legally delivered its first Prime order by sinij · · Score: 1

      Yep, plus "preparing to enter a pilot testing period for drone delivery" should have been done before they start delivery, not during. What if pilots don't pass?

  9. We did this in 2010 and only the local paper cared by spiritplumber · · Score: 1

    We did this in 2010 and only the local paper cared. Why?

    --
    Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
  10. I didn't order this... by sinij · · Score: 1

    What I this? I didn't order Hellfire Missi..>(*$NO CARRIER

  11. Re:Taking bets by vux984 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    People steal from UPS trucks all the time if the driver is not attending the packages. (leaves the truck open and walks away).
    Not just UPS... but anything really.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    The drone, by virtue of not having a driver is always 'unattended'.

    I can can see drones getting downed by birds. (I recall we had swallows nesting in a tree near our front door one year... they'd dive bomb anyone who came by...) I wouldn't be surprised to see them downed by theives running their own drones and taking them out midair, and then packages stolen. Fun and profit.

    And when they malfunction, how will they avoid crashing into things and damaging property or injuring people? Even a 5 pound device falling from 15 feet and crashing into a person or a car is pretty serious. Not to mention after a crash, the goods will probably be stolen... possibly the drone itself too.

  12. Smug video by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    It'd be easy to say "the sky's the limit." But that's not exactly true any more, is it?

    Says the smug-sounding voice over.

    Only it is the limit, because drones don't work outside an atmosphere, do they?

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    1. Re:Smug video by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      Give it up. The word drone is now more commonly associated with small multi-copters than anything else. English isn't held to a standard by a committee.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  13. Ducted fan blades? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

    I wonder how these drones avoid collision with other air users?

    I wonder why drones always seem to have open-ended propellor blades, rather than ducted fan blades. Multiple spinning knieves, a hazard to all around (even if light and soft).

    Aren't ducted blades more efficient, even when the "duct" is a ring fused to the ends of the blades and spinning with them.? (That's like a continuous tip vane, reducing the air that goes around the tip, so you can use it in place of the last portion of the blade, which provides negligible thrust or lift.)

    Even if not, it seems to me that they'd be both safer for anything they hit and less subject to damage when bumping into sonething.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:Ducted fan blades? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      You would have to stick your fingers in the blade. But it's a fool's game to underestimate stupid.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:Ducted fan blades? by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      I wonder how these drones avoid collision with other air users?

      I wonder why drones always seem to have open-ended propellor blades, rather than ducted fan blades.

      Simple: a free spinning prop is roughly twice as efficient as a ducted fan and weighs considerably less.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    3. Re:Ducted fan blades? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      I wonder why drones always seem to have open-ended propellor blades, rather than ducted fan blades

      Simple: a free spinning prop is roughly twice as efficient as a ducted fan and weighs considerably less.

      Actually, it's the other way around. Props can be better than ducted fans while cruising, but ducted fans are considerably better for high-thrust low-speed operation such as Ntra-copters.

      From Wikipedia article on Ducted Fan:

      In some cases, a shrouded rotor can be 94% more efficient than an open rotor. The improved performance is mainly because the outward flow is less contracted and thus carries more kinetic energy. ...
      Advantages:
        * By reducing propeller blade tip losses, the ducted fan is more efficient in producing thrust than a conventional propeller of similar diameter, especially at low speed and high static thrust level (airships, hovercraft). ...
        * Ducted fans are quieter than propellers: they shield the blade noise, and reduce the tip speed and intensity of the tip vortices both of which contribute to noise production. ...
      Disadvantages:
        * Less efficient than a propeller at cruise (at lower thrust level).

      They also turn more slowly, reducing bearing wear without increasing bearing load. (That does mean a high-torque motor, which may be slightly heavier.)

      Note that much of the advantage of ducted fans can be had with the duct consisting of a light ring around the tips of the blades, attached to and spinning with them, rather than a heavy, unmoving, ring airfoil structure surrounding them.

      Seems to me that ducted fan rotors and Ntra-copters (high thrust, low speed or hovering), are a natural match.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    4. Re:Ducted fan blades? by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      ducted fans are considerably better for high-thrust low-speed operation such as Ntra-copters.

      Nice theory, but reports of increased duration due to changing from free spinning to ducted fans appear to be conspicuously absent.

      BTW, what's an ntra-copter?

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    5. Re:Ducted fan blades? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      Nice theory, but reports of increased duration due to changing from free spinning to ducted fans appear to be conspicuously absent.

      Are there reports of trying and failing? (I'm not a drone flyer or engineer myself and am not hooked into the rumor mill.)

      BTW, what's an ntra-copter?

      Partly a typo (of Nra-...). Partly intended to be a generic for "quadra-, hexa- octo-, etc- copter".

      Maybe "N-copter" might be better?

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    6. Re:Ducted fan blades? by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      Nice theory, but reports of increased duration due to changing from free spinning to ducted fans appear to be conspicuously absent.

      Are there reports of trying and failing?

      The net isn't overflowing with failure reports either, except the occasional attempt to use EDF's for quadcopters, which fails pathetically because the ducts are optimized for high speed flight, never mind that it is well known that free props outperform EDF's for horizontal flight. I suppose the reason that there aren't a whole lot of published attempts to compare ducted fan hover endurance to (larger, equivalent thrust) free prop performance is, the effort appears doomed from the start.

      Executive summary: disk loading trumps tip losses.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    7. Re:Ducted fan blades? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      Executive summary: disk loading trumps tip losses.

      Not really, since disk loading on a ducted versus a non-ducted propeller is an apples-to-oranges comparison.

      [Disk loading] is determined by dividing the total helicopter weight by the rotor disc area, which is the area swept by the blades of a rotor.

      This treats the load as if the disk is evenly loaded. Within a type of fan this is good for comparison.

      In a ducted fan it is also a good approximation of the actual loading on any patch of the swept area. In a non-ducted fan the tip vortex depowers the outer portion of the blades. The inner portion has a near constant load, and a high and constant local disk loading, while the outer part (which amount to a disproportionately large amount of the swept area) is progressively more weakly loaded, thus having a lower local disk loading, and energy is dumped into the vortex. Compute the disk loading of an UNducted fan with the same partial disk loading in the central, working, portion as a hypothetical ducted replacement and you average the workng and less-to-non working swept area patches, computing a lower number than what's actually appropriate for the working area.

      The point of the duct is to block the air trying to "run around the tip" and depower the airfoil by reducing the pressure difference across the blade. But you can also treat it as just keeping the inner, more working, portion of the blade and replacing the tip (and its extra drag) with a barrier. The barrier can be a stationary duct, an aerodynamic tip vane rotating with the fan (and substituting its own drag, or a duct rotating with the blade (an extension of the tip vane into a circle, with yet different drag characteristics). If the barrier doesn't have more drag than the blade tips it replaces, and does an equivalently good job, you're ahead on drag. So more of your power goes into pushing air in a useful direction, rather than making cute but useless vortex rings. Meanwhile the working part of the blade has the same disk loading it always had.

      It's tempting to improve (a lot) further by taking advantage of the fact that the ducting is better than blade tips at suppressing tip vortex losses. So you'd run the blade slower (reducing drag), still achieving the same disk loading. This cuts the drag further, which is good.

      But there's a "gotcha" when you're running with electric motors. Power is proportional to torque times RPM, so lower the RPM and you raise the torque. In a single-wound motor, voltage is proportional to RPM and current to torque. But voltage only affects how good your insulation must be, while copper losses are proportional to the SQUARE of current. So while going to a slower-rotating, higher-torque propeller delivers the same POWER to the shaft, doing that with the same motor design GREATLY RAISES the power drawn by the motor, lowering the efficiency. This could easily cost you more in battery life than the improved fan efficiency saves.

      Switch the motor for one equivalently efficient at the lower RPM and higher torque and you're back to the same efficiency, and could realize the gains. But then you have a second gotcha: Such a motor is likely to be heavier than the lower-torque, higher-RPM model.

      So you have to take these factors into account when experimenting with ducted fans. If you just do a "swap the prop" on an existing set of motors, you're likely to lose more to the increased I-squared-R losses than you gain from the improperly-tuned fan redesign. Then you'd think you're failed, or that ducted fans are worse than unducted.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  14. And I would like to predict by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Before a mid-air robbery occurs, we'll see at least one of these crash and injure, if not kill, a human.

    Imagine what a sixty pound weight falling from 400 feet would do to a person. 27kg at 9.8 m/sec^2 has a force of 265 Newtons, falling from 122m, delivers 32,330 Joule's of energy. An order of magnitude less than getting hit by a car at 60mph, but still plenty lethal.

  15. When did /. become so negative nancy? by nightfire-unique · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I for one think this is very cool. It's energy efficient. It's fast. It relies on the successful execution of many science/tech disciplines.

    What's with all the FUD?

    --
    A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
    1. Re:When did /. become so negative nancy? by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Especially for solutions in search of problems.

      Like those horseless carriages. No one has a problem with horses. Those things just fuddle the road. Waste of time if you ask me.

    2. Re:When did /. become so negative nancy? by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      In general Slashdot is probably about 75% luddites and 25% science/tech supporters.

      New tech always gets crapped on here.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    3. Re:When did /. become so negative nancy? by nightfire-unique · · Score: 1

      You must be relatively new here, Slashdot has never been a place where people universally gush over every bit of tech that is mentioned in the news. Especially for solutions in search of problems.

      Sorry man; calling you out on this one.

      My UID is 253895. I was almost certainly been posting on this site before you knew of its existence.

      Slashdot used to be fantastic. It used to be frequented by optimistic, enlightened engineers, scientists, and technologists. The discussion was fantastic.

      --
      A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
  16. Re:Taking bets by skids · · Score: 1

    I'll put money on first lawsuit because kid found adult toy and pornography in woods after wind storm.

    --
    Someone had to do it.
  17. Re: Taking bets by jxander · · Score: 1

    Is there any reason the drones couldn't stick to the roads or other "neutral" air spaces?

    Slightly less efficient than a straight shot, sure, but a whole lot cheaper than replacing drones and quelling rumors of peeping into windows.

    --
    This signature is false.
  18. Re:Taking bets by koreanbabykilla · · Score: 1

    https://www.rt.com/viral/36724...

  19. Re:Taking bets by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    The union UPS drivers may be the ones to shoot down the job killing drones.

  20. Re:Taking bets by aicrules · · Score: 1

    Very good point....or they'll inflate 300 foot tall rats or however tall they need to be to interrupt the drone airspace.

  21. Re:Taking bets by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

    In the UK, it will be a while.

  22. Stunt by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

    Why does Amazon keep putting out these stupid drone delivery theatre videos? Yes, a quadcopter can lift a 5 pound box and fly 20 minutes out, 20 minutes back with it. And land in a big farmer's field as shown in the video. Now let me see, the market consisting of farmers living 7 miles from an Amazon warehouse dispatch center is how big exactly? Is there even one? And don't forget, this thing will need to be flown with cell coverage for the operator video... there's no way it's going to land autonomously in somebody's front yard without eventually maiming the mailman or killing the cat. And um. Exactly how many front yards are there available in the urban centers where these things would need to operate? What if it's raining? Windy? What is the failure rate? Failure mode? (Hint: it's raining hardware on your car.)

    At least they showed a normal quadcopter this time, not some pathetic piece of concept art. It still just sends a simple, clear message: "Amazon is full of shit."

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  23. Re:Taking bets by tehcyder · · Score: 1

    Taking bets on the date of the first drone shotgun casualty....

    Unless you could prove it was attacking you, that sounds like a good way to lose your shotgun licence here in the UK.

    --
    To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  24. Uhh by easyTree · · Score: 1

    So, I forget - when these become widespread - are we allowed to shoot them down if they stray over our property? /me considers moving to a drone-traffic nexus

    --
    Requiem for the American Dream
    1. Re:Uhh by easyTree · · Score: 1

      Uhh; how do I report that preview doesn't .... preview - it displays something which is not always identical to the posted view?

      --
      Requiem for the American Dream
  25. Re:Taking bets by easyTree · · Score: 1

    UPS Suck. Whenever they 'deliver' a package to me, *I* am the one driving up to 30 miles to collect the parcel myself.

    --
    Requiem for the American Dream
  26. Re:Taking bets by easyTree · · Score: 1

    UPSuck (tm.)

    --
    Requiem for the American Dream
  27. Re:Taking bets by easyTree · · Score: 1

    You're looking at it all wrong - the UK has long needed a driver for gun-ownership. This is it! "woohoo! Ima get me some lightweight electronics (Cletus' voice.)

    --
    Requiem for the American Dream
  28. Re:Taking bets by Shirley+Marquez · · Score: 1

    Right now they're only doing drone deliveries in the UK, where guns are scarce. It would be much more of a hazard here in the US.

  29. Faster doodads by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

    Now they can get their doodads even faster! No need to wait until tomorrow to get your crap and put it in the corner. Now you can pay for it and get it very quickly, and put it in the corner.

  30. Re:Taking bets by syntotic · · Score: 1

    !! They would spot thieves planning the shooting. Can I buy the memento picture?