Slashdot Mirror


China's Bungled Drone Display Breaks World Record (bbc.com)

Chinese company EHang has broken the Guinness World Record for the most drones flown simultaneously, despite them failing to coordinate for a light show. The company programmed a fleet of 1,374 drones to fly in set patterns, "but failed to spell out the date and the record-setting number of drones," reports the BBC. From the report: The South China Morning Post called the event an "epic fail." The record was previously held by U.S. technology company Intel, which flew 1,218 aircraft at the 2018 Pyeongchang Winter Olympic Games in February. Intel's show was pre-recorded before being aired during the opening ceremony, due to "possible freezing weather and strong winds." According to the South China Morning Post, EHang was paid 10.5 million yuan ($1.65 million) for the Labor Day performance in the north-western city of Xi'an. You can watch a video of the drone display here.

67 comments

  1. Reporting by Daralantan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "The South China Morning Post called the event an "epic fail."" And promptly had their social scores plummeting into the negatives....?

    1. Re:Reporting by jlar · · Score: 1

      No more travelling for them...

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

      Ehang were paid by the city to do the show, and they messed it up, so it's Ehang whose social scores will be plummeting. The South China Morning Post wouldn't have reported it that way if the authorities were happy with Ehang.

    3. Re:Reporting by burtosis · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I guess this means thier kids will be pulled out of school That ought to teach them a lesson.

    4. Re:Reporting by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 2

      "The South China Morning Post called the event an "epic fail."" And promptly had their social scores plummeting into the negatives....?

      Well, SCMP is in Hong Kong so it's a little different because...
      1) What happens or is said in Hong Kong (mostly) stays in Hong Kong.
      2) Hong Kong still has some autonomy and I haven't yet read about the social scores idea being used there - yet.
      3) SCMP is in English, so its target audience is actually mostly foreigners or locals with really good English skills.

    5. Re:Reporting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hardly, they are blocked in China, so presumable their scores are already as low as they can get.

    6. Re:Reporting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's also blocked in the mainland anyway.

    7. Re:Reporting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The South China Morning Post is based in Hong Kong. Things are considerably freer there than on the mainland. You can even find Falun Gong posters in public places there.

  2. "EHang was paid 10.5 million yuan ..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Probably all in advance. Which explains the result.

    When dealing with a Chinese company, NEVER pay in advance. They'll just take your money and screw you over.

    1. Re:"EHang was paid 10.5 million yuan ..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When dealing with a Chinese company, NEVER, EVER, pay them anything

      ftfy

    2. Re:"EHang was paid 10.5 million yuan ..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you seen this Slashdot video yet? Have you bought the Goat C shirt?

      - FatCashewsLoveMe

    3. Re: "EHang was paid 10.5 million yuan ..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only people worse to deal with are Indians. At least Chinese people know how to wipe and bathe properly.

      You were modded down, because you picked the wrong reason dealing with Indians is worse than dealing with Chinese.

      Both Indian and Chinese cultures tend to think that if they can get away with taking advantage of you (take your money but never deliver what was promised, etc), that's your fault for allowing them to get away with it.

      But while Chinese might take advantage of you, they have a strong work ethic and they will work HARD.

      Indians as a whole have no work ethic at all.

    4. Re:"EHang was paid 10.5 million yuan ..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      MODDOWN! ; creimer spam post again!

      creimer wants you to click on his youtube channel, then click on his stupid amazon affiliate link spam on Youtube. There is nothing of value on creimer youtube channel. Only creimer click-bot goes there.

      creimer, I reported you to youtube and amazon and I keep reporting every spam post you make so all these spam posts will do is bring your view count in negative territory for a given day since youtube barred your stupid click-bot and your spam posts.

    5. Re: "EHang was paid 10.5 million yuan ..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhh... Being taken advantage of is not a racial thing.

      Companies all over take advantage of anyone they can, particularly the large ones. How else do you think they make billions?

  3. my DAMN balls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    suck em

  4. They used... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...algorithms and coding?

  5. A wake up call. Now just imagine..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a squadron of F-22s or F-35s flying into them, using up all their bullets to take down a fraction of them, and then getting shot in the ass as they run back for more bullets - to come back to another 1300.

    Or a swarm hitting an aircraft carrier.

    And with all that manufacturing capacity in China.....

    And people tell me you can't get air superiority with drones.

    1. Re:A wake up call. Now just imagine..... by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      And people tell me you can't get air superiority with drones.

      I'd wait till all those F35 contracts have been signed.

    2. Re: A wake up call. Now just imagine..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Assuming it's a clear and windless day. And one of those F-22s doesn't do a supersonic flyover.

      For with the aircraft carrier, let's hope an Apache doesn't scout them out first. That pilot would be so confused. "All these drones just started to water land below us."

    3. Re:A wake up call. Now just imagine..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The toy drones used for displays like this could never reach the 20,000+ ft a fighter jet flies at, and any drones that happened to be in the way of their bombs/missiles would be crushed like a bug on a windshield. Similar for an aircraft carrier- unless it's in dry dock these things aren't going to touch it. Not that drones couldn't be used to achieve air superiority, just that this demonstration is completely unrelated to the question.

    4. Re:A wake up call. Now just imagine..... by supremebob · · Score: 1

      I'd imagine that one person with a signal jammer could take down a bunch of these drones at once if they needed to. If you did that suddenly while they were changing formation, they would probably get confused and crash into each other.

    5. Re: A wake up call. Now just imagine..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nothing a carpet of falling steel string filaments wouldn't fix. The thing about fan blades is that they're fan blades.

      Train pidgeons to fly toward turbines for a food reward. Problem solved.

  6. The New Fireworks? by coofercat · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Are co-ordinated drone displays the 'new fireworks'? Fireworks are cool, but they're not 100% predictable, and they're noisy/smokey etc. I wonder though as this technology develops, and as 'heavy' drones become cheaper and more plentiful, if we'll see more of these sorts of displays for big annual events around the world?

    1. Re:The New Fireworks? by burtosis · · Score: 1

      Not just events, how long before giant glowing eyesore ads appear around cities everywhere, every evening?

    2. Re:The New Fireworks? by coofercat · · Score: 1

      Well, that depends where you live - where I live there are pretty strict laws about (permanent) illuminated structures - I realise these will drop through that particular loophole for a while, but I doubt it would be for long.

    3. Re:The New Fireworks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks like they crashed into a wall/force field.

    4. Re:The New Fireworks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      noisy/smokey

      You're saying it like it's a bad thing, not to mention that creating fancy choreography is more involved than just sequencing a bunch of fireworks.

    5. Re:The New Fireworks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. You can "feel" a firework when it goes off. It's not the same when drones do something, not even close.

    6. Re:The New Fireworks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check out the vid. If you were under one bank of the drones, you might have felt them as they fell on you.

    7. Re:The New Fireworks? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      and they're noisy/smokey etc

      Both of which is a significant portion of the charm. Each of which have been used to create shows in their own right (fireworks that are used just for synchronised sounds, and fireworks which give off different coloured smoke for use in the daytime).

      I know I'd much rather listen to noisy fireworks than 1218 drones. I know I'd much rather listen to noisy fireworks than 1218 drones. Sentence used twice for the two different definitions of "drone".

  7. China's? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

    Why does the headline attribute this to "China"? It's a private company.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    1. Re:China's? by mrclevesque · · Score: 1

      And why do they say "but failed to spell out the date and the record-setting number of drones" when the link shows otherwise:

      https://youtu.be/YQK6_2Brnqk?t...

    2. Re:China's? by tinkerton · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I noticed that too
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
      But even if they bungled up somewhere, the end result still looks pretty cool. The main emphasis shouldn't be on 'bungled'. Too much propagandishness to me.

    3. Re:China's? by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      Private companies in China are not the same as private companies elsewhere. You might as well use quotes when stating private.

    4. Re:China's? by rkordmaa · · Score: 1

      There are two versions, one the company released and a composition of recordings from the crowd SCMP released. You could say there is a bit of a disparity there. Almost as if company doctored it's footage, quite a bit.

    5. Re:China's? by rkordmaa · · Score: 1

      The link shows a lot of things, vid in SCMP article shows quite a few different things. Someone is using artistic interpretation on how it actually played out. https://youtu.be/YQK6_2Brnqk?t...

  8. But Can It Compare To Putin's Folley? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Putin's Mail Drone Smashed Itself To Itty-Bitty-Titty pieces five seconds after take-off. Now that is Bungled in the Third World for you.

  9. We still have the record for most people / manual by raymorris · · Score: 1

    Last summer our "drone" (quadcopter) group in Dallas set the record for the most flown individually, as opposed to Intel's system in which a computer flew them all as a group. We have a hundred people standing in a field, all flying our toys simultaneously.

    I wish the marketers hadn't labeled RC quadcopters "drones" because it creates confusion. An actual drone flies autonomously. Most drones are fixed-wing aircraft, airplanes. That includes the MQ-1B Predator, RQ-7B Shadow, MQ-9 Reaper, etc. What this article calls "drones" are radio controlled quadcopters. RC quadcopters are just like the RC model planes your great-grandfather flew eighty years ago, except quadcopters are less efficient and they can hover.

  10. Re:We still have the record for most people / manu by freeze128 · · Score: 0

    RC quadcopters are just like the RC model planes your great-grandfather flew eighty years ago...

    So, you're saying that in 1938, people were flying radio-controlled model aircraft? I doubt it. There were no transistors until much later, so I don't think that the aircraft would be powerful enough to lift the HUGE BATTERIES, TRANSFORMERS, and VACUUM TUBES unless it was a FULL-SIZE aircraft.

  11. Yes and no. They're called ... by raymorris · · Score: 3, Informative

    The word "drone" is used for two very different things.

    Actual drones fly autonomously, and are normally fixed wing airplanes. Examples include the MQ-1B Predator, RQ-7B Shadow, and MQ-9 Reaper.

    What this article calls "drones" are RC quadcopters. As the article mentioned, they were flown from by the ground, by radio, just like the RC planes that starting gaining popularity 80 years ago. Quadcopters are fun toys. Because of some fundamental physics, quadcopters get dramatically less efficient as they get larger. The concept works quite well for a toy three inches across. Efficiency drops as you approach the larger popular size, which is 250mm (10 inches) across. Once you get up to about a meter across you're hitting the practical limit. You CAN build one bigger, but it's performance and especially flight time completely sucks compared to a plane or helicopter of similar size. You're never going to put thousands of pounds of military equipment and weapons systems on a quadcopter; it just doesn't make sense.

    Can a military use small, unmanned aircraft effectively? Absolutely, and that's been US military doctrine for most of the time since cruise missiles were developed in the 1970s, and especially since the Tomahawk in 1983. Several proposed new aircraft have been cancelled in favor of missiles, which can carry out the same mission at lower cost, in dollars and lives. The venerable B-52 can quickly carry TWENTY AGM-86 cruise missiles to within 1500 miles of the targets, anywhere in the world, and those missiles then autonomously fly the last 1,500 miles to their targets.

    There's really little military need for small, low-performance aircraft to fly around in patterns. Generally, you want to get to the target and destroy it quickly. That's what missiles do. Other aircraft can loiter maintaining situational awareness, watching, then call the missile strikes. There's little need for the recon aircraft to also be the one to strike the target.

    In some hostile airspace, against moving targets or targets you can't get good satellite views of, you sometimes want to look, then fire a weapon. For that you want fast, stealthy aircraft which carry enough armament to destroy the target in one strike. A large group of slow, non-stealthy toys, which carry no more than a hand grenade, isn't particularly useful.

    1. Re:Yes and no. They're called ... by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      Because of some fundamental physics, quadcopters get dramatically less efficient as they get larger.

      Humor me. Why.

    2. Re:Yes and no. They're called ... by raymorris · · Score: 2

      To put it simply and quickly:

        The thrust developed by a prop at a given RPM is proportional to its diameter to the 2/3 power, multiplied by its pitch. In other words, the cube root of the diameter squared. As an easy example let's use a prop of diameter 1, pitch 1, and a prop of diameter 10, pitch 10.

      1 squared is 1, and the cube root is 1, pitch is 1, so the thrust is 1 unit.
      10 squared is 100, the cube root is 4.6, pitch is 10.
      So a prop 10 times as big produces 46 times the power.

      A quadcopter "10 times as big" is 10x width, 10x height, 10x depth, so 1,000 times the volume, and approximately 1,000 times the weight.

      When you scale up 10 times, you get a thousand times the weight, and 46 times as much thrust. That's a big problem.

      We saw earlier that a prop 10 times the size gives 46 times as much thrust, so we want bigger props. On a quadcopter the radius of the prop is limited to no more than half the diagonal across the fuselage. We can only get bigger props by making the whole craft bigger, but that makes the problem worse. So we need a way to have a prop bigger, without making both the width and height bigger.

      Enter the helicopter. The helicopter design lets us put a 46â(TM) prop in a fuse that's only 9' wide. That's why you see people flying around in helicopters, and you don't see people flying around in quadcopters.

  12. Re:We still have the record for most people / manu by cozytom · · Score: 2

    Actually there were "hobbiest" RC model aircraft in the 1930's.

    The 1950's had small tube based RC units.

    http://www.stormthecastle.com/...

  13. Who says Indians have no work ethic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Indians made up of almost 93% of the H1B workers in the US

    If the Indians don't have any work ethic, you think American companies would hire them to take away American jobs?

    The American companies could, y'know, hire the Chinks, whom you said are 'hard working', but they don't

    They hire the Indians precisely because the Indians particularly enjoy working as scabs, while the Chinks still have some respect for the hard working Americans

    1. Re: Who says Indians have no work ethic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only reason they don't hire Chinese is because of their broken English, that is all. Otherwise we would have a ton of Chinese work visa holders in the US.

  14. The author of that SCMP article is a Chinese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have any of you noticed that the reporter for the SCMP article ~ http://www.scmp.com/tech/enter... ~ carries the name of "Iris Deng"?

    A 'Deng' is a Chinese surname, like Deng xiaping

    In other words, that reporter is a Chinese, with a Western name, Iris

    In other words, that SCMP article was written by an ethnic Chinese who pretends to be a Westerner, who loathes other Chinese

    1. Re:The author of that SCMP article is a Chinese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well obviously, she's from Hong Kong.

    2. Re:The author of that SCMP article is a Chinese by rkordmaa · · Score: 1

      They use western names for talking with westerners and its a good thing they do, Chinese names just don't work for non-Chinese, nobody can remember the damn things. And if they write them the way they are meant to be written - with Chinese characters, well forget about it. I work with Chinese a lot, it's a really good thing that most have sense to choose an additional western name for themselves. The rest... well they end up getting called by some variant of "hey you" because for the life of me I just can't keep the Chinese names straight and in half the cases I can't pronounce them properly to start with. Well, they can't pronounce my name any better, but at least they don't seem to have problems with remembering what my name is, so that's ok.

  15. Re:We still have the record for most people / manu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does my Parrot Bebop 2 count as a drone? I use Flight Director to set it to fly autonomously from me, but only sometimes. Even when I don't, it does most of the work when it flies, maintaining its altitude and position and only moving when I instruct it to. In fact if it came under my direct control it would probably shoot off into the sky and then come plummeting down. What percentage of control qualifies it for drone?

  16. Re:We still have the record for most people / manu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wish the marketers hadn't labeled RC quadcopters "drones" because it creates confusion. An actual drone flies autonomously.

    A drone is an unmanned vehicle. The 'autonomous' is something you tacked on there yourself. By far the most drones, both military and commercial, are controlled remotely by a human. And for all intents and purposes, the drones from this story are actually autonomous. The fact that their 'brain' is kept on the ground doesn't change the fact that they have no direct human controller.

  17. Re:We still have the record for most people / manu by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

    Oh, and regarding the tubes and batteries business, please see here.

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  18. What a Stupid World Record by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oldest person, strongest hurricane, hottest day ever recorded on Mars, sure, but who can fly the most toys?

    Welcome to the Boring World of the Future.

    1. Re:What a Stupid World Record by rkordmaa · · Score: 1

      Half the Guinness records are for stuff like longest toenail or whatnot. They don't care if a record is stupid, they just record it.

  19. A paper airplane is a drone? A birthday balloon? by raymorris · · Score: 1

    So by your definition a paper airplane and a party balloon are drones?

    In my opinion, any useful definition of "drone" needs to distinguish between a paper airplane vs X-47B, Triton, BAMS, etc.

    The FAA doesn't use the term drone, so there is no definition from them. The use Unmanned Aerial System and "autonomous". Under the the first draft of the recent UAS regulations, a paper airplane was a UAS and required a license. The draft was slightly improved before it went into effect.

  20. Partial. Decision making, such as see and avoid by raymorris · · Score: 1

    Because the Bebop 2 now includes a GPS module, it is able follow step-by-step instructions given by the pilot, such as "fly 50 feet, turn left, then fly 30 feet". In US military terms, that's partial autonomy.

    Full autonomous would include decision-making ability. A fully autonomous system can recognize it is on a collision course with another aircraft, and take appropriate action.

    Partial or semi-autonomous is cool, it's fun - and you have to be standing there watching it, controller in hand, or it'll likely crash, or at least violate the law by flying over the two ladies who are jogging. So while cool, it's really not that autonomous since we're still needing to watch it carefully and make all the decisions.

  21. Re:We still have the record for most people / manu by spire3661 · · Score: 1

    Quadcopters are drones because the computer is what keeps it aloft and balanced.. The operator just provides directional and power input.

    --
    Good-bye
  22. The drones did fine. by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

    The drones did exactly as told. It's just a case of half the display being mojibake due to an iOS update two hours before the show.

    --
    How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
  23. Re:We still have the record for most people / manu by raymorris · · Score: 1

    Paper airplanes are drones because the dihedral is what keeps it aloft and balanced.. The operator just provides directional and power input.

  24. Tiananmen Square Tank Man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Also bungled, Chinese Democracy (fuck Axl and fuck all you freedom-hating Chinks!).

  25. weaponized drone swarms by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    Can't wait til they put AI into these things, and arm them. Oh what fun THAT will be.

  26. EHang rose to prominence a couple years ago at CES by cozytom · · Score: 1

    Remember their big splashy people carrying Octo-copter?

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/g...

    Do you still want to ride in one of these?

  27. Re:We still have the record for most people / manu by farble1670 · · Score: 1

    An actual drone flies autonomously.

    You keep saying that but it's not true. From wikipedia:

    An unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), commonly known as a drone...

    and,

    The term drone, more widely used by the public, was coined in reference to the early remotely-flown target aircraft

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  28. Re:A paper airplane is a drone? A birthday balloon by farble1670 · · Score: 1

    An unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), commonly known as a drone

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    There you go.