UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 30 Jan 2010 10:32

I think the Nishant cost being 20 crore and camera woth 5 crore are a exaggeration on DDM's part.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 30 Jan 2010 11:27

the nishant, like many other UAV's, IS designed to come down by parachute but you can't expect DDM to know that. they make it sound as if DRDO is lying when it says it didn't crashland.

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 30 Jan 2010 11:34

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/496 ... lands.html

Nishant crashlands

........... on Friday following technical problem.

However, it developed problems around 2.45 and crashlanded with a loud sound.

Even a 12th standard english essay will be better worded than this "article". Where do they pick journos from these days!!

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 31 Jan 2010 09:04

Rs 200-cr CCTV plan for city gets state approval

MUMBAI: Over 5,000 closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras may soon be installed across the city to boost security. The state government has finally given its consent to the project estimated to cost around Rs 200 crore.

The decision to instal cameras to monitor suspicious activities in Mumbai was made following the 26\11 terror attack. A firm, which was assigned the job of carrying out a study made a presentation to state home minister R R Patil on Saturday.

Patil told TOI that modalities like who would monitor the footage and the specifications of cameras were being worked out. “The project of installing CCTVs at crowded areas like hospitals, important junctions and arterial roads will be carried out in phases. Priority will be given to highly sensitive locations like places of worship, malls and hotels. Once cameras are installed at these areas, other places like schools and colleges, banks as well as important arterial roads will be taken up,’’ said a home department official.

Finding it difficult to physically monitor each and every corner of the city, especially with the existing manpower of the police force, CM Ashok Chavan had in 2009 announced that CCTVs would be installed at strategic locations in the city to increase vigil against terrorism and routine crime. This project is on the lines of London, which has a network of over 10,000 CCTVs.

Confident of implementing the project in the next six months, additional chief secretary (home), Chandra Iyengar, said, “Besides boosting security of the city, these cameras will also help to maintain law and order, control crime and keep a close watch on rash drivers as well as anti-social elements.’’

IPS officer Sanjay Pandey, however, said that besides CCTV cameras, the state also needs an alert force that can quickly respond to an incident.

vishal · Post by **vishal** » 31 Jan 2010 10:58

^^^^^
I wouldn't put too much hope in CCTV surveillance in Bombay. A couple of months ago there was a horrific crash on the Bandra-Worli Sea Link. The cops released a statement saying that they would have better info on who was at fault as the bridge has CCTV cameras installed. The statement went on to say that this was delayed because they had not been able to retrieve the camera from the water. Apparently the car had crashed into the pole on which the camera was mounted and did so with such force that the pole was uprooted and fell into the sea with the camera.

So there was a camera but all storage was local. No arrangement had been made for the video feed to be transmitted to the sea link's control room. For a piece of infrastructure that was inaugurated a few months after 26/11 and was identified as a prime target for a terrorist strike this is a colossal design failure and criminal negligence. Someone has to climb a pole and retrieve+replace the tapes every time they are full. I have a hard time putting my faith in such diligence. Which is also why I have a hard time believing anything good will come out of the CCTV contract for Bombay. A lot of people will go on junkets to Israel, the UK and many other places, bank accounts will be flush with money and the next time there is a terrorist strike in Bombay the CCTV surveillance will be all but useless.

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 31 Jan 2010 19:56

vishal wrote:^^^^^
I wouldn't put too much hope in CCTV surveillance in Bombay. A couple of months ago there was a horrific crash on the Bandra-Worli Sea Link. The cops released a statement saying that they would have better info on who was at fault as the bridge has CCTV cameras installed. The statement went on to say that this was delayed because they had not been able to retrieve the camera from the water. Apparently the car had crashed into the pole on which the camera was mounted and did so with such force that the pole was uprooted and fell into the sea with the camera.

So there was a camera but all storage was local. No arrangement had been made for the video feed to be transmitted to the sea link's control room. For a piece of infrastructure that was inaugurated a few months after 26/11 and was identified as a prime target for a terrorist strike this is a colossal design failure and criminal negligence. Someone has to climb a pole and retrieve+replace the tapes every time they are full. I have a hard time putting my faith in such diligence. Which is also why I have a hard time believing anything good will come out of the CCTV contract for Bombay. A lot of people will go on junkets to Israel, the UK and many other places, bank accounts will be flush with money and the next time there is a terrorist strike in Bombay the CCTV surveillance will be all but useless.

I recall seeing the crash of a "speeding Skoda? car with another Skoda coming from the other side" on video (times now), i'm not sure of what you say is true or not..But I'll take your local knowledge over mine.. I sure hope that they have a centralized storage for all this shit and what is mindboggling to me is that a PUNY LIL SKODA even with a force 10 times can get the pole to break. To me that is a DESIGN FAILURE... Poles are suppose to made to withstand high crash resistance in mind, but then again yea hai Mumbai meri jaan!

vishal · Post by **vishal** » 01 Feb 2010 08:18

^^^^^

Had the cameras not been damaged, we would have been able to got a clear picture of the accident

I have been trying to find the article where they specifically mention the loss of camera data because the thing keeled over and splashed into the sea but no joy so far. Still, cameras being damaged should still mean the cops had a video feed till the point of impact but didn't because all storage was local.

Chanu · Post by **Chanu** » 04 Feb 2010 06:05

good news
there is a report in sakshi stating as follows,test of uav nishant is success.eventually drdo scientists successfully tested it.drdo scientists stated all the systems on board functioned as planned.this test was conducted by ADA near benglore DRDO lab head quarters.the uav which was launched from a launcher at kholar airfield on feb 01 at 11:25 after traveling 3hr35min it reached its destination.
----------------
I transulated every sentence in the paper as it is

I think it is the same uav which abortly landed on the way to kholer air field on 29 jan

Sachin · Post by **Sachin** » 04 Feb 2010 10:43

Chanu wrote:I think it is the same uav which abortly landed on the way to kholer air field on 29 jan

Another vernacular daily had reported that Nishant had to bail out using its parachute, when some of the control systems had failed. This incident happened a few days back. The "bailing out" was mentioned correctly, and not as a kind of crash with a kind of note that the UAV is useless. The daily also reported about the successful test flight.

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 17 Feb 2010 01:53

Tata-IAI venture to indigenise and maintain Israeli defence technologies

16 Feb 2010 8ak: As Israel replaces Russia as India's leading weapons supplier the Tata group has realised that not only will these equipment need ongoing maintenance but also that it makes commercial sense to indigenise some of these technologies. Hence, when 8ak interviewed Air Marshal (retd) Ajit Bhavnani he mentioned that the proposed Tata-IAI venture will focus on indigenisation of Israeli technologies like UAVs, radars and missiles. He pointed to the EL\I 3385 (photo coming!) Combo Pole as a case in point where an advanced techonology developed by Israel would be completely manufactured in India.

On the market for UAVs, he expects the demand to go up ~600% from the current <100 to over 600 as the role moves from surveillance to combat and applications in real estate, mapping, coastal security etc.

Industry sources are however skeptical that the Israelis will part with their technology so easily especially under an ownership cap of 26%.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 17 Feb 2010 06:21

I am probably dreaming but if India has the tech to fly and control UAVs, and has built Tejas. What exactly stops them from flying the Tejas by remote control?

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 17 Feb 2010 07:16

^^
Many nations have UAV tech. But do you know of any public program to produce unmanned fighters? No. This is not that unmanned fighters pose some unimaginable challenge, they don't. The problem is electronic warfare. How will you stop the enemy from jamming the comm and control systems?
The solution is said to be fiber optics as they are immune to electro magnetic disturbance. The unmanned fighters would need to have fly by optics system with full fiber optics bus to connect all systems. This is a challenging tech. But more than challenge, the difficulty is cost. So until this tech is not mastered and more importantly made cost effective, unmanned fighters are not feasible.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 17 Feb 2010 07:45

The unmanned fighters would need to have fly by optics system with full fiber optics bus to connect all systems.

i doubt this is challenging tech.

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 17 Feb 2010 11:12

http://www.mathrubhumi.com/story.php?id=83854
Posted on: 17 Feb 2010
news in malayalam - Unmanned AUV

ravar · Post by **ravar** » 17 Feb 2010 11:39

Had already posted this on Naval thread and Mil Ind Partnership thread

Translated from http://www.mathrubhumi.com/story.php?id=83854

Unmanned submarine undergoes trial at Idukki dam

Posted on : 17 Feb
Bangalore: The indigenously developed unmanned submarine has been tested successfully. The AUV (Autonomous Underwater Vehicle) -150 brought from Durgapur, West Bengal under utmost secrecy underwent the trials at the Idukki reservoir.
The vehicle has been developed by Central Mechanical Engineering Research Institute (CMERI), based at Durgapur in collaboration with DRDO. It can collect information under water remotely without any crew or captain much like a remotely controlled pilotless aircraft. Built with the intent of coastal security, AUV 150 will also be used to study aquatic life and minerals and to map oceans, said Dr. S.N. Som, the head of Robotics and Automation, CMERI. IIT Gorakhpur is also collaborating in the project.
Brought in a container over land from Durgapur upto Kulamavu reservoir at Idukki , the vehicle was later taken to the middle of the reservoir on a boat. Though CMERI officials declined to comment on the exact date of the tests, they indicated that the trials were conducted in January. The current trials were that of runs in fresh water. Since Kulamavu has a centre associated with Navy and also the reservoir being very deep, the choice fell on Idukki. The vehicle is yet to undergo sea trials.
With a length of 4.8 metres and weighing 490 kgs, AUV 150 is controlled remotely from land using wireless technology. It runs on battery. Dr. Som added that it would render invaluable service to Coast Guard and Navy. The US, Russia, Germany, Japan, Australia, South Korea are the other nations having such submarines.

Shubham · Post by **Shubham** » 17 Feb 2010 12:15

Gaur wrote:^^
Many nations have UAV tech. But do you know of any public program to produce unmanned fighters? No. This is not that unmanned fighters pose some unimaginable challenge, they don't. The problem is electronic warfare. How will you stop the enemy from jamming the comm and control systems?
The solution is said to be fiber optics as they are immune to electro magnetic disturbance. The unmanned fighters would need to have fly by optics system with full fiber optics bus to connect all systems. This is a challenging tech. But more than challenge, the difficulty is cost. So until this tech is not mastered and more importantly made cost effective, unmanned fighters are not feasible.

You have correctly pointed out the EM Jamming part, and I believe that Fibre Optical System can be currently incorporated in Today's Fighter Jets. I remember reading that IN demanded Fibre Optical System for communication between Aircraft Carriers Island and the about to be launched aircraft, because it is very advantageous in terms of no interferance from rest of AC equipments.

But the actual problem in case of Unmanned Fighter Jet is not inside communication but outside communication. The inside electronics can be made EMI immune but still you have to relay commands to and fro the aircraft, which the enemy can easily jam.

Now here Optical Fibre can't help , bcos they you would have a veryyyyy long optical fibre from the operating base directly connected to the Fighter Jet

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 17 Feb 2010 12:39

ravar wrote:Had already posted this on Naval thread and Mil Ind Partnership thread

Translated from http://www.mathrubhumi.com/story.php?id=83854
........

thanks for the translation.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 17 Feb 2010 22:10

Shubham wrote:
Gaur wrote:^^
Many nations have UAV tech. But do you know of any public program to produce unmanned fighters? No. This is not that unmanned fighters pose some unimaginable challenge, they don't. The problem is electronic warfare. How will you stop the enemy from jamming the comm and control systems?
The solution is said to be fiber optics as they are immune to electro magnetic disturbance. The unmanned fighters would need to have fly by optics system with full fiber optics bus to connect all systems. This is a challenging tech. But more than challenge, the difficulty is cost. So until this tech is not mastered and more importantly made cost effective, unmanned fighters are not feasible.
You have correctly pointed out the EM Jamming part, and I believe that Fibre Optical System can be currently incorporated in Today's Fighter Jets. I remember reading that IN demanded Fibre Optical System for communication between Aircraft Carriers Island and the about to be launched aircraft, because it is very advantageous in terms of no interferance from rest of AC equipments.

But the actual problem in case of Unmanned Fighter Jet is not inside communication but outside communication. The inside electronics can be made EMI immune but still you have to relay commands to and fro the aircraft, which the enemy can easily jam.

Now here Optical Fibre can't help , bcos they you would have a veryyyyy long optical fibre from the operating base directly connected to the Fighter Jet

That's what I was curious about, even if a plane had a fibreoptic system, the radio signals it's receiving would still be prone to jamming?

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 18 Feb 2010 06:38

Shubham wrote: You have correctly pointed out .................But the actual problem in case of Unmanned Fighter Jet is not inside communication but outside communication. The inside electronics can be made EMI immune but still you have to relay commands to and fro the aircraft, which the enemy can easily jam.

Now here Optical Fibre can't help , bcos they you would have a veryyyyy long optical fibre from the operating base directly connected to the Fighter Jet

Yes. Quite true. However, USAF Chief has commented that F-35 would be the last manned fighter that would be developed by US. So it seems there could be some way to overcome that problem. Or maybe that future fighters may have the option of being both manned and unmanned (according to the situation). I have limited knowledge on these matters, so gurus are welcome to shed some light on this matter.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 18 Feb 2010 07:29

Gaur wrote:Many nations have UAV tech. But do you know of any public program to produce unmanned fighters? No. This is not that unmanned fighters pose some unimaginable challenge, they don't. The problem is electronic warfare. How will you stop the enemy from jamming the comm and control systems?
The solution is said to be fiber optics as they are immune to electro magnetic disturbance. The unmanned fighters would need to have fly by optics system with full fiber optics bus to connect all systems. This is a challenging tech. But more than challenge, the difficulty is cost. So until this tech is not mastered and more importantly made cost effective, unmanned fighters are not feasible.

This doesnt name any sense at all. If EW is going to jam the ground link, how will optically linking up the subsystems of a fighter help in jam resistance? Do you propose running a fiber optic cable from the ground to the aircraft? If you mean to imply that *internal electrical control systems* are susceptible to EW jamming then manned fighters would have this problem too.

Fly by optics is used for something else and is a natural evolution from hydraulic--> electrical --> optical control linkage:

It has 2 advantages.

It is lighter than conventional wiring which can get quite heavy. Typical fighters have over 20 miles of wiring!! Instead the idea is to replace electrical wires with a central optical bus which will multiplex signals (something like your trunk telephone cables being fiber optic and capable of carrying hundreds and even thousands of phone calls simultaneously). Add to that plastics used in FO cables are lighter than metal, less prone to corrosion. Secondly analog FBW systems (and even some digital ones) are susceptible to heat, electromagnetic interference from motors and actuators within the aircraft and electrical phenomena like lightning strikes and short circuits (this is a problem with cars too. If the voltage level in a wire controls the amount of braking for example, heating/cooling of the wire will produce increase/decrease of resistance and hence fluctuation in the signals).

UCAVs have problems related to autonomous flight. The DARPA grand challenge for producing a *ground autonomous vehicle* was a huge failure with none of the teams able to complete the race! Imagine the scale of challenge for a fighter! Thats why surveillance drones have been automated (which for the most part fly straight and level, that too in good weather), not fighters so far. Secondly there are other issues like airspace sharing with other manned aircrafts. Would you comfortable flying alongside a fighter capable of shooting you down and/or being stupid enough to ram into you?

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 18 Feb 2010 07:45

^^
Err...did you bother to read the posts above yours? Shubam had raised the same point and I did agree. This is the post just above yours.

Ameet · Post by **Ameet** » 22 Feb 2010 11:51

Israel unveils new drone that can fly to Gulf

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8527268.stm

The Israeli Air Force has introduced a fleet of pilotless aircraft that can stay in the air for nearly a day and fly as far as the Gulf.

The Eitan drones, which have a wingspan of 86ft (26m), are the size of Boeing 737 passenger jets.

They can reach an altitude of more than 40,000ft (12,000m) and fly for more than 20 consecutive hours.

AP quoted defence officials as saying the planes could provide surveillance and jam enemy communications.

Israel, along with the US and other Western nations, believes Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons and has repeatedly suggested it could attack the country if diplomatic attempts to curb the programme fail.

At the fleet's inauguration ceremony at an airbase in central Israel, IAF commander Maj Gen Ido Nehushtan said the new drone "has the potential to be able to conduct new missions down the line as they become relevant".

Israeli officials refused to say how large the new fleet was.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 22 Feb 2010 11:59

I thought the Eitan/Heron TP were already there before (on wikipedia). Is this an improvement?

Ameet · Post by **Ameet** » 22 Feb 2010 12:14

Carl_T wrote:I thought the Eitan/Heron TP were already there before (on wikipedia). Is this an improvement?

According to the link below, it is the latest model, with a wingspan of a 737 and payload of 1,000kgs.

http://news.antiwar.com/2010/02/21/isra ... hing-iran/

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 22 Feb 2010 12:40

Gaur wrote:^^
Many nations have UAV tech. But do you know of any public program to produce unmanned fighters? No.

Yes. DARPA had/has a program that was running a few years ago for unmanned fighters aircraft as well. The MQ-9 Reaper UCAV is a direct product of that project while the GA Avenger (MQ-11 ?) is a further follow on of the Reaper technology! Certain "black programs" are said to also be developing sensor and AI system to integrate into existing F16 and F18s as well completely stealth based full fledged Unmanned fighter operations- Possibly even future integration into the F35!
The French nEURON and the British Corax are also programs by those two respective countries to develop technology that can lead to full fledged unmanned fighter!

Gaur wrote: The problem is electronic warfare. How will you stop the enemy from jamming the comm and control systems?

Comm I understand but Control systems? EW systems jam external EM signals, while internally the fighters are protected against electromagnetic interference. So while a UAV might loose contact with its control center in a EW rich environment, it won't loose its altimeter, its velocity and heading indicators nor will it loose its primary command instructions or its navigated course so they can complete any pre-programed missions irrespective of the EW environment! For a fighter, even in a extremely EW saturated environment, today's powerful radars would not be blinded. Also, other instruments like FLIR and electronic optical tracking and tracking systems like ALERT and LIDAR etc can all be used to give an artificial system MUCH greater situational awareness than any human pilot could possibly contend with. Also, an artificial system would have a much faster response time to any potential threat scenarios and could theoretically simultaneously engage in a bombing run while maintaining a lock on a approaching aerial target. Not to mention the incredibly powerful and precise CAS it could provide ground units when compared to manned fighters.

The main hiccup should such an unmanned fighter loose contact would be the AI to control all these various systems and sensor inputs and deal with threats as they present themselves. Developing algorithms for various bombing scenarios and aerial engagement scenarios is also not a problem as it would be almost like designing a intricate chess program of steps and counters steps each weighted according the changing situational awareness. However, integrating these algorithms into an AI system that also gathers sensor information and has full situational awareness is the real challenge.

Gaur wrote: The solution is said to be fiber optics as they are immune to electro magnetic disturbance. The unmanned fighters would need to have fly by optics system with full fiber optics bus to connect all systems. This is a challenging tech. But more than challenge, the difficulty is cost. So until this tech is not mastered and more importantly made cost effective, unmanned fighters are not feasible.

Unless somebody is using a directed microwave weapon like the F22 raptor's "alleged" weapon, the risk of massive EM disturbance resulting in the loss of the aircraft is minimal.
Fly by optics/tv-guided/optically tracked/laser ranging systems is technology that was developed in the 80s and is nothing that is "new" or "remarkable". There are a dozen odd cruise missiles in use today by various countries that use these "optically" tracked systems to independently navigate and target. But these are pre-programmed and thus easily programmable, however, developing an AI command and control system to respond to dynamic threats in a dynamic situational scenario is the prime hurdle right now. However, as you can tell, this gap is already being closed steadily with more and more autonomous(robotic) systems.

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 22 Feb 2010 13:12

X-posting from the DEFEXPO2010 thread:

gogna wrote:
Gagan wrote: Amazing! Mind boggling possibilities.

PS: this resembles the flying robot in the movie 3 Idiots.
It is the same one, come on don't tell me you didn't know

Drone of '3 Idiots' could now serve Army, NSG; DRDO in talks

The so-called Netra UAV is apparently quite similar to something hobbyists in Europe are building for a fraction of the 18 lakh to 20 lakh price tag these guys are asking for (according to the above link! ).

Check out this link to a similar machine called Hexacopter, yet without computer control but pretty much the same features : http://vimeo.com/6194911
Website: http://www.mikrokopter.de/ucwiki/HexaKopter
Brochure : http://www.mikrokopter.de/ucwiki/MikroK ... ospekt.pdf

According to the website, he gives detailed instructions on how to build a very similar Quadro-copter (almost exactly like the Netra "UAV" ) in 4 languages along with the parts required. The details for construction and parts for the Hexacopter are also provided. The part list for the Hexacopter comes around 5000 Euros plus taxes. (which comes to about 3.5 lakhs in Indian rupees! ). A "Netra UAV" system would be cheaper! (vs the 18 lakhs asking price for the Netra! ) .

Apparently, there is also a Octocopter design along the same lines.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 22 Feb 2010 15:30

New Israeli UCAV which can fly to Iran and back!

Israel unveils unmanned drones which can fly to Iran
Israel's air force has introduced a fleet of pilotless planes that can remain in the air for a full day and can fly as far as the Persian Gulf, putting Iran within its range.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... -Iran.html

The Heron TP drones have a wingspan of 86 feet making them the size of Boeing 737 passenger jets and the largest unmanned aircraft in Israel's military. The planes can fly at least 20 consecutive hours and are primarily used for surveillance and carrying diverse payloads.

At the fleet's inauguration ceremony at a sprawling airbase in central Israel, the drone dwarfed an F-15 fighter jet parked beside it. The unmanned plane resembles its predecessor, the Heron, but can fly higher, reaching an altitude of more than 40,000 feet and remain in the air longer.

PS:Several UAV/UCAV designs resemble twin-boomed aircraft like our good old Vampires.I suggested a few years ago (to much laughter!),that we convert many of our old Gnats/Ajeets into "suicide bombers".I guess that several of our old mothballed airframes/aircraft could be used as UCAVs,even as we are using our old Chetaks as naval UCAVs,with Israeli help.Perhaps the time has come for us to look into our old inventory and make use of the hundreds of aircraft avaialble.In fact,there is one excellent supersonic type which is available in the hundreds and surely can be mass manufactured again because of available infrastructure,namely the MIG-21!

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 22 Feb 2010 22:16

Brando wrote: Also, other instruments like FLIR and electronic optical tracking and tracking systems like ALERT and LIDAR etc can all be used to give an artificial system MUCH greater situational awareness than any human pilot could possibly contend with.

Which system is this one?

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 22 Feb 2010 22:23

I hear you can fly some UAVs from the iPhone.

I wonder if this could grow into a security threat.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 22 Feb 2010 22:24

^^
Forward looking infrared.

Shubham · Post by **Shubham** » 24 Feb 2010 00:10

Brando wrote:Also, other instruments like FLIR and electronic optical tracking and tracking systems like ALERT and LIDAR etc can all be used to give an artificial system MUCH greater situational awareness than any human pilot could possibly contend with. Also, an artificial system would have a much faster response time to any potential threat scenarios and could theoretically simultaneously engage in a bombing run while maintaining a lock on a approaching aerial target. Not to mention the incredibly powerful and precise CAS it could provide ground units when compared to manned fighters.

The main hiccup should such an unmanned fighter loose contact would be the AI to control all these various systems and sensor inputs and deal with threats as they present themselves. Developing algorithms for various bombing scenarios and aerial engagement scenarios is also not a problem as it would be almost like designing a intricate chess program of steps and counters steps each weighted according the changing situational awareness. However, integrating these algorithms into an AI system that also gathers sensor information and has full situational awareness is the real challenge.

But these are pre-programmed and thus easily programmable, however, developing an AI command and control system to respond to dynamic threats in a dynamic situational scenario is the prime hurdle right now. However, as you can tell, this gap is already being closed steadily with more and more autonomous(robotic) systems.

Sometime back I too used to think that UCAVs are just all about developing a proper AI algo, but studying a bit about Artificial Neural Network opened by eyes

.

One main thing I would say is that as you mentioned that an Unmanned A/C will have lots of sensors to get data, but the point to note here is that what the sensors give is " just data " not " Information ". If the machine is not smart enough to "recognise" patterns from that data, it can't use it to arrive at decisions(on the other hand Humans "understand" patterns).

Secondly the chess game analogy seems odd to apply here, in case of chess you can apply heuristics and to perform incalculable number of all possible moves ahead in time and see which one does not lead to loss for you, but in case of a Real World situation, this can't be done, simply because there are not rules like in chess to evaluate your success or failure.

jaladipc · Post by **jaladipc** » 24 Feb 2010 01:04

Brando wrote:X-posting from the DEFEXPO2010 thread:

The so-called Netra UAV is apparently quite similar to something hobbyists in Europe are building for a fraction of the 18 lakh to 20 lakh price tag these guys are asking for (according to the above link! ).

Check out this link to a similar machine called Hexacopter, yet without computer control but pretty much the same features : http://vimeo.com/6194911
Website: http://www.mikrokopter.de/ucwiki/HexaKopter
Brochure : http://www.mikrokopter.de/ucwiki/MikroK ... ospekt.pdf

According to the website, he gives detailed instructions on how to build a very similar Quadro-copter (almost exactly like the Netra "UAV" ) in 4 languages along with the parts required. The details for construction and parts for the Hexacopter are also provided. The part list for the Hexacopter comes around 5000 Euros plus taxes. (which comes to about 3.5 lakhs in Indian rupees! ). A "Netra UAV" system would be cheaper! (vs the 18 lakhs asking price for the Netra! ) .

Apparently, there is also a Octocopter design along the same lines.

right!
But you cant compare a mil standard jam resistant data and up link to a hobbiest collection/invention.

last time i say a 1000 bucks UAV capable of carrying a .75 kg for 1 hr on ebay.
There is no commanality between these crafts apart from the basic physics and electronics that everyone use to build them.

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 24 Feb 2010 03:58

Shubham wrote: Sometime back I too used to think that UCAVs are just all about developing a proper AI algo, but studying a bit about Artificial Neural Network opened by eyes .

ANN is merely an approach towards working AI but practically, the results of NN systems are almost rudimentary. Most engineers actually use statistical models to better achieve a greater level of AI/automation than a purely NN approach. Especially in robotics, NN's have proven time and again to dissapoint when compared to statistical based algorithms that are more efficient and predictable, not to mention MUCH easier to work with!

Shubham wrote: One main thing I would say is that as you mentioned that an Unmanned A/C will have lots of sensors to get data, but the point to note here is that what the sensors give is " just data " not " Information ". If the machine is not smart enough to "recognise" patterns from that data, it can't use it to arrive at decisions(on the other hand Humans "understand" patterns).

I think we can all safely say that today's machines can safely convert 'data' to 'information' for individual sensors or even a group of sensors with little trouble since today's robots are capable of being launched into space, navigating inter planetary distances and navigating alien landscapes!
The main challenge is not recognizing patterns per say but recognizing "useful" patterns and generating adaptive control algorithms for dealing with these patterns and also statistically heavy tail phenomenon. Thus, the challenge of developing a competent AI.

Shubham wrote: Secondly the chess game analogy seems odd to apply here, in case of chess you can apply heuristics and to perform incalculable number of all possible moves ahead in time and see which one does not lead to loss for you, but in case of a Real World situation, this can't be done, simply because there are not rules like in chess to evaluate your success or failure.

My analogy was intentionally rudimentary to avoid providing a convoluted and confusing answer.
Today heuristics is the corner stone of any advanced robotic control system today. And while it may be imperfect, the probability of generating a similar solution (though suboptimal) provided the data set is reasonably valid can by no means be discounted. Naturally, heuristic systems of real world relevance are tempered by statistical data also.
However, in the case of UCAVs here, heuristics can readily be applied because the problem is not about reaching "success" or "failure" for infinite "moves" but rather ranking moves based on pre-programed statistical and analytical interpretations of a continuously generated situational data-set.

SriniY · Post by **SriniY** » 24 Feb 2010 09:17

http://www.popsci.com/technology/galler ... ure-drones

Excellent summary of 30 current and future UAV's

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 25 Feb 2010 15:18

Post-26/11, unmanned vehicles ignite interest

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 25 Feb 2010 22:25

Elbit manufactures UAVs, and has a good balance sheet and revenue/profit growth, but low profit margins. Research target to those interested in a possible investment.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 27 Feb 2010 23:32

Could Drones attack the US?

http://www.newsweek.com/id/234114/page/1

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 27 Feb 2010 23:41

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29oUc8Czdic

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 03 Mar 2010 01:27

Global Hawk Makes History With First Roundtrip Flight

Palmdale CA: Northrop Grumman's RQ-4 Global Hawk unmanned aircraft system (UAS) made aviation history Feb. 2 when it successfully completed its first roundtrip flight from the company's Palmdale, Calif., manufacturing facility. AF-20, a Block 30 Global Hawk built for the U.S. Air Force, performed the historic mission, soaring at altitudes of 58,300 feet for approximately four hours and 18 minutes.

"This was the first time ever that the same Global Hawk has taken off and landed in a single mission from Palmdale, heralding a new era of flights in and out of the facility," said George Guerra, Northrop Grumman vice president of High-Altitude, Long-Endurance systems.

Prior to this flight, two Global Hawks, AF-12 and AF-16, simultaneously flew historic missions on Dec. 14, 2009. AF-12, one of two Block 20 aircraft to be modified with the Battlefield Airborne Communications Node (BACN) Joint Urgent Operation Need (JUON) system payload, became the first UAS to land at Palmdale.

At the same time, the AF-16 aircraft, which will be equipped with an airborne signals intelligence payload, became the first Block 30 to fly out of Beale Air Force Base, where it is currently being used for training and for initial operational test and evaluation later this year.

Part of the Air Force's Objective Gateway program, BACN is an airborne gateway and communications relay system that enables warfighters to rapidly share data and information gathered by multiple users across multiple dissimilar systems present within the battlefield," said Guerra. "It is the top urgent operational need requested by field commanders and scheduled for deployment by the end of this year."

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 04 Mar 2010 00:02

NorthropGrumman Tells Indian Navy NRUAV Not Mature, Buy FireScout Instead