5 ms·

I don't think it's the cost of the plane that is the limiting factor here. You might be underestimating the difference between this type of R/C plane and a mil

I don't think it's the cost of the plane that is the limiting factor here. You might be underestimating the difference between this type of R/C plane and a military-class drone like a Predator. One of the more difficult challenges to overcome is the range of the communication link between the pilot and the plane. This guy demonstrated a range of mile or so. For many of the kinds of military uses that would have the "big impact" you're talking about, the plane would need over-the-horizon range-- which as a practical matter would mean satellite-based comm. So basically you need satellite launch capability to support this kind of project. The cost of that would be a limiting factor.

danparsonson 16y ago
I wonder how technically difficult it would be to utilise 3G mobile phone networks for cheaper remote control?
- rthomas6 16y ago
  Probably not TOO hard, but the main issue there is the communication would not be reliable enough for something real time that had a low failure tolerance, like controlling a plane. If some packets got dropped and had to be re-sent, it could mean that the plane crashes if the communication was some sort of emergency time-critical maneuver.
  - aaronblohowiak 16y ago
    "it could mean that the plane crashes if the communication was some sort of emergency time-critical maneuver." You don't need a very quickly-responding plane to have a large impact on military tactics.
  - wmf 16y ago
    That's where the autopilot comes in.
  - rdtsc 16y ago
    The plane would have to be programmable and would have to support a semi-automated flying mode. Then there won't be a need for a high-capacity realtime data stream. But then the plane would have to have obstable avoidance, auto-pilot, and it must return back to within radio range if it flies too far.
- yummyfajitas 16y ago
  Far more difficult than deactivating/destroying the cell network.
  - tibbon 16y ago
    Deactivating AT&T's 3G network just requires more than 10 iPhones in one room :)
rdtsc 16y ago
Perhaps one could launch a tethered helium baloon with the antena and thus increasing the range ? Or in the city one could deploy a bunch of radio relay stations and create a mesh. Then I guess it all depends on how automated the plane is. If it is able to track terrain, can stabilize itself and can be programmed to fly a round-trip mission, there might not be a need for a constant realtime radio link to it. I can see configuring a flight & surveilance plan, launching it and just waiting for it to complete its mission then return, in a complete radio silence mode.
- cosmicray 16y ago
  > Perhaps one could launch a tethered helium baloon with the antena and thus increasing the range ? I used to know this guy that did something very very naughty back when he was a budding teen (late 1960s). He ordered a weather balloon from Edmund Scientific, filled it with helium, then attached an entire roll of heavy duty institutional grade aluminum foil to it. He then let it go... off the west coast of Florida. MacDill saw something on the radar, and sent a few fighters up to see what it was. Somehow they tracked it back to him (possibly via Edmund) and he got a serious talking too, and then some.

danparsonson 16y ago

I wonder how technically difficult it would be to utilise 3G mobile phone networks for cheaper remote control?

rthomas6 16y ago
Probably not TOO hard, but the main issue there is the communication would not be reliable enough for something real time that had a low failure tolerance, like controlling a plane. If some packets got dropped and had to be re-sent, it could mean that the plane crashes if the communication was some sort of emergency time-critical maneuver.
- aaronblohowiak 16y ago
  "it could mean that the plane crashes if the communication was some sort of emergency time-critical maneuver." You don't need a very quickly-responding plane to have a large impact on military tactics.
- wmf 16y ago
  That's where the autopilot comes in.
- rdtsc 16y ago
  The plane would have to be programmable and would have to support a semi-automated flying mode. Then there won't be a need for a high-capacity realtime data stream. But then the plane would have to have obstable avoidance, auto-pilot, and it must return back to within radio range if it flies too far.
yummyfajitas 16y ago
Far more difficult than deactivating/destroying the cell network.
- tibbon 16y ago
  Deactivating AT&T's 3G network just requires more than 10 iPhones in one room :)

rdtsc 16y ago

Perhaps one could launch a tethered helium baloon with the antena and thus increasing the range ? Or in the city one could deploy a bunch of radio relay stations and create a mesh. Then I guess it all depends on how automated the plane is. If it is able to track terrain, can stabilize itself and can be programmed to fly a round-trip mission, there might not be a need for a constant realtime radio link to it. I can see configuring a flight & surveilance plan, launching it and just waiting for it to complete its mission then return, in a complete radio silence mode.

cosmicray 16y ago
> Perhaps one could launch a tethered helium baloon with the antena and thus increasing the range ? I used to know this guy that did something very very naughty back when he was a budding teen (late 1960s). He ordered a weather balloon from Edmund Scientific, filled it with helium, then attached an entire roll of heavy duty institutional grade aluminum foil to it. He then let it go... off the west coast of Florida. MacDill saw something on the radar, and sent a few fighters up to see what it was. Somehow they tracked it back to him (possibly via Edmund) and he got a serious talking too, and then some.