3 ms·

The article mentioned that the operator has both hands tied up in order to control the craft, so there isn't much else they can do other than observe. Seems th

The article mentioned that the operator has both hands tied up in order to control the craft, so there isn't much else they can do other than observe. Seems that could be taken care of these days by using computer controlled fly by wire. The other big problem is high noise. So no that usable for reconnaissance. But with a half hour of flight time, and if it could be made to hold a couple passengers, it looks like something that would be useful for field evacuation use.

musingsole 7y ago
There are some better (where better==lighter, cheaper, less training) systems for field evacuation such as the Fulton surface-to-air recovery system: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulton_surface-to-air_recovery_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulton_surface-to-air_recovery... I'm sure a modern version of this system could solve the tied up hands problem, as you mention. Maybe it'd be a useful system for maintenance on a large craft like an aircraft carrier.
jandrese 7y ago
Needing to use both hands to control it seems like a problem that could be solved with some foot controls. Hardly a showstopping problem. Just have a little bike seat on a gimbaled pole that the operator sits on and a couple of pedals to control throttle and yaw. Of course it still has the problem of what you do with an expensive tiny platform that can't carry much if any cargo, makes a horrible racket, and is much easier to spot than a guy on the ground in a jeep.
cat199 7y ago
> ... other than observe. Seems that could be taken care of these days by using computer controlled fly by wire. not to mention that trigger buttons could easily allow more than just 'observation'...
evgen 7y ago
For a fun dive into the wild days that were early-50s aeronautical research, check out the Hiller Flying Platform [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiller_VZ-1_Pawnee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiller_VZ-1_Pawnee]. It was basically the segway of the skies. Bay-area folks can actually go see the original at the Hiller museum next to the San Carlos airfield.
overcast 7y ago
Why bother? Drone evacuation would serve the same purpose.

musingsole 7y ago

There are some better (where better==lighter, cheaper, less training) systems for field evacuation such as the Fulton surface-to-air recovery system: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulton_surface-to-air_recovery_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulton_surface-to-air_recovery... I'm sure a modern version of this system could solve the tied up hands problem, as you mention. Maybe it'd be a useful system for maintenance on a large craft like an aircraft carrier.

jandrese 7y ago

Needing to use both hands to control it seems like a problem that could be solved with some foot controls. Hardly a showstopping problem. Just have a little bike seat on a gimbaled pole that the operator sits on and a couple of pedals to control throttle and yaw. Of course it still has the problem of what you do with an expensive tiny platform that can't carry much if any cargo, makes a horrible racket, and is much easier to spot than a guy on the ground in a jeep.

cat199 7y ago

> ... other than observe. Seems that could be taken care of these days by using computer controlled fly by wire. not to mention that trigger buttons could easily allow more than just 'observation'...

evgen 7y ago

For a fun dive into the wild days that were early-50s aeronautical research, check out the Hiller Flying Platform [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiller_VZ-1_Pawnee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiller_VZ-1_Pawnee]. It was basically the segway of the skies. Bay-area folks can actually go see the original at the Hiller museum next to the San Carlos airfield.

overcast 7y ago

Why bother? Drone evacuation would serve the same purpose.