3 ms·

>Wondering why this had to be manually piloted versus automatically tracking Lack of skills, time and resources for a prototype project on such a short notice

>Wondering why this had to be manually piloted versus automatically tracking Lack of skills, time and resources for a prototype project on such a short notice and tight deadline? A team of 3 drone enthusiasts don't have DJIs resources to deliver on-device object tracking computer vison for the exact time Red Bull gives you public access to their new F1 car, considering they were struggling to even get the drone airborne and fly properly in the first place.

rurban 3y ago
Unconvincing. I've build road profile sequences (RPS) for F1 race tracks, and their timings stay pretty constant over the years. Such a RPS could be imported into their drone track SW easily, and then you won't need an expert pilot. Every car has that builtin for years. We also simulated driver profiles, so you could adjust them if they wont give you the real data.
- jcims 3y ago
  And then they run on a rainy day and everything is off. Rockets have an even more predictable trajectory and yet NASA with all its resources can’t create an autonomous tracker that isn’t filled with all sorts of stiff, robotic movements and corrections. I thought the filming was great under the circumstances. And the mix of wider and close shots was very informative and interesting. Just because a more perfect outcome can be imagined doesn’t imply it’s actually better.
- FirmwareBurner 3y ago
  >Unconvincing. I've build road profile sequences (RPS) for F1 race tracks Nice flex but your argument is unconvincing. Yes the track layout is well known and predictable, but you only get a few GOs with the F1 car on that track and there's a million ways your untested flight and computer vision tracking algos you set up in 3 days can backfire spectacularly, so why not stick to manual flight from a seasoned drone pilot who can handle all the edge cases?

rurban 3y ago

Unconvincing. I've build road profile sequences (RPS) for F1 race tracks, and their timings stay pretty constant over the years. Such a RPS could be imported into their drone track SW easily, and then you won't need an expert pilot. Every car has that builtin for years. We also simulated driver profiles, so you could adjust them if they wont give you the real data.

jcims 3y ago
And then they run on a rainy day and everything is off. Rockets have an even more predictable trajectory and yet NASA with all its resources can’t create an autonomous tracker that isn’t filled with all sorts of stiff, robotic movements and corrections. I thought the filming was great under the circumstances. And the mix of wider and close shots was very informative and interesting. Just because a more perfect outcome can be imagined doesn’t imply it’s actually better.
FirmwareBurner 3y ago
>Unconvincing. I've build road profile sequences (RPS) for F1 race tracks Nice flex but your argument is unconvincing. Yes the track layout is well known and predictable, but you only get a few GOs with the F1 car on that track and there's a million ways your untested flight and computer vision tracking algos you set up in 3 days can backfire spectacularly, so why not stick to manual flight from a seasoned drone pilot who can handle all the edge cases?