5 ms·
> Good for them? I did this in 2010 using a G1 phone as a controller. By an extremely liberal interpretation of "this", perhaps. What's your pet peeve? That y
by enneff 12y ago
> Good for them? I did this in 2010 using a G1 phone as a controller.
By an extremely liberal interpretation of "this", perhaps.
What's your pet peeve? That you did something vaguely similar a few years ago? Someone did it before you, too.
- Chronic29 12y agoThe pet peeve is that Google does not deserve this attention.
- enneff 12y agoChronic29, who is hellbanned, replied "The pet peeve is that Google does not deserve this attention." I'd like to know who else has built and successfully trialled tail-sitting autonomous flying vehicles. This stuff is awesome!
- spiritplumber 12y agoI was in Italy at the time - no flying stuff allowed in town. So I built a small autonomous truck instead. Also, thanks for downvoting a post with link to source and schematics, whoever you are.
- enneff 12y agoJust speculating here—I didn't downvote—but I suspect it's because you're being an egomaniacal ass.
- spiritplumber 12y agoSounds fair to me :) In that case if you must downvote, downvote a post of mine that doesn't have useful/relevant content. I know I'm burning a lot of points on this one, but the fact is, I wasn't any more of an egomaniacal ass than the guy I talked to who tried to frankly pretend my work didn't exist. And, this site working how it does, most of the value is in the comments -- why downvote something with (maybe tangentially) related links to open source software/diagrams that other people can use? This is HACKER news, correct? (Now watch me get downvoted to oblivion just because I am standing up for what I think and backing it up as rationally as I can manage)
- enneff 12y agoNext time you could try dropping the disparaging tone ("Good for them?") and just stick to the facts "I did something like this a few years ago..."
- spiritplumber 12y agoI see how that could be seen as disparaging, in English.
- robotresearcher 12y agoFirst demo of autonomous hover of a fixed wing UAV was by Paul Oh et al of Drexel in 2006. http://dasl.mem.drexel.edu/alumni/bGreen/www.pages.drexel.edu/_weg22/fwHovering/fixedWingHovering.html http://dasl.mem.drexel.edu/alumni/bGreen/www.pages.drexel.ed... https://www.microstrain.com/sites/default/files/Autonomous%20Hovering%20of%20a%20Fixed-Wing%20Micro%20Air%20Vehicle.pdf https://www.microstrain.com/sites/default/files/Autonomous%2...
- enneff 12y agoFascinating stuff! I wish the video links still worked. :-/
- asynchronous13 12y agoAre you sure that was the first? When I was at Georgia Tech we were doing that in 2005 :-) there's some videos online http://uav.ae.gatech.edu/wiki/uavrf/movies http://uav.ae.gatech.edu/wiki/uavrf/movies Look for GTEdge transition to or from hover in the video descriptions. (We probably weren't the first either...)
- robotresearcher 12y agoFair enough! Oh's paper claims priority :) Could be publication delay or a mistake. Same era, so the time had come for that work.
- Florin_Andrei 12y ago> By an extremely liberal interpretation of "this", perhaps. Well, the "this" operator is overloaded, just like in C++.