MIT profs create autonomous UAVs

Creating a robot that can manage to fly around a room on its own without hitting a wall is a mean feat to pull off, but that's exactly what a team of professors at MIT have managed to do. Their multiple-UAV test platform is capable of complex tasks like following moving ground-based objects with little or no direct control from a human -- yup, unfortunately that geek dream of a cockpit will no longer be required if these guys get their way. The current test setup is made up of $700 four-rotorblade helicopters, monitored by networked computers, which could theoretically allow a single person -- or even a bored student with an internet connection -- to control several UAVs at a time. Current flying drone systems require a team of trained personnel to keep a single UAV airborne and on target, so this endeavor is certainly a step up in software terms. How well the test system will transition from tracking radio controlled cars in a lab to lets say, a stolen car going at 125MPH, remains to be seen.

Read - Videos of the UAV in action
Read - The Boston Globe

[Michael Parker McEachern @ Nov 26th 2006 7:45PM]

is it just me, or is there a string attached to it?

[StevO @ Nov 26th 2006 7:50PM]

lol theres is
or maybe its a radio antenna

i definitely read the title as "MIT profs create autonomous UFOs" when i clicked

[Karl @ Nov 26th 2006 8:00PM]

Fantastic! I can't wait until I can setup my own automated home security patrol. But when will they invent miniature men? Karl -- http://www.karlblog.com/

[Kevlar @ Nov 26th 2006 9:11PM]

I think you need one of these... http://www.chibi-robo.com/

[Rich @ Nov 27th 2006 7:07AM]

One of my friends worked on this project over the summer and when I noticed the picture in the story, I realized that the guy on the left actually flew us up to Maine for the afternoon (in a normal size plane, not an autonomous UAV). It's a very cool project and I don't know if they've already accomplished it, but these things are supposed to be able to stabilize themselves and reposition themselves over a target even when they've got high-speed wind gusts coming at them.

[phill @ Nov 26th 2006 8:33PM]

This UAV reminds me far too much of the manhacks flying around trying to decapitate Gordon Freeman in Half-life 2. Students on campus be wary!

[XiozTzu @ Nov 26th 2006 8:58PM]

Sadly, the two researchers were mauled when the string broke. Ouch!

News at 10

[Colin @ Nov 26th 2006 9:31PM]

either StevO is right and the 'string' is an antennae, or it could be a safety tether.

[Jypson @ Nov 26th 2006 9:04PM]

Two baby birds begging for their daily dose of nerd juice from the mothership.

[micrors4racer @ Nov 26th 2006 9:43PM]

Looks surprisingly like the draganflyer thing at
http://www.rctoys.com/index.html

[Zack @ Nov 26th 2006 9:48PM]

They didnt invent this, it has been done and marketed:

http://www.rctoys.com/rc-toys-and-parts/DF-VTI/RC-HELICOPTERS-DRAGANFLYER-VTI.html

They are just copying something that has been invented already.

I knew i seen this somewhere, its called the Dragonflyer.

[cagedog @ Nov 26th 2006 9:51PM]

It's all fun and games until THIS happens: http://tinyurl.com/y8ym8x

[Zack @ Nov 26th 2006 9:52PM]

i concur, these are more advanced because they can search out things on thier own, I was merely stating that the actual design has been done.

[Chimera @ Nov 26th 2006 11:43PM]

Zack, the point of this is that the two guys created an *autonomous* UAV. This most certainly has not been done before (although, I'd be willing to bet that skunkworks has one somewhere...)

You might as well call a self-driving car simply a re-hash of the Ford Model-T.

[micrors4racer @ Nov 27th 2006 12:43AM]

Well me and Zack were just stating the basic platform of it was already designed they just automated it. Awsome either way.

[1984 @ Nov 27th 2006 1:03AM]

I, for one, welcome our autonomous UAV overlords.

BTW - It's not a string, it's an antenna.

[KerryB @ Nov 28th 2006 2:43PM]

"Creating a robot that can manage to fly around a room on its own without hitting a wall is a mean feat to pull off, but that's exactly what a team of professors at MIT have managed to do."

Is it bad that I'm more interested in the usage of the word "mean" by Conrad than I am in the story itself (only partly true, I'm a fan of UAVs)?

Conrad says "a mean feat", which initially made me think he was misusing the common phrase "no mean feat" in which the word "mean" is used in the old fashioned sense of "base" or "low" or, in this context, "simple" or "inferior". Thus, if something is "no mean feat," then to acomplish it is difficult.

But then, "mean" can sometimes be used to refer to excellence. Dictionary.com (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/mean definition 2, sense 11) uses the example "He blows a mean trumpet," which seems as good a choice as any.

So, was Conrad thinking of the latter, or am I right in thinking he made an error attempting the more common usage?

I know, more likely than not, no one cares about the ramblings of a pedant, but at least I've amused myself.