[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Paparazzi-devel] support of multiple UAVs? ... now with video link

From: Gautier Hattenberger
Subject: Re: [Paparazzi-devel] support of multiple UAVs? ... now with video link included
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2015 21:15:27 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0


You can also have at the multi-uav navigation modules already existing:

They are very basic collision avoidance based on a simplified TCAS logic and a simple formation flight controller.

You also add a "follow" ( and a "potential" modules not really documented (3D avoidance based on potential fields)

The major issue is that for now, all communications are relayed by the ground. It is not only laziness, we are using two messages class, one for downlink, one for uplink, so air-to-air communications is not completely obvious there...
But at some point, we also have to go in this direction.


Le 16/02/2015 18:31, Hector Garcia de Marina a écrit :

Thanks a lot for your exhaustive response!

Those features are quite hidden in the wiki I would say.

I already have some algorithms in 3D formation control that I would like to implement in PPZ.

I will take a more in depth look and ask for support/suggestion here about how to proceed.

Thanks again!

On Feb 16, 2015 5:28 PM, "David Conger" <address@hidden> wrote:
My apologies, forgot to include the video URL (also you can YouTube
search for "Paparazzi the free autopilot")


On 2/16/15, David Conger <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hello,
> From at least 2005 (when I first found Paparazzi) multi-drone control
> with a single GCS ground station has been working very well.
> Here is a video from 2007 showing a drone in Germany and another in
> France being controlled from Berlin Germany over a mobile Internet
> link.
> 2007!!!! ... can you imagine that's quite a long time ago in Drone
> years. No other open source project at the time even flew properly
> much less in a configuration anything like this.
> If there is a single drone to single GCS limit is it not Paparazzi GCS
> you are using. Possible one of the others? QGround Control?
> Even more interesting info about multi-drone flights:
> Paparazzi airframe configuration tool assigns an aircraft ID which is
> used by GCS to plot each aircraft with a different colored trace. As
> you fly each drone will have it's own color assigned. Full control of
> each is maintained via the same buttons and commands and a nice
> colored trace of the flight path is seen.
> Even more interesting is the security built in via a shared (aircraft
> and GCS) hash code. A hash is done at compile time that assures only
> the GCS with the correct hash code will send data to the aircraft that
> is accepted. If someone else runs Paparazzi and tries to control your
> drones the aircraft code will reject the messages as invalid without
> having the proper hash code. At the time even some (maybe all) of the
> military drones did not have this security.
> Note: For the flight you see in the video they had to share the hash
> code to the operators in Berlin.
> Imagine all the new features you find inside Paparazzi today (if you
> search) if this was circa 2005 I'm talking about now.  ;)
> It is expected few people outside Paparazzi (and many inside) still
> are not aware of so many powerful features inside. Everyone in a truly
> open project like this is more interested in coding and building vs
> marketing and selling. It's a good sign I think of a truly open
> project that you do not see so much marketing and hype to get you to
> buy something.
> What I have seen is the Paparazzi foundation is very cutting edge even
> today. Cutting edge things like Ivy, OCaml, run the risk of lack of
> adoption. Like Beta vs VHS for video tape wars a superior way to do it
> can fail to gain wide adoption. I encourage everyone to learn Ivy,
> learn OCaml vs trying to pull these powerful things out from under
> Paparazzi. They are not trivial to substitute or replace and are IMHO
> key components.
> Do not be misled by Apache IVY. Here is the Ivy inside Paparazzi:
> GCS is written in this (Caml):
> There are so many cool, useful, features in GCS. Sure it does not look
> like an F35 cockpit but look at the troubles complexity brings (joking
> about F35 problems). From day 1 I have followed other ground control
> stations and feel they are trying to be too much like an airplane
> cockpit. Drone control should not be like airplane control. You are
> interacting with it not flying it. GCS is what you need how you need
> it and flexible an extensible. Please review this:
> I hope this reply helps you to realize you have a lot of exciting new
> features to learn about with Paparazzi. Ones that exist now and are
> just waiting for you to learn and use now.
> I hope for any newbies or those on the fence watching Paparazzi that
> you have learned Paparazzi is the best project for real work
> yesterday, today and tomorrow. Maybe someday the others will catch up
> but I doubt it. Paparazzi is constantly evolving and adding new
> features. Now if only Parrot would adopt it and mention Paparazzi
> instead of QGround Control their product would be perfectly aligned
> for the new FAA rules. Imagine BeBop and ARDrones doing gas pipeline
> surveys, following miles of power lines and looking at the top of cell
> towers. Parrot has the capacity to delivery huge volumes quickly so
> should a major telco or power company adopt these they could get them
> in their hands quickly. :)
> Cheers,
> David B Conger
> On 2/16/15, Hector Garcia de Marina <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Hi guys,
>> I guess this is not new here. I was wondering if there was/is any effort
>> for integrating to the system more than one vehicle at the same time.
>> With integration to the system I mean monitoring and communicating to
>> multiple vehicles in the GCS and communication among vehicles without
>> passing to the GCS.
>> The objective is to perform some formation control. I guess this would be
>> interesting for certain scenarios where flying in formation is a
>> requirement or an improvement/advantage. The formation is not only
>> restricted to a platoon with a particular shape, but surveillance of an
>> area following a trajectory where the distance between vehicles has to be
>> constant or another applications.
>> This year I will have time for making efforts in this direction. But
>> since
>> I never took a look at the GCS, I do not know how difficult will be to
>> implement a "multivehicle" feature (or if there exists one already!).
>> In addition, what is the status of PPZ with ChibiOS? A new stable version
>> of ChibiOS is going to be released (3.0) with a lot of important changes
>> but I guess the PPZ branch is using 2.6.x right?
>> Cheers
>> --
>> Héctor
>> Webpage:
> --
> address@hidden


Paparazzi-devel mailing list

Paparazzi-devel mailing list

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]