[NSRCA-discussion] Could this allow automated scoring?
John Gayer
jgghome at comcast.net
Sat May 9 09:50:25 AKDT 2015
Ground based GPS augmentation systems exist and have been tested.
However, I haven't heard about anything in our price range. Typically in
an airport environment, the ground based transmitter is broadcasting
corrections to the satellite signals rather than an imitation satellite
signal.
Standard micro GPS probably wouldn't know what to do with this signal.
Also the ground-based xmitter is not sized/priced for us.
However , it may not be necessary to go that route. If we could improve
on the 3 meter accuracy a bit and the 10hz update rate and expand the
storage capacity....
But rather than auto-judging, setting up a display showing the plan view
and vertical view graphically, perhaps with color shading to indicate
deviation from roll angle = 0 in realtime would be an incredible advance
in practice/coaching. Think about it.
In a square on corner, you would see directly the effect of the top
corner roll attitude being off 5 degrees and where that took the third leg.
John
On 5/9/2015 7:07 AM, Daniel Underkofler via NSRCA-discussion wrote:
> It's great to see technology like this approaching for at least
> partial automated judging.
>
> Seems that resolving the altitude component adequately is the largest
> challenge. To address this, I had envisioned a local set of 3
> "beacons", each emitting GPS-like signals that are received and
> processed by a transponder in the model. Yeah - expensive and even
> more out in the future.
>
> In the short term, using high resolution and update GPS to resolve XY
> location might be useful for partial judging. Human judges would still
> be responsible for the majority of the scoring, but a "correction
> factor" for XY errors might be factored in. For instance, it is
> terribly hard to judge the geometry of the horizontal triangle in F15,
> but given good XY data, a portion of the score could be addressed.
> Distance and parallelism to the runway could also be determined and
> factored in (somehow).
>
> Dan
>
> On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 9:33 PM, John Gayer via NSRCA-discussion
> <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>> wrote:
>
> The judges are expected to consider the track of the plane in an
> earth coordinate system. For example the judges are supposed to
> consider that a 45 degree climb appears steeper at the end of the
> box than it does in the center. So the track should be analyzed by
> the judges in an earth coordinate system and the track of the
> model rather than attitude.
>
> The location of the pilot is actually irrelevant but the location
> of the box is clearly of critical importance. Knowing the actual
> location of the plane with a fairly quick update rate is critical.
> At 120 feet/sec(approx 80 mph), horizontal position is no problem.
> At this speed you need an update rate of about 80 milliseconds to
> get a data point about every 10 feet. Not sure how good the GPS
> update rates are these days but this should be achievable. IF the
> altitude update rate is too slow then augment with an altimeter.
> Since we are downloading this data from the model, roll attitude
> could be transmitted as well for wings level.
>
> We would still need a zero judge for snaps, spins and stall turns
> and to establish when the pilot is lost in a maneuver. It might be
> necessary to have an "advance to the next maneuver" switch for
> that case.
>
> It would actually be a fascinating project to download
> accelerations, roll, yaw and pitch rates for analysis while
> observing snaps visually to see if standards could be established
> about what is a snap and what isn't.
>
> John
>
> On 5/8/2015 1:24 PM, Peter Vogel via NSRCA-discussion wrote:
>> Not by itself. Judging/Scoring is from the perspective of the
>> pilot + judges, not from the perspective of the plane. (As
>> opposed to IAC, where it's from the perspective of the pilot in
>> the plane). For it to be done right you'd need to know the
>> precise location of the plane and the precise location of the
>> pilot, then calculate the geometry of the plane's movements
>> relative to the perspective of the pilot's location.
>>
>> The SoloShot 2 automatic cameraman does close to what we want in
>> tracking the movement of the plane relative to a ground station,
>> but from that you'd still need to calculate geometries, and wings
>> level, etc.
>>
>> Peter+
>>
>> On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Keith Hoard via NSRCA-discussion
>> <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Cheap, Centimeter accuracy GPS <http://goo.gl/mZg6RG>.
>>
>> No more complaints about biased judging?
>>
>> -Keith Hoard
>>
>> klhoard at hotmail.com <mailto:klhoard at hotmail.com>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> <mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Director, Fixed Wing Flight Training
>> Santa Clara County Model Aircraft Skypark
>> Associate Vice President, Academy of Model Aeronautics District X
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> <mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20150509/9831c12c/attachment.html>
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list