Air Force's New Robot Can Fly Any Plane and Turn It Into an Autonomous Drone

ElPaso Pilot

ElPaso Pilot

En-Route
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
2,510
Display Name
Display name:
ElPaso Pilot
Elon?? Was this your doing??

WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Ohio – The Air Force Research Laboratory and DZYNE Technologies Incorporated successfully completed a two-hour initial flight of a revolutionary Robotic Pilot Unmanned Conversion Program called ROBOpilot Aug. 9 at Dugway Proving Ground in Utah...

“Imagine being able to rapidly and affordably convert a general aviation aircraft, like a Cessna or Piper, into an unmanned aerial vehicle, having it fly a mission autonomously, and then returning it back to its original manned configuration,” said Dr. Alok Das, Senior Scientist with AFRL’s Center for Rapid Innovation. “All of this is achieved without making permanent modifications to the aircraft.”​

https://gizmodo.com/the-air-forces-new-robot-can-fly-any-plane-and-turn-it-1837475043

https://www.robins.af.mil/News/Arti...ssfully-conducts-first-flight-of-robopilot-u/

ockwty4vpkkfjnxxwyoi.jpg
 
Why is he sitting right seat. Robot thinking he is Jason schappert.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
"Revolutionary?" No.

That is the old "Brick S417house" way of doing it. There are some more modern kits that install in minutes and weigh very little. The radios are the critical part of the system, but they aren't going to show you that!
 
Yeah, but can it dipstick the tanks before departure?
 
Makes me think of another thing. I wonder how well it copes if the planes characteristics change, IE: Runs out of fuel or has some sort of mechanical failure.
 
Don’t really see any benefits to this. You already have aircraft that fly completely autonomously without having a separate robot moving controls.
 
Velocity173 said:
Don’t really see any benefits to this. You already have aircraft that fly completely autonomously without having a separate robot moving controls.
Click to expand...
It's completely impractical, but let's say I got stuck up north and had to fly commercial back home. I could rent a robot and have it ferry my plane back home when the weather clears.
 
Salty said:
It's completely impractical, but let's say I got stuck up north and had to fly commercial back home. I could rent a robot and have it ferry my plane back home when the weather clears.
Click to expand...
that would probably cost you more than your plane
 
Salty said:
It's completely impractical, but let's say I got stuck up north and had to fly commercial back home. I could rent a robot and have it ferry my plane back home when the weather clears.
Click to expand...

And that robot will be driven to the airport in a fully autonomous Model 3.
 
Velocity173 said:
Don’t really see any benefits to this. You already have aircraft that fly completely autonomously without having a separate robot moving controls.
Click to expand...
It will fly an aircraft that lacks the avionics to fly autonomously. I'm certain the military has more than a few.
 
I worked on a project a few years ago that did the same thing with ground vehicles, a strap-on style kit that made anything driveable within an hour or two.
 
steingar said:
It will fly an aircraft that lacks the avionics to fly autonomously. I'm certain the military has more than a few.
Click to expand...

Well then equip the ones that can’t fly autonomously with avionics that will vs putting more money into a robot that isn’t needed.
 
Salty said:
I could rent a robot and have it ferry my plane back home when the weather clears.
Click to expand...

Why would the weather need to clear for a robot to fly it?
 
Velocity173 said:
Well then equip the ones that can’t fly autonomously with avionics that will vs putting more money into a robot that isn’t needed.
Click to expand...
One unit that can be moved between airplanes when they need the capability vs. multiple units in all airplanes in case the capability is needed. It's not a ready-to-field machine, it's technology development for operational flexibility.

Nauga,
dodging suitcases in the aisles
 
I already have that in my plane! I plugged it in, stretched out in the back... and awoke hearing it say:

 
Dammit - guess I better update my Starbucks barista application!
 
nauga said:
One unit that can be moved between airplanes when they need the capability vs. multiple units in all airplanes in case the capability is needed. It's not a ready-to-field machine, it's technology development for operational flexibility.

Nauga,
dodging suitcases in the aisles
Click to expand...

But they’re looking at converting many many airframes to an autonomous version. What’s the use at converting an aircraft to a temporary UAS then back to a manned system? And no way this robot conversion is going to be rapid.

Seems to me that a software package kit that you can hook up to existing airframes would be a better option than installing a cumbersome robot. I think a package that’s embedded in the airframe with FBW would have a better survivability vs the robot as well.

 
Last edited:
Velocity173 said:
Seems to me that a software package kit that you can hook up to existing airframes would be a better option than installing a cumbersome robot. I think a package that’s embedded in the airframe with FBW would have a better survivability vs the robot as well.
Click to expand...
From the AFRL release: "...rapidly and affordably convert a general aviation aircraft, like a Cessna or Piper, into an unmanned aerial vehicle..."

What's your rough estimate of the cost, weight, and time to fit, say, a 172 and a Warrior with a full-authority FBW system that adds no weight when piloted as compared to a single removable system capable of operating either through unmodified flight controls?

Nauga,
who has done more than the math
 
Puts on tinfoil hat to be first to say black flag event with small GA aircraft...
 
nauga said:
From the AFRL release: "...rapidly and affordably convert a general aviation aircraft, like a Cessna or Piper, into an unmanned aerial vehicle..."

What's your rough estimate of the cost, weight, and time to fit, say, a 172 and a Warrior with a full-authority FBW system that adds no weight when piloted as compared to a single removable system capable of operating either through unmodified flight controls?

Nauga,
who has done more than the math
Click to expand...

Yeah but their test aircraft (C172) isn't going to be their end state customer. A military aircraft will be far easier to convert to an autonomous system vs an old C172. They already have autopilots so the brains and muscle (servos) are already ready to adapt. The current UH-60M essentially can fly an entire mission without a pilot touching the controls and it’s not FBW.

I imagine equipping an aircraft temporarily with a robot would be cheaper than a software kit but I don’t see the operational benefit. No way the install / removal process would be “rapid” enough for a fluid battlefield. I think the logistics involved in quickly transitioning from a manned platform to an unmanned one, favor the Sikorsky Matrix concept.
 
Here's the video of the first flight. 1968 Cessna 206.

Looks like the programmers have it set up to fly like a student on first solo as well.

Only kind-of tracking the centerline on takeoff, as well as bouncing it in on the landing. :D

 
I'm sure that's not the final product. The current RoboPilot looks like it would be heavier than a human pilot. I think with some neural network training, and artificial intelligence, it could do a lot better than the first solo.

It's probably in the right seat because they trained it using a pilot sitting in the left seat.

I think, though, that a FBW RoboPilot would work better and be faster to enable/disable
 
there are better executions....google "Aurora ALIAS" and read more about them.
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
there are better executions....google "Aurora ALIAS" and read more about them.
Click to expand...

I think AFRL’s selling point is that their system costs less than an ALIAS type system. Whether that’s true or not or they could even meet their claims of it being rapid and universal, remains to be seen. Also, hard to tell by the wording in the article but it sounds like they’re trying for a low cost drone by weaponizing a small GA aircraft. Another lofty assumption that I don’t see happening.

I can maybe see this robot going into a single mission platform like MC-12 ISR but I don’t see the AF or any other service giving up manned ISR anytime soon.
 
Velocity173 said:
I think AFRL’s selling point is that their system costs less than an ALIAS type system. Whether that’s true or not or they could even meet their claims of it being rapid and universal, remains to be seen.
Click to expand...
*Everything* about these programs remains to be seen, including cost and actual CONOPS/CONEMP. It's technology development, not a fielded system.

Nauga,
who has more than one basket
 
Aurora has flown that system on numerous platforms....to include a 737 simulator.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top