|
Post by Jim on Aug 21, 2013 19:13:03 GMT
|
|
|
Post by John on Aug 26, 2013 4:45:41 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Robert Berry on Sept 3, 2013 12:07:39 GMT
I'd like to know how kites compare with balloons as AP platforms. Some of the sites I have in mind are built-up and would probably be difficult/impossible to fly with a kite.
|
|
|
Post by John on Sept 3, 2013 15:37:06 GMT
Balloons are good in wind-free conditions and are used by another community group over in the USA (PLOTS). They even sell kits: store.publiclab.org/products/balloon-mapping-kitIt is the cost of helium that is a problem. You could always reduce this cost by flying small cameras on a rubbish bag, especially a £35 near infra-red HD video camera: www.armadale.org.uk/balloonphotography.htmIn many applications, image resolution is not critical. In a light wind, the line can be let out and the balloon released on the windward side of your site of interest. But, here again, buildings can cause turbulence. As you will know, near infra-red is widely used in environmental work. See PLOTS: publiclab.org/search/infragramAnother alternative is a kite-balloon hybrid, a helikite: www.allsopp.co.uk/but they are expensive.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Sept 3, 2013 18:18:20 GMT
I would like to add that trying to attach a normal camera and rig to a balloon set-up can present its own problems.
I have been known to fly delta style kites in very tight areas. These have been surrounded by trees, large trenches dug in the ground or around buildings. I would not recommend flying under these conditions unless you really know what you are doing and then it can be potentially dangerous. Buildings or standing structures can create updrafts of swirling air that can destabilise a kite quite easily.
In really tight or unsafe areas, I would suggest a pole or mast for safety.
|
|
|
Post by John on Sept 4, 2013 0:16:35 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Robert Berry on Sept 4, 2013 8:21:41 GMT
Quadcopter?
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Sept 4, 2013 8:37:31 GMT
Now we have entered a different realm altogether. These machines definitely have their place and that is in the hands of an experienced controller (in fact it should be two operators in case of failure). Yes, a quad or similar remote control device is ideal for built up areas, but again have their own problems. You need to be well versed with the craft and be able to fly it under different conditions. It should have a fail safe system to help bring it home if there is a problem (thats if you remember to turn it on). The battery life is generally short lived, whilst a kite/balloon system can potentially remain in the air for hours. The props on a quad are dangerous and can lacerate down to the bone if they connect with soft tissue. I could go on, but they do have their merits. They can be flown indoors and up close in areas where other technologies cannot enter. We do have quadcopters amongst our arsenal of airborne platforms and I have even built my own custom system that has GPS, waypoint logging and other lovely additions for the like minded techno nerds to glean over. Personally, I prefer the relative safety and enjoyment of kites as the primary lifting element.
|
|
|
Post by John on Sept 4, 2013 13:38:29 GMT
|
|
|
Post by John on Oct 15, 2013 15:51:12 GMT
|
|
|
Post by landmarks on Jan 11, 2014 17:54:18 GMT
Delighted with my new Standard kit- my first shoots with both kits attached ! Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Jan 14, 2014 22:26:07 GMT
Well done, you can only go from strength to strength, keep up the good work and have fun!!!
|
|