Good luck with Project Wing, Google. This drone moonshot is NEVER going to happen

Re: You've got it all wrong....

Why is everyone forgetting that they started the 3D mapping years ago?

www.androidcentral.com/google-maps-adds-more-3d-buildings-more-cities

Re: Alternatively ...

I also worked for a company that had a nearly fully automated warehouse 10 years ago. They ditched it for a much larger space in a union-unfriendly state where large numbers low wage workers of sometimes questionable provenance do all the work manually that was once accomplished through sophisticated automation. I'm sure that there were solid business reasons for making that change (for example, the relative cost of installing and maintaining effective automation), but have sometimes wondered if there might be other explainations.

Re: I would like 1 bag of skittles

Yeah, most of the "problems" mentioned in the article are overstated. 3D mapping? No real need as long as the drone has an adequate sensor array onboard which should also take care of most of the obstacle issues.

The real problem is going to be physical security. Google and Amazon are going to be real bummed when less savory types start knocking their drones out of the air, not only for the device itself but also for the goodies inside!

It's definitely not an insurmountable problem. When it comes to spotting overhead wires a human helicopter pilot, with good eyesight, is likely to have a lot of other things to be looking at instead such as instrumentation, distance, other craft and so on that spotting something thin and very close to their flight path isn't likely to be easy and human eyesight really isn't really suited for flight at even 50mph. However for a drone system a near space high resolution sensor of some form (optical, radar, etc) shouldn't have a problem spotting them and it then becomes a task of whether or not the drone is able to avoid them.

I wouldn't really consider that such drone delivery systems are useful for urban environments, but where there is a lot of unpopulated space with sparse settlements, a drone delivery system could be useful.

@Gene Cash

"I don't have a pre-mapped view of the local mall, but I still manage to not run into anything."

In fairness, you do have some of the most sophisticated sensing, interpretation, positioning, path-finding and error-correction software imaginable, all running on hardware developed and refined in parallel over millions of years and exquisitely tuned to work together seamlessly. You also have access to a vast store of comparative information that works with unbelievably versatile pattern-matching software to identify all manner of objects in the environment, supplemented with an unequalled ability to infer the properties of objects by observation of their behaviour and vice-versa.

Further, the whole package is capable of near-spontaneous self-improvement and efficient learning routines which enable you to not only deal with new situations in suitable ways but also improve the efficiency of any subsequent approaches the similar problems.

There is nearly no engineering or software problem that can't be solved to get drones delivering packages - the issues becomes the ability to do so without spending many, many times more than the benefit gained.

As one poster said, above, the trick is to get the environment suited to the use. That is clearly not the case for this proposal so a better option would seem to be the continued development of self-driving cars. Once this is sufficiently advanced, efficient delivery vehicles could be designed.

That has many benefits, not least of which is that the investment is already there - both in the infrastructure (roads) and the technology. You also have a much broader range of packages that can be transported so your investment has broad use.

There is of course the problem of actually getting the package into the customer's hands but considering the issues presented in the article of the increasing density of populations and the types of dwellings we inhabit (i.e. apartments), this is no more problematic for a self-driving vehicle than a drone. As it will be near-impossible to take the parcel directly to the recipient, the recipient must meet the delivery part-way.

The only added concerns for a vehicle above a drone would be package selection and dispensation once at the destination and parking.

Re: Argument from personal incredulity

Actually, it's not from personal incredulity - his considerations are valid because Google was not stating it was aiming at Ebola deliveries in a desert - in a more dense population this is indeed madness, and not just for the arguments mooted.

This drone project shows precisely the same deficiencies as their self driving car project: an assumption that somehow maps will magically update themselves to local circumstances. I wonder why - have they discovered that creating enough intelligence to deal with issues on the fly will deprive them of the sort of live information they can sell? What if someone has just put up a washing line, what are they going to do, buy local politicians to ban that?

Sorry to drone on (cough), but there is another question I have: let's assume for a moment that the irrational has happened anyway and Google drones are now all over the place. Who is responsible for checking the payload? What if some crazed idiot sends a parcel with bio weapons or some fun stuff with a timing device? Come to think of it, sounds like a potential for a self driving car as well - jack the thing and send it on its way.

I am not inclined to welcome anything new as revolutionary until I'm sure it cannot be abused by revolutionaries..

Re: And the other side of the story?

That would require research and reporting no? Do we get that here?

Re: And the other side of the story?

Chris, as a journalist I take it you have asked Google how they intend to go about those various questions you raise.

AC, may I suggest that, as a reader, you investigate the concept of the "editorial"?

Re: Why?

The US Gov ( and others worldwide ) doesn't want shit loads of these things buzzing about up there, so Google realises this and wants to get in there first. They can then provide a delivery service to others for a huge fee. If Amazon, UPS, Fedex, et al can't get their own licenses, Google are on to a nice little earner and imagine Google getting their grubby mitts on all that logistics data? Goldmine!!

Re: Why?

Perhaps the article is mixing things up. It would be Amazon that would need to learn about landing sites and so on, but for Google, I would imagine this would be a way to augment their mapping data without having to resort to cars. It would likely depend on the ownership of airspace where they intend to fly these things.

Re: Why?

> but what does Google get out of it?

I can't imagine any reason at all why Google would be interested in being paid to collect a continuous feed of low altitude high resolution images of populated areas....

Re: Why?

Surely it's obvious? They would get the same out of it as Ford do selling trucks and Boeing do selling aircraft. They would simply sell either the technology, the drones themselves or the rights to use the technology, or would sell the delivery service itself to the likes of Amazon.

Re: The task is impossible

Impossibru.jpg

Re: The task is impossible

Which are more tiresome - those who insist that something is impossible, or the sophomores who always contradict them with this particular argumentum ad verecundiam?

Re: Please remember that this is America.

I predict Google's next purchase will be a company specialising in armour plating. Or perhaps camouflage (aka "blue paint").

_{Seriously? It will be sending live data back to Google. Shoot it down and your mug shot will be emailed to law enforcement. And thereafter there'll be one less gun nut on the street. Everybody wins!}

Re: Stated Goals

First and foremost. . . Not a big fan of Google for a variety of reasons--Its decreasing ability to deliver relevant results to my searches being at the top, followed by privacy concerns, and with envy being admittedly somewhere not too far down the list.

The point made in "Stated Goals" that there will be situations where the technology will be suitable and others where it won't is spot on. "Where it won't" is more likely to be driven by economic and legal considerations than technical. Ultimately it will come down to a cost/risk/benefit analysis on the part of providers (Google will not be the only one using the technology), customers, government (wait a minute, we can TAX the use of these suckers!), and a myriad of third parties.

Some random thoughts: Ordering a $5.00 magazine sounds like a cool way to acquire a sophisticated drone to get the parts.

Just because you can land a drone on top of my apartment doesn't mean that the owner is going to allow folks to go traipsing willy-nilly across the roof. (Flat roofs are prone to leak and are damnably expensive to repair.)

For any level of operability in urban areas, figuring out liability and insurance is going to take a while. We've had the technology for doing unmanned air transport for decades, and it hasn't happened.

For the same reason even for rail transport--arguably about as constrained an environment as one can get--unmanned operations are only common in situations like theme parks and airports, where the entire environment is under ownership and control of a specific entity.

Again, I'm anything but a fan of Google. But, in this case my impression is that the hyperbole in the article looks more like the writer's than Google's.