Drones Get In-Flight Wireless Charging

AlphaAtlas

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
1,713
Now drones don't even need humans to change their batteries, according to the Russian company GET. Their wireless charging stations can deliver 12 kilowatts of power at 80% efficiency to multiple drones hovering within the station's perimeter. GET says the system is portable, and envisions multiple "loops" being set up to allow drones to perform long range missions without ever having to switch batteries.

Check out the video here.

GET is the world leader in distance wireless power transmission. An electrically powered drone can recharge and fly indefinitely via efficient safe high power in-flight rapid recharging in a GET power hotspot. The company’s distance wireless charging technologies uniquely enable drone delivery and many other industrial applications.
 
It woulda been cooler if it looked like this.

It's still neat though. Are stretches of road next for electric cars?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aix.
like this
I hope they've got their failsafe measures in place for their power plants for the added load if/when these get rolled out en masse. Wouldn't want a repeat of 1986...
 
It woulda been cooler if it looked like this.

It's still neat though. Are stretches of road next for electric cars?

I so wish we could have more WipeOut games now that we have such amazing tech...WipeOut XL was ahead of its time in speed, scope, and in all aspects of design. Imagine if we had an online AG racing league akin to F1 on steroids...maybe someone will make something like it if/when VR really takes off.
 
I so wish we could have more WipeOut games now that we have such amazing tech...WipeOut XL was ahead of its time in speed, scope, and in all aspects of design. Imagine if we had an online AG racing league akin to F1 on steroids...maybe someone will make something like it if/when VR really takes off.

They've made several. The latest one came out in 2017, which is a remaster of the previous two before it.

Honestly though, all the wipeouts since XL just aren't as good as XL was.
 
I don't understand whats happening at all in the video
The drone hovers, then all these words appear also to be hovering and flying around, and then the drone flies off
Where are the fancy graphics showing energy waves and arrows etc
Terrible promo video
3/10
 
They've made several. The latest one came out in 2017, which is a remaster of the previous two before it.

Honestly though, all the wipeouts since XL just aren't as good as XL was.

I honestly didn't realize they'd made any after the horrendous WipeOut Fusion on PS2; the series was basically dead to me after that as it appeared they'd lost the everything that made the first 3 titles good (gritty graphics, super speed) in favor of making it all about the weapons/combat. I haven't owned a console since then though so I guess that's probably why.
 
I could imagine this being extremely useful for remote SAR- drop unmanned 'base stations' about that can use drone sensors to finely comb an area. Only needs to be a bit bigger than your average DJI to carry a barrage of sensors that could find just about anything, especially if it can stream that data back to the base station for sorting and storage- or transmission further back for more processing. Could even give the drones small comm devices to hand out.

And 12kW? That's a lot of power!
 
Guess I don't see a benefit of this compared to having the drone land and be wirelessly charged. Maybe over water?
 
3 things that make this stupid.

#1 Wireless charging is inefficient. You'd probably need 10x more power used to recharge that drone instead of plugging it in. This may work if electricity is cheap, but still not environmentally friendly.
#2 It's stationary and running at the same time. I feel that it can be recharged faster by just having it land and turn off, and have some guy named Diego go up to it and plug it in. Or just have it land on some contact metal points like your Romba does. Either way wired charging is probably faster.
#3 Again it's stationary, so why does it need to be running? If you're using drones for a business, I imagine having them run for an extra 6 minutes while charging will wear down their lifespan.
 
imo this is more for a security drone setup.



10 mile perimeter would need 8 drones for a 3 minute per passby setup (one way loop-16 for 2 way loop with a pass every 90 seconds)
 
Guess I don't see a benefit of this compared to having the drone land and be wirelessly charged. Maybe over water?

Having a few 'pedestals' for the drones to land so that they can turn of their propellers would make sense; I assume that they didn't do this because they wanted to show off how far they could push this technology, and being over water where the base station is moving quite a bit might be a reasonable application, assuming the drone can avoid the charging infrastructure while staying within the charging zone enough to actually get a charge. Maybe it takes a few more minutes.

Wireless charging is inefficient.

They're claiming 80%. I think that they may be pushing it a little, at the very least, and I'm inclined to be skeptical as well, but what if they did get it close?

and have some guy named Diego go up to it and plug it in. Or just have it land on some contact metal points like your Romba does

I'm going to assume that their marketing use-case includes installations where having maintenance personnel would be prohibitive, likely due to cost. Could just be too remote, or could be dangerous. Also, they're claiming that it is weather proof- direct contact means exposing conductors, which would not be weather proof, especially for something that is marketed as cost efficient.

Again it's stationary, so why does it need to be running? If you're using drones for a business, I imagine having them run for an extra 6 minutes while charging will wear down their lifespan.

That'd be a big question: what about battery life?
 
I wonder if it's microwave transmission,(longer distance but much less efficiency) or local inductance through magnetic fields? (Have to be much closer but much more efficient)

Truth is you can stand under a major power line with a CFL tube in your hand and make it glow. But the amount of voltage required for the distance is rather absurd for practical use.
 
Having a few 'pedestals' for the drones to land so that they can turn of their propellers would make sense; I assume that they didn't do this because they wanted to show off how far they could push this technology, and being over water where the base station is moving quite a bit might be a reasonable application, assuming the drone can avoid the charging infrastructure while staying within the charging zone enough to actually get a charge. Maybe it takes a few more minutes.



They're claiming 80%. I think that they may be pushing it a little, at the very least, and I'm inclined to be skeptical as well, but what if they did get it close?



I'm going to assume that their marketing use-case includes installations where having maintenance personnel would be prohibitive, likely due to cost. Could just be too remote, or could be dangerous. Also, they're claiming that it is weather proof- direct contact means exposing conductors, which would not be weather proof, especially for something that is marketed as cost efficient.



That'd be a big question: what about battery life?

I can see a practical use. While on the ground they are sitting targets for sabotage. Hovering above a hidden charging station might be of practical use. And staying in the air keeps "gaps" from surveillance coverage from happening. But then again, you could buy two and alternate them.

But if they have to recharge, they don't have much a choice but to stay stationary. That's like being a chopper pilot running low on fuel who has to land while taking fire. It's not a pretty situation. But if you alternated landing points while near 2/3rd charge, you could fly to an alternate landing site that might not be as dangerous.
 
3 things that make this stupid.

#1 Wireless charging is inefficient. You'd probably need 10x more power used to recharge that drone instead of plugging it in. This may work if electricity is cheap, but still not environmentally friendly.
#2 It's stationary and running at the same time. I feel that it can be recharged faster by just having it land and turn off, and have some guy named Diego go up to it and plug it in. Or just have it land on some contact metal points like your Romba does. Either way wired charging is probably faster.
#3 Again it's stationary, so why does it need to be running? If you're using drones for a business, I imagine having them run for an extra 6 minutes while charging will wear down their lifespan.

It's not a good design. Landing pad chargers have existed for 2 years for the application this is aimed at. It seems they may have taken and adapted from another system (Magne Charge) designed for electric vehicles, as the specs line up a tad. It's a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

The problem with this is; as you pointed out; there's no point in the drone remaining airborne. It's stationary at a dock. It might as well land on a quick/smart charging pad equipped perch where the camera can remain operational and charge more efficiently. If both charging methods are compared, losing 20% efficiency on top of having to also power the drone is going to up the charge time a good amount.
 
Wireless transfer of power is great...


...as long as no biological matter you care about gets between the transmitter and the receiver :p
 
3 things that make this stupid.

#1 Wireless charging is inefficient. You'd probably need 10x more power used to recharge that drone instead of plugging it in. This may work if electricity is cheap, but still not environmentally friendly.
#2 It's stationary and running at the same time. I feel that it can be recharged faster by just having it land and turn off, and have some guy named Diego go up to it and plug it in. Or just have it land on some contact metal points like your Romba does. Either way wired charging is probably faster.
#3 Again it's stationary, so why does it need to be running? If you're using drones for a business, I imagine having them run for an extra 6 minutes while charging will wear down their lifespan.

early precursor tech for
1. mobile charging station. Think about mobile stations mounted on half-tracks / towed which can be placed underneath heavy canopy cover = no need to grub clearance for landing.
2. shallow burrow and cover for charging stations. Can be placed in strategic locations pre-conflict, extracted during conflict, all with high effective camouflage . Resistant to snowfall , sandstorm ...
3. installing this on support planes / heavy lift helicopters = extended persistent usage of a single drone, reducing need for shift change. Same thing for sea and submarine drones, which is up and coming

--without all that wires hanging about that is ...
 
Last edited:
Another utterly stupid idea. Why hover wasting power? Why not just land near the charging station?
 
early precursor tech for
1. mobile charging station. Think about mobile stations mounted on half-tracks / towed which can be placed underneath heavy canopy cover = no need to grub clearance for landing.
2. shallow burrow and cover for charging stations. Can be placed in strategic locations pre-conflict, extracted during conflict, all with high effective camouflage . Resistant to snowfall , sandstorm ...
3. installing this on support planes / heavy lift helicopters = extended persistent usage of a single drone, reducing need for shift change. Same thing for sea and submarine drones, which is up and coming

--without all that wires hanging about that is ...
1. If there is enough room for a half track there is enough room for a drone to land.
2. can you even charge the batteries faster wireless than you're discharging them by hovering? You can camouflage a landing pad, as opposed to camouflaging this.
3. If you already have a support plane there just launch another drone instead of charging while wasting fuel and flight hours.
 
1. If there is enough room for a half track there is enough room for a drone to land.
2. can you even charge the batteries faster wireless than you're discharging them by hovering? You can camouflage a landing pad, as opposed to camouflaging this.
3. If you already have a support plane there just launch another drone instead of charging while wasting fuel and flight hours.

1. canopy above ie rainforest theater. Better ability to restore location to native conditions to reduce tracking. Improved flexibility and options for commander
2. mobility with min prep ; less physical work on drone, the better. Not only hover over land, but over sea, swamp, mangrove, mudlands (ie difficult terrain). Improved flexibility and options for commander
3. drone numbers are limited. Having two operational at the same time is better than one . Drone in flight do not need to compensate for return flight. Improved flexibility and options for commander
 
Back
Top