Hi Roman, Hi everyone,
I don't know either Gator team or Peter Ifju so I don't
know if they're involved in OpenJaus.
For my knowledge of JAUS the standard is an US DoD
spin-off tought for military Unmanned
Veichles (it started for
Unmanned Ground assets and then it's been generalized to generic
In my company we're going to use it to open-up the
communication protocol of our UV.
I think this's a good starting point to open further
Paparazzi structure of course keeping under
control the complexity and the
overhead of a multipurpose protocol.
Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 8:38 PM
Subject: Re: [Paparazzi-devel] Thoughts about the
very good find! Do you know if this is done by Gator team and Peter
Ifju? I was not aware that they are involved with this kind of through software
spec development. Or may be it's not them..
I think, the spec is so high-level and general that at the current
stage, any autopilot will fit or can be made to fit. Well, unless they will try
to specify format of the node-level-and-below messages.
2010/6/23 Michele Santucci <address@hidden>
even if this thread is apparently closed I would
encourage anyone interested in GCS development
I personally think that Paparazzi already have a
good GCS and reliable protocol but IMHO keeping
in touch with the efforts of creating a standard it's
never a bad idea.
Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2010 3:43 PM
Subject: [Paparazzi-devel] Thoughts about the
I have been observing the communication on the development board with
regards to the future Paparazzi GCS development and the OCaml programming
I have my deepest respect for the work Pascal has done on the GCS and
Paparazzi in general. Now that we have lost him I gradually start to
comprehend the enormous hole he has left behind and the implications of using
a programming language for the GCS that is not widely adopted.
As I understand the basic problem for future Paparazzi GCS development is
the lack of OCaml programming skills that are present in the community. At the
same time in the worldwide open source UAV communities there is a stronger and
stronger desire for defining open standards for UAV <-> GCS
communication and provide an open GCS development platform. Is there a
common solution to both problems?
I do not know! However, while surfing the internet I came across
from the PixHawk
team that tries
to provide open standards and a general UAV GCS (everything written in GPL-ed
framework). I understand there would be quite a
lot of work to transition the Paparazzi system to another GCS (reintegrate
communication protocol, rewrite the generation of control parameters from the
airframe file, etc.). But maybe in the long run the Paparazzi community and
open source UAV communities in general could benefit from using a common GCS
I would love to hear your thoughts and opinions about the future
Paparazzi GCS development options.
Thank you and kind regards,