Re: [Paparazzi-devel] question about paparazzi on sounding rocket

[Eric Parsonage]

Chris 

you should let the open pilot people know what progress you have made on their 
behalf too.

Eric




On 15/02/2012, at 3:23 PM, Chris Gough wrote:

>> So either Chris is selling to WMD producers and/or the missile programs of 
>> evil
>> governments, or he just went the extra mile to cover his own ass.  
>> Unfortunately,
>> he basically filed papers with the government suggesting he wanted to sell a
>> potentially dangerous product to known or suspected enemies of the 
>> government.
>>  Asking them to approve something like this puts them in a possition where
>> they're forced to then try and cover THEIR asses.  No surprise that it was 
>> denied
>> for some time.
> 
> That's only sort of how it went down.
> 
> There is a big list called "prohibited export list". Aviation
> autopilots is on that list, under "Category 2, dual-use goods" (not
> "Category 1, WMD"). It's a pre-existing list that exists in Australian
> law, and aviation autopilots are on it, period. Dual-use goods means
> they are not designed to be weapons, but could be re purposed to make
> a mean one never the less. Many of the listed dual-use things are
> substances, not devices.
> 
> So, I contacted the regulator's help desk and asked them if an
> open-source autopilots for unmanned vehicles fitted the definition and
> was a prohibited export. They said "probably yes, but a definitive
> answer requires a technical assessment".
> 
>> It would probably be wise to stop calling the hardware PPZ boards and start 
>> calling them
>> "available hardware upon which PPZ can be run".  I'm sure there are plenty 
>> of things you
>> could do with the boards other than use them as an autopilot.  Adding a 
>> section on how
>> they can be used as generic robotics platforms or RC car/boat controllers 
>> might go a long
>> way towards avoiding them being tied directly to what can essentially be 
>> viewed, from a
>> military perspective, as a missile guidance system.
> 
> I did all that in my submission for technical assessment. The assessor
> didn't care about names of things or alternate uses, they were
> concerned with some very specific capabilities - stabilising rocket
> launches, terrain following navigation, ability to navigate at high
> speed / altitude, and a few others. The assessor was a technical
> person who seemed to know about missiles and exactly what he was
> trying to avoid.
> 
> At the end of that process I was told it definitely is a prohibited
> export under the law, but I was not discouraged from applying for a
> permit or licence.
> 
> The licence application assessor was concerned with "who and where".
> The key concept here was "sensitivities". This is mysterious by
> definition. I started by asking for permission to export everywhere
> without a publicly listed sanction, and got told "no, because of, um,
> sensitivities". I basically went through a binary search, adding and
> removing countries to get past these "sensitivities" without being
> told what or where they are. When they realised I was navigating
> sensitivities systematically they dropped a few hints to speed the
> process up. In a few cases, pointing out academic institutions known
> to use paparazzi helped (but not with Brazil, firm No). Eventually we
> came up with a list of 33 non-sanctioned countries unencumbered by
> "sensitivity" wrt the nominated hardware.
> 
> We also iterated over administrivia (record keeping, customs
> compliance, etc) until she was happy it could be approved on technical
> grounds. It was refused, but as far as I can tell the guy who did the
> initial technical assessment stepped up and escalated the decision for
> me, until eventually it was approved.
> 
> If anyone else wants to go through this or a similar process I'd be
> happy to help them out as much as I can. Specifically, my
> administrative processes for maintaining "bad lists" (people you
> should really make sure you don't have any dealings with)  and
> screening orders against were critical to approval, I can probably
> give you a decent head-start there. Also, my list of 33 countries is
> probably a good starting point.
> 
> Chris Gough
> 
> 
>> -Jake
>> 
>> 
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Chris Gough
>>> Sent: 02/14/12 04:26 PM
>>> To: address@hidden
>>> Subject: Re: [Paparazzi-devel] question about paparazzi on sounding rocket
>>> 
>>>> You have to wonder what genius brought any of this to there attention!!!
>>> 
>>> It was me Eric, and I stand by my decision (but rumors of my genius
>>> are greatly exadurated :).
>>> 
>>> I can understand your reaction though, it's certainly tempting to
>>> ignore the regulation/regulators (and hope that if it blows up on
>>> someone, that someone isn't me). These are the reasons I chose
>>> "permission" over "forgivness":
>>> 
>>>  * worst case scenario is life-ruiningly bad
>>>  * compliance is not especially onerous, they make an effort to facilitate 
>>> it
>>>  * proactive assessment is more likely to be favourable than reactive 
>>> assessment
>>> 
>>> Political pressure to "clamp down" on some sort of incident is a
>>> threat to everyone invested in open-source autopilots (how likely? I
>>> don't know. What impact? possibly severe). I think the reason it took
>>> a long time to get a licence was because they were initially
>>> reluctant, they might have had pre-concieved ideas about high tech
>>> aerospace being the exclusive domain of large companies. My case was
>>> eventually escalated to the top-most beurocratic comittee (joint
>>> meeting of heads of department - defence, foreign affairs and trade,
>>> science and industry). It's good for everyone that they now have more
>>> realistic ideas about open source autopilots, they eventually did
>>> grant the licence.
>>> 
>>> I have been approache by people in countries under UN Security Council
>>> sanction, promising a bulk-orders as an incentive to participate in
>>> scheems to pass the restrictions. The regulators take a keen interest
>>> in these events. The don't seem interested in making a nusance of
>>> themselves to scientific, industrial or recreational robotics. A
>>> person with more insight to the process than me suggested there was a
>>> strong motivation to avoid international/diplomatic embarassment (in
>>> the event of any kind of incident).
>>> 
>>> For various reasons, I suspect they use some sort of "Ayres
>>> Braithwaite compliance pyramid".
>>> 
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_risk_differentiation
>>> 
>>> I figured it was best to demonstrate "willingness to do the right
>>> thing" and "managerial control capability" of the regulated risks, so
>>> that they would find me a "low risk client" and chose an "enforced
>>> self-regulation" approach. Better for me, good precedent too.
>>> 
>>>> Perhaps in Australia hardware that could possibly run Paparazzi should be 
>>>> given another name.
>>> 
>>> That could just make it "off licence", so I'd need additional
>>> permission to export it.
>>> 
>>> I know, I know, <target ... board="pc">. They are not idiots, put
>>> yourself in there shoes; risk of diplomatic embarassment vs.
>>> willingness to comply + managerial control... better things to worry
>>> about.
>>> 
>>> Chris Gough
>>> 
>>>> On 15/02/2012, at 12:17 AM, Chris Gough wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 12:27 AM, Florin Mingireanu
>>>>> <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>>> Does this imply that UAVdevboard and Ardupilot Mega are also under 
>>>>>> MTCR/ITAR
>>>>>> or there is something special to paparazzi that places it under 
>>>>>> MTCR/ITAR?
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm not aware of any reason why paparazzi hardware would be "a
>>>>> dual-use good" and the other open source autopilots would not be.
>>>>> 
>>>>> But the assessment process is opaque. Maybe they just didn't like my 
>>>>> shoes :)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Chris Gough
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 3:22 PM, Chris Gough <address@hidden>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The best thing about open source software an hardware (at lease with
>>>>>>>> GPL) is
>>>>>>>> that it is outside of MTCR and ITAR restrictions.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I have formal advice contradicting this from the Australian Defence
>>>>>>> Department (Defence Export Control Office).
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Their technical assessment found that paparazzi autopilot hardware is
>>>>>>> a "dual-use good" under MTCR. It took me ~9 months and >20 submissions
>>>>>>> to get a license to export it.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Don't piss them off, they have a big stick.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Chris Gough
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPad mini.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 14/02/2012, at 11:58 PM, Florin Mingireanu
>>>>>>>> <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> One way to do it is to not attempt any inertial correction during the
>>>>>>>> burn.
>>>>>>>> After the burn out roll/yaw/pitch stabilization can commence. You don't
>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>> a high g environment anymore. Also it helps if the rocket is inherently
>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>> planned to roll fast...
>>>>>>>> In this case I could see that an open source autopilot (like paparazzi)
>>>>>>>> could do the task of stabilizing the vehicle.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Florin
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Bernard Davison
>>>>>>>> <address@hidden>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> The nominal burn time for the motors is 0.8-1.25 seconds.
>>>>>>>>> The 3" Sighter and the 5" Zuni motors have pretty similar burn times.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> We launch them at an angle of 70 degrees so they always land several
>>>>>>>>> kms
>>>>>>>>> away from us.
>>>>>>>>> It also helps protect us when the student payloads break off. Which
>>>>>>>>> happens from time to time with some of the designs.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>> Bernie.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPad mini.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On 14/02/2012, at 11:48 PM, Florin Mingireanu
>>>>>>>>> <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> How long does the burn take? 2-3 seconds?
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>> Florin
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Bernard Davison
>>>>>>>>> <address@hidden>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> The launch is >70G ;-)
>>>>>>>>>> The thing goes from a compete standstill to >Mach 2 in 1 second.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> The rockets we usually use are surplus defense motors.
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.asri.org.au/SSRP
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> We did have a payload once that was going to try and maintain a lock
>>>>>>>>>> throughout the flight but it got buried. :-(
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>> Bernie.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPad mini.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On 14/02/2012, at 11:41 PM, Florin Mingireanu
>>>>>>>>>> <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Why doesn't the GPS keep lock during the ascent? I have seen GPS data
>>>>>>>>>> loggers for high power rocketry that keep lock during the ascent. 
>>>>>>>>>> What
>>>>>>>>>> type
>>>>>>>>>> of GPS module do you use?
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Florin
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Bernard Davison
>>>>>>>>>> <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Yep standard civilian GPSs have been flown. They lose position of
>>>>>>>>>>> course
>>>>>>>>>>> at launch but do acquire solution after the main parachute opens.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Also the MEMS accelerometers have been flown and data logged.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> The major problem we've always faced is knowing what went wrong when
>>>>>>>>>>> things don't work and the thing is buried 5m underground and the
>>>>>>>>>>> rocket has
>>>>>>>>>>> turned itself into metal confetti.
>>>>>>>>>>> We've worked out what we believe  Will be a survivable data storage
>>>>>>>>>>> module. Hopefully to be tested in the next year or so.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> At the moment were breaking the Lisa/L board up into smaller
>>>>>>>>>>> components
>>>>>>>>>>> and designing them to be rugged. I.e. positive locking connectors
>>>>>>>>>>> isolation
>>>>>>>>>>> on some switches and comms. Etc.
>>>>>>>>>>> We're also breaking the board into discrete task based "nodes" that
>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>> communicate via redundant CAN bus connectors. So in the future it
>>>>>>>>>>> would be
>>>>>>>>>>> possible to have a failure tolerant system. I.e. if you have a
>>>>>>>>>>> failure of a
>>>>>>>>>>> transceiver node, IMU node, flight computer node, CAN bus. Then it
>>>>>>>>>>> could use
>>>>>>>>>>> another node on the network.
>>>>>>>>>>> Of course that would need the appropriate software to be written for
>>>>>>>>>>> that kind of control.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>> Bernie.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> address@hidden
>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> address@hidden
>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Florin Mingireanu
>>>>>>>>> Romanian Space Agency
>>>>>>>>> Str. Mendeleev 21-25, et. 5, sector 1, 010362 Bucuresti, ROMANIA
>>>>>>>>> office tel. +40-21-316.87.22; +40-21-316.87.23;
>>>>>>>>> cell: +40-757-768971 (primary phone)
>>>>>>>>> fax +40-21-312.88.04
>>>>>>>>> address@hidden
>>>>>>>>> http://www.rosa.ro
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
>>>>>>>>> address@hidden
>>>>>>>>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
>>>>>>>>> address@hidden
>>>>>>>>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Florin Mingireanu
>>>>>>>> Romanian Space Agency
>>>>>>>> Str. Mendeleev 21-25, et. 5, sector 1, 010362 Bucuresti, ROMANIA
>>>>>>>> office tel. +40-21-316.87.22; +40-21-316.87.23;
>>>>>>>> cell: +40-757-768971 (primary phone)
>>>>>>>> fax +40-21-312.88.04
>>>>>>>> address@hidden
>>>>>>>> http://www.rosa.ro
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
>>>>>>>> address@hidden
>>>>>>>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
>>>>>>>> address@hidden
>>>>>>>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
>>>>>>> address@hidden
>>>>>>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Florin Mingireanu
>>>>>> Romanian Space Agency
>>>>>> Str. Mendeleev 21-25, et. 5, sector 1, 010362 Bucuresti, ROMANIA
>>>>>> office tel. +40-21-316.87.22; +40-21-316.87.23;
>>>>>> cell: +40-757-768971 (primary phone)
>>>>>> fax +40-21-312.88.04
>>>>>> address@hidden
>>>>>> http://www.rosa.ro
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
>>>>>> address@hidden
>>>>>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> .
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
>>>>> address@hidden
>>>>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
>>>> address@hidden
>>>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> .
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
>>> address@hidden
>>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
>> address@hidden
>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> .
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel