This morning I headed out to do a test flight with the 3DR Solo. I have to say - I was suitably impressed!

We flew with a GoPro in fixed position, rather than using a gimbal, so I can't comment about gimbal stability. But I liked the way the camera could be easily moved from looking outwards to downwards (pre-flight), while still feeling like it would hold its position during flight.

Some of the features that I particularly liked were:

• The box it comes in! Nice and sturdy, one of those ones that you don't want to throw out. Which is great, because it will do the job for transportation until you figure out which Pelican case or similar you need in the longer term
• The batteries. OK, propriety is a bit of a pain, and they are rather expensive, but their charge is easy to check with some lights on top, and they click in so smoothly to the upper body of the platform
• The centre-default throttle, which is great for holding altitude
• The integrated tablet holder, so you can use the Tower app at the same time as flying (annoying the app is not for iOS though)
• Flat propeller profile - makes them easy to pack away
• As with the Iris+, the idiot proof set up with the propellers having matching colours and icons to show which way to turn them to tighten - even my 4 year old can set this up without instruction
• The information screen is really easy to read and informative! Even with polarising sunnies on, it was super clear to see
• The option to add different payloads is a huge plus. We're looking to integrate a spectrometer, so I'm definitely keen to put this to the test
• Changing between manual and automatic flight is very easy with the Tower app. I definitely recommend two operators though. 'Unmanned' airborne vehicle is a bit of a misnomer!

There are only a couple of minor things where there is room for improvement in my opinion:

• Would like to see the front and back of the platform in different colours like the Iris+. The lights can't be seen during the day, so it's impossible to tell which way it's facing. Having said that, coloured or not, it's nearly impossible after it gets a little further away anyway, so I guess this isn't big issue.
• I felt a little limited with the flight modes. I'm used to being able to flick a switch to change between loiter and alt hold, then RTL for example. That could be done from the tablet but I don't want to take my eyes off the aircraft and controller to switch. Might just take some more experimenting.

With the fixed Go Pro, I flew for approximately 16 mins on a single battery, landing at the recommended 20% charge. There was a light breeze and I wasn't really working it hard, so I expect that this is the upper limit of flight time.

Two years ago I bought a dJI s800 for a complete package of around $10K. It came in a dodgy half broken cardboard box with no balance charger or power supply. Yet it was considered 'ready to fly'. The batteries allowed for five minutes of flight time before four hours of charging. Flight planning was difficult, and it was near impossible to extract the telemetry details post flight. The technology has come a long way since then!

The 3DR Solo is certainly 'off the shelf' technology that can be purchased from Harvey Norman or similar. It set my colleague back about $2K for the platform, spare battery, android tablet, and Go Pro. Certainly a worthwhile investment for extending field survey range, and scaling up to satellite data.

There are a heap of other features that I didn't check out in this preliminary test. But it certainly exceeded expectations in the areas I considered. They have clearly done a lot of work in making the design as polished as possible, and it has paid off with user experience. This really can be used by a complete novice. CASA has an interesting challenge ahead to deal with regulation against increasing accessibility of these devices.

My husband is heavily involved in the sporting industry. While he works across a range of different areas, one of the things that he especially enjoys is mentoring coaches. He was telling me recently about the difference between an athlete learning technical vs. tactical skills on the sports field, and I realised that the importance of this is no different for students in my classroom.

Describing the difference between tactical and technical is easy using a sporting analogy. As a kid, I learnt judo. I suppose that I was technically rather good - I rapidly progressed to the capped level of brown belt (under 11's) and I still remember having to perform 16 throws and five hold-downs to achieve this. But put me on the dojo for a competition and I didn't win a single fight. Why? Because I hadn't been taught tactically about how to deal with different situations and different opponents. I had no ability to translate my technique into fight winning tactics.

The relevance for tertiary education? How often do we ask students to regurgitate information in the same way that I rote learned my 16 throws? Will that arm them with the skills to perform in the workplace? In my analogy example - not necessarily. That's not to say that there is no place for technical learning. I certainly needed to learn the variety of throws, but what I missed was a deep understanding of how they could be applied. This would have made me more adaptable to any situation that was presented.

As the penny dropped on this particular example for me, it reminded me just how important it is to teach using problem based learning (tactical) approaches. In my classes, I tend to offer the technical learning as 'flipped' tasks, while my in-class activities are designed to foster more tactical learning (see 'My recipe to flip, not flop' and 'How to make sure your class isn't a flipping hell'). By presenting students with a range of different scenarios, I hope that I am helping to develop their skills and confidence in tactical problem solving. Hopefully they will be ready to face the reality of the workplace - or the 'fight'.

I love teamwork, especially sports. But to be honest, whenever I’m at a workshop and the facilitator asks the participants to get in a group, my inner self groans. Yet I don’t let this stop me from setting group tasks for my students! Why? Because I know that we learn better in social situations. And I know that the strong students will learn more from explaining things to the weaker students. And I know that the output of the whole should be greater than the sum of the parts. But clearly these things aren’t enough to create the enjoyable learning experience that’s intended.

So I know why it's good to work in a group, and these same benefits apply to teams. But what’s the difference?

While out cycling the other day (when I do my best thinking) I had a bit of a light bulb moment. It comes down to the cliché – there’s no I in team. Ok, so it may appear there’s not one in group either, but I’d like to propose that it’s an insidious invisible I.

A team has a common purpose or cause that they all buy into, and this creates cohesion. Team members join together to reach a goal that they chose. Conversely, I think that a group is still just a bunch of individuals. A group may have one or more of the following critical differences:

-          Purpose or goal is not identified;
-          Members didn’t choose the purpose or goal;
-          Members don’t believe in the purpose or goal

The other thing that I think benefits teamwork is the appeal to competitive natures. When we are competitive, we are striving to achieve our best. When we are at our best, naturally it’s more enjoyable.

But what’s the ‘so what factor’ for me? I want to optimise the level of learning and enjoyment that my students or workshop participants experience. Subconsciously I think that I incorporate many of the good aspects of ‘team’ in the activities I set. But I can certainly do more. And I'm going to remember these points and test out my theory next time I create a team activity.

Over the past two days, I attended a workshop on UAS and remote sensing. It was sponsored by TERN / Auscover and was a great opportunity to share experiences with other researchers interested and active in the discipline. In many respects I consider myself a pre-schooler in this field and I wasn’t sure that I had a lot to contribute, but I was certainly willing to learn!

One of our activities was to discuss the current regulatory environment. In Australia, this is controlled by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) and can be challenging to navigate. It was comforting to know that I am not the only one grappling with working my way through the system. Given the complexity of it, I thought that it might be useful to cover some of that here for any new players.

In all fairness, CASA is dealing with a rapidly changing technology and is doing its best to keep up. But with legislation that is more than ten years old, the current state of UAS is well beyond it. We are anticipating some changes in the near future, but until these are released, we must work within the bounds of the current rules.

Here’s what we know:

1.       All remote pilots must abide by the following (unless exemptions are given – though these take time and money to request):
a.       No flight within 3NM of an airport or helipad
b.      No flight within controlled airspace
c.       Maximum altitude of 400 ft above ground
d.      Minimum distance of 30 m from people and property
e.      Maintain unaided (i.e. no binoculars) visual line of site of the craft
f.        Have a minimum of 5 km visibility (this is enough to stop people operating in bushfires, there is no need for a separate ruling here)
g.       Daytime flight only
h.      No flight if the clouds are lower than 1000 ft

Many people knowingly or otherwise violate these regulations and can certainly be fined by CASA for doing so.

2.       If you are flying for any reason other than sport or recreation, the following also apply:

a.       Individuals must complete RPAS training including a radio operator’s licence (AROC), English proficiency, theory and practical testing, and five hours logged flight. This covers flight for platforms with a maximum take of weight (MTOW) <7 kg. Estimated total cost $5,000 per person, five days training
b.      Additional manufacturer’s training per person, potentially including ‘heavy lift’ for >7kg platforms. Estimated total cost $250 - $2,000 per person, half day to multiday training
c.       Operator’s Certificate – This is required for the Organisation, but is given to named individuals as the Chief Controller and Maintenance Controller. Note that this is a challenge if staff turnover is high, as a new OC will need to be sought if these positions change. Compile and submit organisational documents and procedures to CASA, 3 hr practical exam and 2 hr oral exam. Follow up audits at 9 months and 3 years. Estimated total cost $10,000

Note that the costs given above do not include staff time, so the investment is significantly greater than this. There are some other interesting points to consider as well if heading down this route:

1.       CASA certification process may take up to 1.5 years given the current waiting times
2.       The OC is given for a specified platform only. So if you add to your ‘fleet’, you need to re-apply to CASA to have your new platforms listed and tested.
3.       With more than one platform, the regulations state that you must employ a full time Chief Controller – i.e. this is the only job that they do. You can apply for an exemption to this though if only flying small (<150kg) platforms. This restriction would otherwise be prohibitive for small business for example.

Finally, aside from formal regulations, there are other items to include in your reality check when considering whether or not UAS applications are for you:
1.       Must invest time and money into continual training and flight practice for your pilots
2.       Preferably find an easily accessible location to fly and train without having to go miles away
3.       Not everyone can be a pilot even if they have been trained – some people just aren’t cut out for it, therefore you may lose on some of your investment
4.       Need to keep a redundancy in people, platforms, and sensors to ensure your business can keep running
5.       Have to ensure all maintenance and flight logs are appropriately documented (prepare to be audited)
6.       Purchase Ozrunways mobile app for aeronautical charts and radio frequencies

We estimate the overall start-up cost at around $200K-$250K to be operational, including staff time and training, certification, base platforms. The long term benefits hard to quantify, but in some cases this is the only technology that will provide the answers you need.

By comparison, around $2K per day + a mobilisation fee might get a commercial company to do the job for you… But most likely that would only be with a standard RGB camera. If you want to use thermal, hyperspectral, or LiDAR it would be another story. If you’re interested in hyperspectral sensors, have a look at my blog about the current options.

I wrote this not to deter new comers from entering the field, but to provide a realistic point of view so that it’s possible to make an educated decision about the real costs involved. It's not all sunshine and puppies! And I haven't really touched on the steep learning curve associated with flying and developing workflows for data analysis. It really needs to be someone's baby that they are fully dedicated to making work!

I wonder how this process is going to change over the coming years? Surely it's got to become cheaper and easier.

Thanks to all of the other workshop participants for the discussions that formed the basis of this blog.

I'm currently evaluating a range of hyperspectral sensors, intent on flying one from a small UAV. Surprisingly, I have a few to choose from and more are coming into the market. I thought that it would be most useful to compile a table of sensor specs to make it easy to compare and contrast my options. Some of the characteristics of the sensors below are deal breakers for me, but they might still work for your application. So I'm not providing any recommendations here, just a compilation. Hopefully it will save you some time doing the same! Please let me know if I have made any errors.

I'll be presenting this tomorrow at the International Symposium for Remote Sensing of the Environment in Berlin. It's part of my story to demonstrate that building a UAS capability is not exactly straightforward! I'm really looking forward to presenting as I have the objective not only to share the knowledge that I have gained in this process, but also to seek the expertise of others. 

I'm hoping to be able to initiate a discussion around the collective trials and tribulations of those working with this technology. Here's hoping the audience is willing to step out of their traditional role of 'information absorbers' to actively participate in what I have planned. I've opened a back channel on Today's Meet to facilitate the discussion. I've used this technique with varying degrees of success in my classes, but this is a first for me to experiment with it in a more formal situation. I have no idea if the conference goers will want to play, but I'm certainly curious to see how it goes down! Just another way that my research is benefitting from my teaching.

In my parallel life, I am a group fitness instructor. I teach high intensity interval training (HIIT) and I LOVE it. I love both the activity itself, but also the style in which I teach it. Short, sharp, and with lots of hard work and energy. I can't wait to get to the gym to teach, and I am buzzed afterwards.

At some point not so long ago, I wondered why I was a little less enthused for teaching my university classes. And that's when I realised that the traditional lecture is the equivalent of a long, slow, jog. Booooring. There are certainly some educational benefits if the students are able to maintain concentration, but they are just as likely to get caught napping and fall off the back end of the treadmill. As this penny dropped, I realised that my university classes could never be the same again.

Somehow, I needed to get aspects of the HIIT concept my lecturing. HIIT is supposed to be the fastest, most efficient way to get fit. Could the same be true for learning technical content? 

So I turned to my gym choregraphy notes. I looked at the workout sequence and changed my lecture plans to follow a similar structure. I created interval based learning activities - one problem based activity for each key learning objective. My flipped classroom structure also helped here.

My 'lecture' class now starts with a warm up – a simple, confidence building activity. As the class progresses, the activities get harder and more intense. They are fast and furious. Moving. Doing. Seeing. Touching. Debating. Presenting. Problem Solving. Experiencing. And to cool down? Reflecting.

Freely available online tools have been a key in helping me create the collaborative interactive learning space in my classroom. I have listed many here in my conference paper on this same topic that I am presenting next week at the International Symposium for Remote Sensing of the Environment (Berlin, May 2015).

Yes, this class has taken me a lot of effort and planning to set up. But now it's so much more fun and rewarding to teach! How many other university subjects start with Speed Dating? For my students, this is an integral ice breaker.

I challenge anyone reading this (if anyone ever does!) to have a go at HIIT in their academic teaching. I'd love to hear of your results. Please refer to my paper for more details, and also have a look at the poster below.

In 2013 I was fortunate enough to spend two months working from NASA Ames in Mountain View, California. Personally and professionally this one of the most memorable experiences of my life. There will never be enough time to give my glowing reports of my entire time there, but there was definitely one thing that really stood out to me. The NASA DEVELOP Program. 

This unique program links industry, government, and universities to conduct innovative research projects addressing problems of relevance to the community. It brings together students, early career professionals, and those in transitional stages of their career (e.g. finishing military service), forming teams to tackle environmental challenges using earth observation data. The stories of the next generation of environmental scientists participating in the program were incredibly inspiring.

I started to talk to NASA colleagues about how I could involve some of my students in Australia. They generously offered to engage with one of my current students, who was about to head over to Florida on a student exchange program. So I passed the opportunity on to one of my 2nd year Bachelor of Environmental Science undergraduate students. I was hoping that she could be a bit of a guinea pig for me, and give me an insider's perspective into the program. I want to share some of her thoughts to show just how inspirational the program is, and to highlight exactly why I want to create a similar experience in Australia.

"At the beginning of last year I signed up for a student exchange program. To my surprise I was actually accepted and I completed Semester 2 while studying abroad at the University of South Florida in Tampa, Florida. In total I spent about 4 and a half-months there– it was an amazing experience! 

Naturally I was really excited about this trip when I first got accepted and I talked a lot about it during Semester 1. This is how Karen came to know about my involvement with the student exchange program. Further to my surprise, as if the upcoming exchange trip wasn’t amazing enough, she provided me with another amazing opportunity. 

Now, you can imagine my shock when I opened and read her email one mediocre morning while casually on my way to work. NASA, what? Me? Has she sent this to the wrong person?

The opportunity Karen provided me with was to observe and take a small part in an internship program run across the US by NASA called NASA DEVELOP.  DEVELOP was formed with the hopes of bridging the gap between NASA and society, through involvement of the next generation and external organizations. 

The DEVELOP program is run right across the US in 13 different locations and 2 non-US locations. I got to visit the University of Georgia for a week in October to observe this internship in process during my semester abroad. 

When I visited UGA in the Fall term of the DEVELOP program, I spent time with the Colombia Ecological Forecasting team, where the objective was to enhance the conservation efforts of Colombia’s most endangered primate – the cotton-top tamarin. The team used NASA satellite data to aid in achieving the goals of the project partners, which was to increase the habitat suitability for the endangered primate. 

I just want to quickly point out that this South American country is actually located more than 2000 miles, or in other words about 3400kms away from Athens, Georgia. The fact that such thorough research can be done on an area so far away is pretty damn amazing. 

I just wanted to say that this experience was such an eye opener for me – its one thing learning about something in a school environment and then to actually get to see how it is put into practice in the real world. Like I’m sure many of you agree, I feel when you learn about things in university it has a detached feel to it – you know that what your learning is used by researchers and professionals, but its like you feel that what your learning isn’t the full thing. You know there must be more to it, and while it’s interesting, at the end of the day you just do what you need to do to pass and get that degree.

Being given the opportunity to travel to a NASA DEVELOP site and witness the work being done there has been one of the most inspirational experiences I have ever had. Seeing these students, just like ourselves having a key hand in something as precious as saving a entire species was just awe inspiring to me.

As a student who knew what I was interested in but no idea what kind of work to aim for, this experience has both reinforced why I’m studying Environmental Science and has given me something to aspire to upon completion of my degree." - Name withheld

The NASA DEVELOP Program fits squarely within my interests of linking research and education in remote sensing. It also promotes another keen interest of mine - leadership and effective teamwork. I would love to implement this in Australia. 

As I've said before, I think that simplicity is the key to good communication. And it doesn't get much simpler than cartoons! So I thought that I might share some of the cartoon tools that I use to create percieved simplicity.

You may have seen ads on TV where you just can't take your eyes off a hand as it draws pictures or writes a message. They are often really simple, but somehow it just captures your attention and you keep watching to see what will be drawn next. 

When I first started seeing these ads appearing, all bearing similar characteristics, I realised that there had to be software creating them. Enter one of my favourite tools - Sparkol VideoScribe. I have created scribes for communicating a variety of different concepts (see my YouTube channel). I mostly use them for my students, but also for presentations I've given for our School, Funding Pitches, the VC, and... wait for it... for NASA! And if imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, several of my students and colleagues have tried their hand at creating their own scribes too. I'm by no means a guru at using this software, and you'll find far better scribes on youtube than mine! But I'm always learning, and having fun doing so. So I can definitely recommend having a play with this one.

Another online animating tool I've dabbled with is GoAnimate. I love using this to bring humour and satire into learning. Creating a short anime style cartoon forces me to really think about the key message, and return to Denzel Washington's "Explain it to me like I'm a six year old" (from Philadelphia). There are several more examples of my animated cartoons like the one below on my YouTube channel.

A recent find for me, and something that I look forward to using more is Pixton. So there's no motion or sound with Pixton, it's just old school cartooning. One of the best things about it is just how basic it is. I can demo how to use it in under five minutes, and then set the students on their own mission to communicate a concept. This one is so much fun to use, and you don't have to worry about having funky voices like in GoAnimate. Or worse - the horror of your own voice over in VideoScribe! I'm now building a repository of student created cartoons to be shared with future years. Below is an example from one of my students, Jenni Lo Choy, 2014.

Simple isn't the same as easy. These cartoons convey a message in a simple manner, but the underlying thought process is far more complex. It's certainly easier to present some text to cover the same points, but I argue that a mix of cartoons is more engaging and memorable.

Yes, the title is correct. No, it shouldn't read 'How Teaching Benefits FROM my Research'. Well, OK, it could read that way as well, it's totally a two way street. But just for now, I'll talk about one side.

I have come across many academics who see teaching as a burden that takes them away from their research. And let's be honest, sometimes the administrative overhead can be a drag. But I strongly believe that just as as teaching should be informed by research, the converse is also true.

I have been teaching in some way, shape, or form since Kindergarten. From peer tutoring to coaching sporting teams, running short courses, and university lecturing, I have done it all. I learn from those better and more experienced than me who demonstrate fantastic teaching skills. And often I learn even more from those who are lacking.

Perhaps one of the most important things that teaching has taught me, is that everything I know is something that I learned. Obvious, right? But this realisation has a big implication. What this means is that I should never take my knowledge for granted, and just assume that others know these things too. Because maybe they haven't learned them just yet. This is important when considering a target audience for a research paper or talk. Mostly they won't know all that I am going to write or say. If they did, then why am I bothering to tell them?

It's sometimes hard to remember back to a time when I didn't understand a particular basic concept in my discipline (remote sensing). It feels like common knowledge. But often these 'basic' things are really challenging for first timers. So here's the next thing that teaching has taught me - keep it simple.

One of my favourite movie quotes comes from Denzel Washington in his role as a Lawyer in Philadelphia: "Explain it to me like I'm a six year old". I consider this quote a lot in my teaching, and challenge myself to break down the most complex concepts into ideas that a child could understand.

By actively practicing simplicity in my classes, it is filtering through to other aspects of my life. And one of the major beneficiaries is my research.

I believe that simplicity is a foundation of good communication, including for research. This doesn't mean that my work needs to be 'dumbed down'. It is about engaging the audience in language that they understand. It's not about trying to impress or over-awe them with technical jargon.

I want my research to be widely read. I want my proposals to be funded. Who doesn't? Teaching - or perhaps more correctly - my students, have taught me the importance of simple language. The importance of graphics. They are my critics along with the research community and funding bodies. I have changed my research writing and presentation styles to reflect the simplicity that my students demand, and I believe (qualitatively) that I am achieving positive results.

Every week I have five hours in front of students. Granted I am not 'presenting' as such the entire time, but even so - how many other non-teaching academics get this kind of practice in public speaking or explaining concepts? Many I know might be lucky to attend one conference per year for a mere 20 minute presentation. I am certain that my improving research writing and presentation skills are primarily attributed to my teaching practice.

And of course, without teaching, there are no students. Chicken or egg? Regardless, many students look for a pathway from coursework to research. If they like my classes, they look for research projects for credit, or just as a volunteer. Either way, my own research benefits from theirs.

So research and teaching are intrinsically linked, just as they should be. I only wish that more academic staff would open their eyes to this.

Buying a remote controlled 'copter is not easy. Sure, you can buy an El cheapo one on eBay, but say you want something quality. Something that you trust to provide a platform for some expensive kit. That won't crash. In the ocean.

The market for Unmanned Airborne Systems (UAS) or drones, has exploded in the past three to five years. What was originally either a small child's toy or a military craft, now occupies a far greater spectrum of uses. Diversifying use has been driven by leaps in technology - firstly in terms of platform design, but also in developing small and lightweight sensors or cameras to use as payload. Airborne imagery for personal or professional use has never before been so accessible.

So whether you opt for a $30 beginner drone, invest in a $500 Harvey Norman special, or get into big business with a model for tens of thousands of dollars, getting your hands on one is incredibly simple. Sort of.

Actually it's not simple at all if you are fortunate enough to be in my situation! In 2014 I was lucky enough to be awarded a substantial grant to create a state of the art UAS for remote sensing environmental monitoring in Northern Australia. At the time I thought it was challenging to write the proposal, but that's nothing compared to what I face when it comes down to the real decision making! 

UAS and their components are a moving feast. For example, the items in my proposed budget are no longer available. More advanced (and hopefully better) items are on the market and are constantly being upgraded and superseded. That's how quickly the technology is moving. As is the Aussie Dollar, but that's another story! 

I used to have a rule of thumb which said that the sensor payload should cost less than 10% of the platform itself. It seemed sensible at the time to make that rule, to protect expensive payloads by housing them on suitably robust and reliable platforms. It still makes sense to me. But in this instance, I'm going to have to break my own rule as I really want a hyperspectral imager, and these don't come cheap. In fact for a quality sensor, the cost outweighs the platform. I'm hoping the platform will still do its job. And not crash. In the ocean.

Maybe one day we'll be able to go to our local drone dealership and test fly a few models. See which ones feel good. Which ones are likely to be lemons. And which ones don't live up to their manufacturer's claims. But not yet. We have to trust the company specs and online reviews. Even so, the exact configuration we want has not yet been created - this was always going to be a custom build. So there ARE no reviews! It's a big investment to make sure it all works. That's a lot of responsibility that both excites me and makes me nervous.

I never expected building a UAS capability to be a fast process, and therefore committed a significant amount of my time to completing the project.  As I'm learning every day, this commitment was certainly not an underestimate. Embarking on a serious UAS project is not for the feint hearted. And successfully getting through the custom build and acquisition is only the beginning. Next comes the processing...

View the link below for one of my training systems.