433
1 INTRODUCTION
A UAV is an aircraft capable of performing a flight
withnopilotonboard.Therefore,theaircraft’sflight
must be performed autonomously, in pre‐
programmedmode,orusingremotecontrol.Another
commonlyusedtermforaUAVisadrone[1,2].
UAVs have revolutionised the aviation industry.
This is mainly due to the fact that drones are
characterised by much lower operating costs
compared to manned aircraft. In addition, the
continuous progress made inthe field of innovation
andtechnologyhastheresultthatUAVsarefeatured
by high manoeuvrability and small dimensions,
thankstowhichthey
canbeusedtoperformcomplex
tasks[2,3]. Originally,droneswere usedfor military
applicationssuchaslandmapping,surveillancezone,
performing reconnaissance and as long‐range
weapons. Currently, UAVs are widely used in civil
applications, and continuous expansion of their
capabilities leads to an increase in the number of
sectors
using drones. The main areas of UAV
applicationinclude[4,5]:
Agriculture: taking reliable measures aimed at
saving money and time (e.g. precision farming),
identifyingdamagequicklyandaccurately,aswell
asavoidingpotentialproblemsinthefield[6–10];
Archeology and architecture: surveys and 3D
mapping of man‐made
structures and historical
sites[11–15];
Crisis management: UAVs are capable of quickly
acquiring the information required for a rescue
operation. Moreover, a flight using a drone can
Comparative Analysis of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles
Used in Photogrammetric Surveys
M.Specht
1,2
,S.Widźgowski
2
,A.Stateczny
3
,C.Specht
1
&O.Lewicka
1
1
GdyniaMaritimeUniversity,Gdynia,Poland
2
MarineTechnologyLtd.,Gdynia,Poland
3
GdańskUniversityofTechnology,Gdańsk,Poland
ABSTRACT:TherearemanymanufacturersonthemarketofferingvarioustypesofUnmannedAerialVehicles
(UAV). The multitude of drones available on the market means that the choice of a UAV for a specific
applicationappearstobeadecisionproblemto
besolved.Theaimofthisarticleisacomparativeanalysisof
dronesusedinphotogrammetricsurveys.ThecriteriaforevaluatingtheUAVswere:availabilityandproduct
support,payload(min.5kg),price(PLN100,000),aswellasspaceavailableformeasurementmodules.These
aretherequirementsthatmustbemet
fortheimplementationoftheINNOBATproject,theaimofwhichisto
develop an integrated system using autonomous unmanned aerial and surface vehicles, intended for
bathymetricmonitoringinthecoastalzone. Thecomparative analysisof droneswasbasedon27companies
producingUAV.Basedontheanalysis,6drones
thatmettheprojectrequirementswereselected.Theywere:
AureliaX6Pro,AureliaX8StandardLE,DroneHexaAG,FOX‐C8XT,Hercules10andZoeX4.SelectedUAVs
differ from each other, among others, in the number of rotors, flight duration and resistance to weather
conditions. Individual characteristics of drones may
have a different rank depending on their application,
thereforetheselectionofUAVsshouldbemadeafterprioritisationcriteriaofagivenproject.
http://www.transnav.eu
the International Journal
on Marine Navigation
and Safety of Sea Transportation
Volume 17
Number 2
June 2023
DOI:10.12716/1001.17.02.21
434
alsobeperformedabovecontaminatedareaswith
nohazardtohumanhealth[16–20];
Environment: thermal analyses [21], cadastral
mapping[22],monitoringoflandandwaterareas
[23,24],aswellasnaturalresources[25],roadmap
compilation[26];
Forestry: forest management, species
identification, fire surveillance, vegetation
monitoringandtree
assessment[27–31];
Traffic monitoring: parking occupancy detection,
vehicle position monitoring and estimating the
traveltime[32–36].
ThemaincomponentsofUAVsinclude:abattery,
engines, a flight controller, a frame, propellers, a
receiver, sensors, a transmitter and velocity
controllers.Thepropellers,alongwiththeengine,are
responsible for generating
aerodynamic lift that
allowsthevehicletomove around inthe air. Drone
rotors are adjusted to engines in order to increase
performance as much as possible. The UAV frame
shouldbeasimpleandlightweightdesignthattakes
into account the aerodynamic impact on the
improvement of flight characteristics. The
material
anddesignofaframeareimportant,asanimproperly
balancedor overlyfragile framecan adverselyaffect
theUAV’soperation.Theuseofanexcessivelyheavy
frame will reduce the vehicleʹs payload, while an
askew frame will bring about problems with flight
stability. The materials used for
the construction of
droneframesmainlyincludecarbonorthermoplastic
fibres, including polyethylene, polystyrene and
polyether ether ketone. The sensors, along with the
flight controller, are used to enable the UAV to
perform basic safety functions such as obstacle
detection, maintaining the drone in a specified
positionandcontrollingit.As
regardscommunication
with the vehicle, a key role is also served by the
groundstationalongwithadditionalcommunication
modules[3,37].
The multitude of UAVs available on the market
means that the choice of a drones for a specific
application appears to be a decision problem to be
solved. The
aim of this article is a comparative
analysis of UAVs used in photogrammetric surveys.
Theselecteddroneshadtomeettherequirementsfor
the INNOBAT project, which were: availability and
productsupport,payload(min.5kg),aswellasprice
(PLN100,000).
This paper is structured as follows: Chapter 2
presents
the classification and types of UAVs,
communication during the drone flight and
measurement modules for UAVs. Section 3 reviews
dronesproducedby27companies.Moreover,inthis
chapter, 6 UAVs satisfying the INNOBAT project
requirements were selected and a comparative
analysisoftheircharacteristicswasmade.Thepaper
concludes with
final (general and detailed)
conclusionsthatsummariseitscontent.
2 MATERIALSANDMETHODS
2.1 ClassificationandtypesofUAVs
DuetothehighdiversityoftheUAVsector,theyare
classified in many ways, and no single standard of
droneclassificationcanbeidentified.Therefore,they
are divided based on different
criteria, including
weight, range, as well as methods and components
that enable flight. The classification based on the
weightisprovidedinTable1[38].
Table1.ClassificationofUAVsbasedontheweight.Own
studybasedon[38].
________________________________________________
UAVcategoryWeightm
________________________________________________
C0m<250g
C1250g ≤ m<900g
C2900g ≤ m<4kg
C34kg ≤ m<25kg
C4m>25kg
________________________________________________
Most drones used in commercial flights fall into
categoryC1,C2orC3.TheUAVsbelongingtogroups
C0–C3haveadditionallimitationsofaflightaltitude
of up to 120 m. Table 1 provides the division
introduced by Commission Delegated Regulation
(EU)2019/945of12March2019onunmannedaircraft
systems
andonthird‐countryoperatorsofunmanned
aircraft systems [38]. This division is applied in the
EuropeanUnion(EU)MemberStates.Inotherpartsof
the world, other divisions of drones based on the
weightarealsoused.
AnotherfrequentlypresentedUAVclassificationis
the division based on the altitude
and range. The
classificationbasedontheflightrangeisprovidedin
Table2[3].
Table2.ClassificationofUAVsbasedonthealtitudeand
range.Ownstudybasedon[3].
________________________________________________
UAVcategoryAltitude Range
________________________________________________
Hand‐held<600m <2km
Close<1500m<10km
NATO<3000m<50km
Tactical<5500m<160km
MediumAltitudeLong<9100m<200km
Endurance(MALE)
HighAltitudeLong>9100mindefinite
Endurance(HALE)
Hypersonic15200
m >200km
________________________________________________
Consideringthatthevastmajorityofcommercially
available UAVs fall into the hand‐held or close
category,thisdivisionisnotpracticallyapplicableto
the categorisation of consumer drones. Therefore,
UAVsarecommonlydividedintocategoriesbasedon
the number of rotors and the presence of wings
(Figure 1). Four basic
drone categories can be
distinguished:singlerotor,multirotor,fixed‐wingand
fixed‐wing hybrid Vertical Take‐Off and Landing
(VTOL). Due to their diverse characteristics, each of
the above‐mentioned UAV types is intended for
different applications. The greatest advantages and
disadvantagesofthedronecategoriesmentionedare
providedin
Table3[3].
Fixed‐wing UAVs resemble traditional aircraft in
design. They comprise a single rotor positioned
centrallyatthefrontofthefuselageandlongwingsto
provideaerodynamiclift.Consideringthat,unlikethe
other solutions, the aerodynamic lift does not come
from the rotors, these drones consume considerably
less
energytofly.Itisonlyusedtomaintainvelocity
andnottodriftintheair,whichmakestheseUAVs
much more efficient. This also contributes to a very
long flight range. In comparison to drones from the
435
othercategories,thesearecharacterisedbyhighflight
altitudesandagreatpayload.Duetotheirinabilityto
hover in the air, their applications are limited, e.g.
theyarenotusedforprecisionterrainmapping.The
additional difficulties due to the requirement to use
anappropriate runway for take‐off
andlanding and
thehighpricescontributetolessinterestinthistype
ofsolutioninthescientificandresearchsector[3].
Figure1. Classification of UAVs based on the rotors and
wings.Ownstudybasedon[3].
ThedesignofsinglerotorUAVsresemblesthatof
helicopters. They are characterised by very high
carryingcapacitiesandalongflightrange.Theuseof
ahorizontally positionedrotorallowsthemtohover
intheair,whichdistinguishesthemfromfixed‐wing
drones.Actually,asinglerotorUAVisequipped
with
two rotors, the main one centrally located in a
horizontal position, responsible for maintaining the
drone in the air, and the second, much smaller one,
positionedonthetail,responsibleforcontrollingthe
flightdirection. A large rotor blade is more efficient
thanmultiplerapidlyrotatingbladesofa
smallsize.
This contributes tothe ability to carry heavier loads
and to operate longer on a single battery charge as
compared to multirotor drones. Considering the
precisionofmaintainingthesettrajectory,singlerotor
designsarelessaccuratethansolutionsbasedonmore
rotors[3,37,39].
Multirotors can be additionallydivided
based on
the number and arrangement of engines. The most
popularonesincludeUAVswithfour(quadrocopter),
six(hexacopter)andeight(octocopter)rotors(Figure
2). In multirotor solutions, some propellers rotate
ClockWise (CW), while the others rotate
CounterClockWise(CCW)[37,40,41].
Figure2. Division of multirotor UAVs: quadrocopter (a),
hexacopter(b)andoctocopter(c)[41].
Hexacopters and octocopters are available in a
version with all the engines positioned in the same
orientation and in a version in which the rotors
operate in contra‐rotating pairs (Figure 3). The
application of such a solution allows stability to be
increased,andtheadverseeffectofafailureof
anyof
itsdrivestobereduced,asthedronedoesnotloseits
supportpoint[37].
Figure3.DivisionofmultirotorUAVs withcontra‐rotating
propellers:octocopterX(a)andhexacopterY(b)[41].
Figure 3 presents the two most common design
types based on the contra‐rotating operation of two
enginesinUAVs,i.e.octocopterXandhexacopterY.
A greater number of rotors improves flight stability
andcontributestofailure‐free performance,whichis
due to their redundancy. As the number of engines
increases,sodoestheenergydemandofthevehicle,
which consequently results in a shorter flight
duration. The greatest disadvantage of drone
solutionsbasedonmultiplerotorsistheirshortflight
rangeandlowvelocity.Thesecharacteristicsprevent
the performance of measurements over a large area
andoverlongdistances.
Ofallthesolutionsdiscussed
here, multirotor UAVs consume the most energy to
stayintheair,whichcontributestotheshortestflight
duration[37].
Multirotor drones have gained significant
popularity in scientific and research applications.
They owe this to their simple design that enables
them to take‐off and land
vertically and to perform
complex manoeuvres. Multirotors are the cheapest
and simplest solution for getting measurement
equipment up into the air. Accurate measurements
taken in the air are aided by the high precision of
flight and the hovering capability offered by
multirotor UAVs. These characteristics make
multirotors effective in areas
where other types of
droneshavefailedtoperformwell[42].
A fixed‐wing hybrid VTOL is a combination of a
fixed‐wing UAV and multirotor vehicles. This
combinationoftwodronecategories enables vertical
take‐off and landing, as well as hovering.
Consequently,thecombinationoftheaforementioned
categories results
in pooled advantages of both
aircraft and multirotors. However, this involves a
very high degree of design complexity and the
associatedhighdegreeofdifficultyinitsoperation.A
hybrid VTOL aircraft is a technology still under
development.Giventhecomplexityofthedesign,this
solution is likely to prove
to be very expensive.
Nevertheless, considering the ongoing development
ofthistechnology,itmaybecomeawidelyusedinthe
future[3,37].
436
Table3.Asummaryoftheadvantagesanddisadvantagesof
themostcommonUAVtypes.Ownstudybasedon
[3,37,39,42].
________________________________________________
UAVtype AdvantagesDisadvantages
________________________________________________
Single MultitaskingDifficulttouse
rotor HighflightrangeLittlemanoeuvrability
droneHigh payloadHighprice
Possibilityof
hoveringintheair
MultirotorMultitaskingSmallflightrange
droneSimpleoperationShortflightduration
HighmanoeuvrabilityHighenergydemand
Possibilityofhovering
intheair
Lowprice
Fixed‐ LongflightdurationLowversatility
wing HighflightrangeLittlemanoeuvrability
droneHigh payloadLargetake‐offand
Highgroundcoverage landingspacerequired
ResistancetoexternalNopossibilityof
conditionshoveringintheair
Fixed‐ LongflightdurationComplicatedoperation
wing HighflightrangeTechnologystillbeing
hybrid Highpayloaddeveloped
VTOL Highgroundcoverage Veryhighprice
droneResistancetoexternal
conditions
________________________________________________
Because of the above‐mentioned advantages, the
mostcommonUAVsincommercialusearemultirotor
drones. Due to the high costs and high degree of
handling difficulty, the other solutions are less
commonlyused,whilestillfindingtheirniche.
2.2 CommunicationduringtheUAVflight
Three basic methods of flight execution
by UAVs,
determinedby the degreeoftheir autonomy,canbe
distinguished. The simplest way to fly a drone is
through manual control by the operator. This is the
most common method involving communication via
radio remote control. When controlling the UAV
manually,theoperator,basedontheobservationsand
information received from the sensors, manoeuvres
the drone using a radio transmitter or other ground
station[3,43,44].
Another method is semi‐autonomous control,
whichallowsmore complexoperations tobe carried
out.Asregardsthesemi‐autonomoussystem,someof
the operations needed to perform a flight are
transferred to the
flight controller. The controller is
most often responsible for carrying out basic flight
safety operations, such as maintaining the correct
altitude and detecting collisions using a variety of
sensors available on the UAV. In such a case, the
operator is responsible for carrying out the mission
andcontrollingitsparameters
[43].
The last of the discussed methods is fully
autonomous control. Drones controlled by this
method carry out the mission autonomously. The
flight controller in the UAV is responsible for the
executionofsafetyfunctions,theflightitself,andthe
planned mission. The operator prepares the mission
scenario before its launch
and is involved in
monitoring the correctness of the flight without
interferingwithit[43].
Theautonomousflightrequiresinformationonthe
current drone position, and access to the planned
flight route. What is also important is the error
checking in real time, and building a database that
enables the
safe return of the UAV following
communication breakdown. The above‐mentioned
functionalities and the vehicle guidance capabilities
based on telemetry commands, which enable
autonomousflight,are provided by Ground Control
Stations(GCS)[3,43,45].
The GCS is the central part of drones. Its
functionalities include planning tasks for the vehicle
duringthe
flightandmonitoringtheactuatorcontrol
for this purpose. It usually comprises the
communicationequipment,adiskfordatastorage,a
display, a processor, telemetry and the section
responsibleformissionplanning[43].
One of the essentialcomponents of a UAV is the
flightcontrolsystem.Thisisbecausethe
movements
ofadronearesolelydeterminedbyitscontrolsystem.
As the accuracy of the control system increases, so
doestheflightprecision.Duetothelargeamountof
data sent from the UAV, there is a need to use
multiple stable and efficient data transmission
channels. This enables safe
and uninterrupted
operation,aswellas readingdatafromthedronein
realtime[40,44].
In addition to the ground station, effective
communicationrequiresanumberofcommunication
intermediarydevices.Figure 4 presentsthe auxiliary
devicesandtherelationshipsbetweenthem.
Figure4. UAV components and operation. Own study
basedon[3].
Figure 4 shows a simplified model of
communicationgoingonbetweenthegroundstation
and the UAV. After sending the signal from the
ground station, it is delivered to the radio receiver.
The received signal is then converted into a Pulse‐
Position Modulation (PPM) or a Pulse‐Width
Modulation (PWM) signal.
These signals are
subsequently transmitted to the flight controller.
Based on these, the controller performs specific
actions by controlling the actuators, e.g. rotors or
servomechanisms responsible for the movement of
the ailerons. In addition to the modules responsible
for the flight execution, there are also auxiliary
modules that provide information
on other crucial
aspects, such as the battery charge status or radio
signal strength. Wireless transmission protocols that
specifythedatapacketstructureandtherulesneeded
for correct data exchange are implemented in the
communication between the receiver and the
transmitter. A popular practice followed by
manufacturersistouse
thesameprotocolsinallthe
dronestheysell[3,46].
437
GCSsshouldoperateoverawidetemperatureand
humidity range, as well as be resistant to other
environmental conditions, such as precipitation. It is
also advisable to display information on the UAV,
including the altitude, flight velocity, heading and
position[3].
In order to effectively autonomise the flight, the
following
arerequired[43]:
Receivingandstoringdataonthecurrentposition
ofthevehicle;
Theopportunitytosendcommandstothevehicle
inflight;
Continuous monitoring of the system status and
theabilitytodetectfailures;
Theabilitytoreturnsafelyafteracommunication
breakdownor
anotheremergency.
Taking aerial measurements based on terrain
photos and scanning requires planning the flight
routeandcontrolpointsforgeoreferencingpurposes.
The flight routes are usually planned before the
launch of the mission using dedicated software,
takingintoaccountboththeflightparameters,suchas
thealtitude,exactrouteto
befollowedbythevehicle
andmeasurementequipmentparameters.Depending
onthespecificityofsurveys,theflightisperformedin
manual,assistedorautonomousmode.Thepresence
ofGlobalNavigationSatelliteSystem(GNSS)/Inertial
Navigation System (INS) is usually used for
autonomousflight[4,45,46].
Animportantaspectwhenchoosingadrone
isthe
method for controlling its flight. Some of the most
popular solutions include remote control, mobile
applicationsandaGCS.Thefirstofthesesolutionsis
characterised by a significantly lower cost.
Consideringthelowlevelofautomation,thissolution
isnotapplicableinmissionswhereprecisemovement
along a
set trajectory is of importance. In such a
situation,itismostoptimaltouseadditionalsoftware
operated from a mobile application or a dedicated
groundstationsolution[3,46].
2.3 MeasurementmodulesforUAVs
UAVs are currently regarded as a widely available
platform for acquiring photogrammetric data. It has
become
very popular to combine digital cameras or
laser scanners using Light Detection And Ranging
(LiDAR) technology with GNSS/INS systems. This
combination enables very precise georeferencing of
thephotosorscanstaken,whichconsequentlyallows
theareassurveyedtobeaccuratelyrepresentedinthe
form of maps or models. Given the multitude
of
drones available on the market, it is easy to find a
UAVinaverywidepricerangeandthenadjustitto
one’sneeds.Thispromotestheemergenceofa large
numberofstart‐ups,aswellasscientificandresearch
projectsbasedondrones[4,45,46].
2.3.1 Exemplary
measurementsystemsonUAVs
Two types of technological solutions can be
distinguished among the UAVs used for
measurements and research. The first type is the
measurement equipment forming an integralpart of
thedrone,andthesecondtypeistheuseofseparate
modulesincludingtheequipment.
As regards UAVs with
integrated equipment,
popular solutions include drones equipped with
GNSS/INS systems along with a camera or LiDAR.
The NEXUS 800 manufactured by HYPACK can be
mentionedhereasanexample.ThisUAVisequipped
withbothadigitalcameraandLiDARworkingwith
GNSS/INS module. The essence of its operation is
combiningphotogrammetriccameradataandLiDAR
data,aswellasprocessingthedatausingspecialised
hydrographicsoftware[47].
Asecondsolutiongaininginpopularityistheuse
of separate modules including the measurement
equipment. It enables the complete separation of a
drone from the measurement equipment. The
modulesdescribedherecan
workwithanyUAVthat
satisfiescertaincriteria,suchasthemaxpayloadand
appropriate load space dimensions. This solution is
moreversatile,asitenablestheuseofasingledrone
thatcanperformavarietyoftasksdependingonthe
module being currently installed. It contributes to a
significantreductionincosts.The modularnatureof
thedescribedsolutionallowstheentiremeasurement
system to be established based on commercially
availableUAVs.
Anexampleoftheapplicationofsuchasolutionis
the INNOBAT optoelectronic module, which
comprises a camera mounted on a gimbal, a
communication module, a GNSS/INS
system, a
LiDAR and a power supply. The aforementioned
componentsweighapprox.5kg,whichrepresentsthe
min.payloadof thedroneworkingwith thesystem.
Themainapplicationof the INNOBATmoduleisto
determine the shallow waterbody depth and
topographyinthecoastalzone.Thedataacquiredand
processedusinganoptoelectronicmoduleinstalledon
the UAV will be completed with the data sourced
fromaGNSSreceiverandaMultiBeamEchoSounder
(MBES) mounted on an Unmanned Surface Vehicle
(USV). The min. isobath recorded via the echo
sounder positioned on the vessel will be
supplemented with aerial photos taken
using the
optoelectronic module. The data acquired using
unmanned measurement platforms will enable the
developmentofDigitalTerrainModels(DTM)ofthe
coastal zone. The analysis presented in Chapter 3.1
will concern the selection of a drone for the
INNOBAT optoelectronic module discussed above
[48–50].
2.3.2 RequirementsforUAVsby
measurementmodules
InordertoselectaUAVthatcanserveasacarrier
of measurement modules, a number of criteria and
factors that translate directly into the ability to
perform the mission correctly must be taken into
consideration.
Themostimportantparameterstoconsiderwhen
choosing a drone include the
physical requirements
relatedtothespaceavailablefortheloadandthemax
weightenablingtheUAVtoflysafely.Theweightsof
measurement modules are determined by the
componentsincludedintheirequipment,andusually
rangefrom2to5kg.Forthisreason,thevastmajority
ofdrones
availableonthemarketwillnotbeableto
438
carry out flights with advanced professional
measurementequipment[51].
The weight criterion is closely linked to the max
flightdurationona singlebattery.Thisparameteris
importantinthecontextofhowlongthemissionlasts
andwhetherornotaflightonasinglebatteryenables
the entire
mission, or a significant part, to be
completed.Figure5presentstherelationshipbetween
theflightduration and the weight of the load being
transported for the selected commercially available
UAVs.
Figure5. The relationship between the flight duration and
theloadweightforselectedUAVs[52–54].
Figure 5 shows a decrease in the flight duration
withagradualincreaseintheloadweight.Theflight
duration of the UAVs presented in Figure 5 is
shortened under the max load by approx. 50% as
comparedtotheflightcarriedoutwithnoload.The
flight duration, along with
the power output of the
receiversandtransmittersinstalledinboththedrone
andthegroundstation,translateintotheflightrange.
This parameter is of particular importance if the
operator is required to stay in a specific location,
whilethedroneneedstocompletedistantprofiles.
Due to the
limited payload of the UAV, both
storage mediums and other devices should be as
lightweightaspossible.Consideringthelargevolume
ofremotesensingdata,ahighdatatransmissionrate
andtheuseofanti‐interferencesystemsarerequired
toensuretheirintegrity.Tothisend,RemoteSensing
Instruments (RSI) must
implement communication
via numerous efficient and stable data transmission
lines, which allows data transfer in real time.
Considerationshouldalsobegiventoadditionaldata
carriers,whichenabledatapre‐processingandstorage
[40].
The other technical aspect that should be paid
attention to when choosing drones for flights with
measurement modules is the precision of the flight
carried out, achieved using built‐in compass and
GNSSsystem.Whatisalsoimportantistheresistance
to vibrations that can be induced by rotating
measurement equipment such as LiDAR. The final
aspectistheresistancetoweather factorssuchasvery
low
or too high temperatures, strong wind andrain
[51].
3 RESULTS
3.1 AnoverviewofUAVsavailableonthemarket
There are numerous companies on the market that
manufactureUAVs.However,thedronesconsidered
inthisoverview,withapayloadthatenablesaflight
withprofessionalmeasurementequipment,represent
a
niche. A large proportion of UAV manufacturing
companies are oriented towards selling systems,
whichareanintegratedpartofdrones.
The following overview of drones focuses on
analysing UAVs with a min. payload of 5 kg and a
price of no more than PLN 100,000. An additional
criterion taken into account
was its availability,
productsupportandspaceavailableformeasurement
modules. The overview focuses on commercially
availableUAVs,excludingcustom‐madeones.
All the conditions were laid down based on the
requirements of the INNOBAT project, described in
more detail in Chapter 2.3. A market analysis of 27
companiesmanufacturing
droneswasconducted.The
companies are as follows: AceCore Technologies,
AerialTechnology,Anavia,AureliaAerospace,Autel
Robotics, Birdpilot, Delair, DJI, DRONE VOLT,
Dronetools,HeightTechnologies,HSE‐UAV,Indudro,
Inspired flight, Italdron, Kespry, Microdrones,
OnyxStar, Parrot, Pilgrim technology, Prodrone,
Skydio, Steadicopter, Threod Systems, Vulcan UAV,
YuneecandZiyanUAS.
3.2 UAVssatisfying
theINNOBATprojectrequirements
Based on an analysis of the UAV offers, 6 drone
models that satisfy the requirements (availability,
payload, price and space) were selected: Aurelia X6
Pro and Aurelia X8 Standard LE manufactured by
AureliaAerospace,DroneHexaAGmanufacturedby
Dronetools, FOX‐C8 XT manufactured by OnyxStar,
Hercules
10manufacturedbyDRONEVOLT,aswell
asZoeX4manufacturedbyAceCoreTechnologies.
The above‐mentioned UAV models, along with
theirmanufacturersandpricesintheseller’scurrency
andtheapproximateprices afterconversiontoPLN,
are presented in Table 4 (at the PKO BP bank
exchange rate of 04
February 2022 of USD 1 = PLN
4.1424,EUR1=PLN4.7468).
Table4.AnoverviewofUAVssatisfyingtheINNOBAT
projectrequirements.Ownstudybasedon[53–57].
________________________________________________
UAVtype Company Original Price
price inPLN
________________________________________________
AureliaX6Pro Aurelia USD10,000 PLN41,400
Aerospace
AureliaX8 Aurelia USD7300 PLN30,300
StandardLE Aerospace
DroneHexaAG Dronetools EUR13,000 PLN61,700
FOX‐C8XTOnyxStar EUR16,800 PLN79,700
Hercules10 DRONEVOLT EUR20,000 PLN95,000
ZoeX4AceCore EUR13,900 PLN66,000
Technologies
________________________________________________
All the drones satisfy the cost criterion of PLN
100,000,setoutatthebeginningofChapter3.1.UAVs
considered are described below, and their selected
characteristicsarecomparedinChapter3.3.
439
Aurelia X6 Pro drone manufactured by Aurelia
Aerospace is a hexacopter (Figure 6). The use of six
rotorsenablesanefficientflightincaseofafailureof
one of them. The body is a single piece made from
carbon fibre, which contributes to a significant
reductionintheUAV
ʹsweight.Thespanofthearms,
also made from carbon fibre, is 125 cm. The drone
armscanbefoldedtofacilitatetransport[57].
Figure6. Aurelia X6 Pro UAV manufactured by Aurelia
Aerospace[57].
AureliaX6ProUAVenablesaflightwithaloadof
5kg.Theflightdurationof anunloadeddroneis55
min.,whilewithaloadof5kg,itis27min.TheUAV
usesthePixhawkControlZeroflightcontroller,which
onlyweighs5g.Moreover,themanufacturer
enables
its replacement with more efficient Pixhawk Cube
Blue model. The drone incorporates an accurate
GlobalPositioningSystem(GPS)receiverthatisable
to work with the ground station to use Real Time
Kinematic (RTK) corrections and ensure flight
accuracyatalevelof2cm.ThemaxUAVvelocity
is
56 km/h. The max allowable wind speed during the
flightis32km/h.Thedroneisadditionallyequipped
withLiDARsensorsfortheobstacledetection[57].
Aurelia X8 Standard LE drone manufactured by
AureliaAerospaceisanoctocopter(Figure7).Theuse
ofeight rotorsenablesanefficient flightin
case of a
failureofoneofthem.TheUAVframeismadefrom
carbon fibre, and its arm span is 137 cm. The drone
armscanbefoldedtofacilitatetransport[57].
Figure7. Aurelia X8 Standard LE UAV manufactured by
AureliaAerospace[57].
AureliaX8StandardLEUAVenablesaflightwith
a load of 8 kg. The flight duration of an unloaded
drone is 30 min., while with a load of 5 kg, it is 15
min.TheUAVusesthePixhawk2.1flightcontroller,
withthemanufacturerenablingits replacementwith
more
efficient Pixhawk Cube Blue model. The max
drone velocity is 56 km/h. The max allowable wind
speed during the flight is 32 km/h. The UAV is
additionally equipped with LiDAR sensors for the
obstacle detection.The drone has no abilityto carry
outmissionsin therain.However,themanufacturer
statesthatintheeventofrainduringtheflight,itcan
belandedsafely[57].
DronehexaAGdronemanufacturedbyDronetools
isa hexacopter (Figure 8).The UAVischaracterised
byverylargedimensions,anditsarmspanis210cm.
The drone arms can be folded to facilitate transport
[55].
Figure8.DronehexaAGUAVmanufacturedbyDronetools
[55].
The max payload for Dronehexa AG UAV is
approx.10kg(or16kgifflightsarecarriedoutclose
tosealevel).Theflightdurationwitha10kgloadis
18 min., while with a 16 kg load, it is 10 min. The
systemiswater‐anddust‐resistant,
capableofflying
in winds reaching speeds of up to 29 km/h. The
dedicated loads include tanks with liquids and a
spraying system. Such solutions mainly prove their
worthinagricultureandduringdisinfectionthrough
the decontamination of public spaces. The drone
enables carrying out flights with a precision of
approx.30cmthankstothepossibilityofusingRTK
corrections[55].
FOX‐C8XTdronemanufacturedbyOnyxStarisan
octocopterdesignedtoprovidequality,efficiencyand
versatility (Figure 9). The UAV frame is made from
carbonfibre,anditsarmspanis96cm[56].
Figure9.FOX‐C8XTUAVmanufacturedbyOnyxStar[56].
FOX‐C8 XT UAV enables a flight with a load of
5kg. The flight durationof anunloaded droneis44
min., while with a load of 5 kg, it is 20 min. The
design is characterised by its high resistance to
externalconditions.TheUAVisresistanttooperation
inlightrainandhastheabilitytocarryoutflightsin
winds reaching speeds of up to 50 km/h. It is
440
equippedwith state‐of‐the‐artelectronics responsible
forflight,whichensurehighefficiency,precisionand
reliability. The drone is capable of determining
position in the classic manner or using RTK
corrections to ensure accuracy at a level of single
centimetres[56].
Hercules10UAVmanufacturedbyDRONEVOLT
is
an octocopter X with contra‐rotating propellers
(Figure 10). The design features drive redundancy
thankstotheuseofeightenginesonfourarms.The
dronehasadurablecarbonfibreframeandmounting
madefromanodisedaluminium.Thearmspanis90
cm.Inordertofacilitatehandlingand
transport,both
thearmsandthechassisareremovable[53].
Figure10. Hercules 10 UAV manufactured by DRONE
VOLT[53].
Themanufacturerallowsthesimpleincorporation
ofdifferentcameratypesintothedesign,aswellasa
sprayingsystemthatenablespumpingliquidfromthe
ground.TheflightdurationofanunloadedUAVis35
min.,whilewithaloadof5kg,itisapprox.14min.
Thedronewas
designedwithahighlevelofpayload
stabilityinmind.Themaxpayloadthatcanbecarried
byHercules10is7.5kg.TheUAVischaracterisedby
ahighflightvelocityofupto90km/h,andiscapable
of operating in moderate rain and wind, reaching
speedsof
upto50km/h.Datatransmissionbetween
the control equipment and the drone is encrypted.
TheflightcontrollerusedinthisUAVisaDVCORE,
basedonthepopularPixhawksolutions.Adedicated
manufacturer’sapplicationisusedforcontrollingthe
flight,andthedroneiscapableofoperatingwithRTK
corrections[53].
Zoe X4 UAV manufactured by AceCore
Technologies is a quadrocopter intended for
commercialuse(Figure11).Thebaseofthedroneisa
lightweight frame constructed from Carbon‐Fiber‐
ReinforcedPolymers (CRFP), and its arm spanis 69
cm[54].
Figure11. Zoe X4 UAV manufactured by AceCore
Technologies[54].
ZoeX4UAVisavailableinthreevariantsdiffering
in the battery pack used, selected depending on the
flightdurationandthepayloadpreferences.Themax
flightduration(inthevariantwith2x16Abatteries)is
40min.,whiletheflightdurationwithaloadof5kg
(inthe variant
with2x10A batteries) is 14 min. The
maxpayloadthatthedronecancarry(inthevariant
with2x5.5Abatteries)is6kg.Thedesignallowsthe
loadtobelocatedeitherbeloworabovetheframe.In
order to reduce vibrations affecting the load,
additionalstabilisationwas
usedtoenableoperation
withvibration‐sensitiveequipment.TheUAVisable
to carry out a mission in light rain, and the control
functioncanbefulfilledbyoneortwooperators.The
Cube Orange flight controller, interacting with the
mostpopularapplications,includingMissionPlanner,
isresponsiblefortheflight
control.Themanufacturer
alsooffersaccessoriestobeselecteddependingonthe
requirementsofthemissionsbeingcarriedout[54].
3.3 Asummaryofcharacteristicsandcomparisonof
selectedUAVs
The selected characteristics of UAVs described in
Chapter 3.2 are compared in tabular form and
presentedinTable5.The
featurescomparedinclude
theflightdurationwithnoloadandwitha5kgload,
maxpayloadandtheeffectivecommunicationrange.
Table5.AsummaryofselectedcharacteristicsoftheUAVs
underconsideration.Ownstudybasedon[53–57].
________________________________________________
UAVtype FlightFlight Max Effective
duration duration payloadcommunica‐
withno withationrange
load 5kgload
________________________________________________
AureliaX6 55min. 27min. 5kg 15km
Pro
AureliaX8 30min. 15min. 8kg 20km
StandardLE
Dronehexa 70min. 28min. 16kg Nodata
AG
FOX‐C8XT 44min. 20min. 5kg 4km
Hercules10 35min. 14min. 7.5
kg 2km
ZoeX4 40min. 14min. 6kg 10km
________________________________________________
The first analysed characteristics are flight
durationswithnoloadandwithaloadof5kg.The
loadweightbeingcomparedarisesfromtheadopted
droneselectioncriteriapresentedatthebeginningof
Chapter 3.1. The flight duration indicated by
441
manufacturers is measured under optimum flight
conditions.AsregardsZoeX4,thesurveysweretaken
atanambienttemperatureof20°C,inthepresenceof
a light wind (approx. 15 km/h), and the entire
measurement was carried out when flying at the
altitude of 5 m above the ground. Under
different
conditions,theflightdurationscanprovetobeshorter
thanthosedeclaredbythemanufacturer.Sincenotall
companies carry out precise tests to determine the
flightdurationunderspecifiedload,someoftheflight
durationswith a5kgloadpresentedwereprovided
by the manufacturers as a
rough guide (Dronehexa
AGandFOX‐C8XT).OfalltheUAVsconcerned,the
longestflightdurationwithnoloadandwithaload
was achieved by Dronehexa AG manufactured by
Dronetools.The shortestflight durationswere noted
forHercules10manufacturedbyDRONEVOLTand
ZoeX4manufacturedbyAceCore
Technologies.
Other characteristics being compared include the
maxpayloadandtheeffectivecommunicationrange.
Ofallthedronesunderconsideration,AureliaX6Pro
andFOX‐C8XThavethelowestpayload.Dronehexa
AGischaracterisedbythehighestpayloadof10kg,
with its manufacturer also declaring that for flights
carriedoutclosetothesealevel,theUAViscapable
offlyingwithasmuchas16kgofload.Theeffective
communicationrangereducestherangeofthedrone
itself.Dronetools,themanufactureroftheDronehexa
AGdoesnot provide thisparameter. As regardsthe
otherUAVs, the longest
transmission rangeisnoted
for the drones manufactured by Aurelia Aerospace
(Aurelia X6 Pro and Aurelia X8 Standard LE), and
reaches15/20kmwhenininteractionwiththeground
station.
Another aspect under analysis is the
environmentalconditionsunderwhichselectedUAVs
arecapableofcarryingoutaflight.Table
6compares
the max wind speeds and the ambient temperature
ranges at which a flight can be carried out. It also
shows whether a particular drone is capable of
operatingunderprecipitationconditions.
Table6.Anoverviewofenvironmentalconditionsforthe
UAVsunderconsideration.Ownstudybasedon[53–57].
________________________________________________
UAVtype Maxwind Ambient Abilityto
speedthat temperature workintherain
allowsflight range
________________________________________________
AureliaX6 32km/h ‐15°Cto40°CYes,inlightrain
Pro
AureliaX8 32km/h ‐15°Cto40°CNopossibility
StandardLE
Dronehexa 28.8km/h 0°Cto50°C Yes,in
AGaccordancewith
theIP65
FOX‐C8XT 50km/h ‐15°Cto40°CYes,inlightrain
Hercules10
50km/h ‐20°Cto45°C Yes,inlightrain
ZoeX4 50km/h ‐15°Cto50°CYes,in
accordancewith
theIP43
________________________________________________
Table 6 addresses the max wind speeds and the
ambient temperature ranges thatenableflight. FOX‐
C8XT,Hercules10andZoeX4arecapableofcarrying
out a flight in strong winds up to 50 km/h,
corresponding to 6° on the Beaufort scale, while
DronehexaAGiscapableofflying
inwindsupto28.8
km/h,whichcorrespondsto4°ontheBeaufortscale.
Of all the above‐mentioned UAVs, only Dronehexa
AGisnotcapableofflyinginsub‐zerotemperatures.
The last of the aspects being compared is the
ability to carry out flights in the rain. The
weather
resistance of the Dronehexa AG and Zoe X4 is
compliant with the International Protection Rating
(IP). Zoe RFT, which satisfies the IP43, provides
protectionagainstwatersprayingatanyangleupto
60° from the vertical on any side. Dronehexa AG is
compliant with the IP65, which denotes protection
against
a water stream (12.5 L/min.) being poured
fromanyside.Theotherdrones,excludingAureliaX8
StandardLE,iscapableofcarryingoutaflightinlight
rain. Aurelia X8 Standard LE is the only UAV not
capable of operating in the rain. The manufacturer
statesthatintheevent
ofrain during a mission,the
vehiclecanbelandedsafely.
4 CONCLUSIONS
This article provides an overview of the UAV types
along with the range of their applications, and
analyses the drones available on the market. Many
UAVdivisioncriteriacanbedistinguished,including
design, flight range and weight. A
drone is selected
basedontheapplicationforwhichitisintended.The
greatest differences between the UAV categories are
theirabilitytohoverintheairandtoperformcertain
manoeuvres.Themostpopulardronesaremultirotors
due to their wide range of applications and low
prices.Thearm
arrangementandthenumberofrotors
affect the stability and reliability of the design, but
fromtheperspectiveofthemissionbeingcarriedout,
theyarenotthekeyfeatures.Itisthecommunication
methodsthatareofsignificance.Inordertocarryout
flights involving measurement equipment, it is
important
tobeabletoplanamissionpreciselybefore
launch, which is ensured by the use of the GCS. In
additiontomissionplanning,itenablesflightcontrol
andisinvolvedincommunication.
Carrying out missions using specialised
measurementmodules requires significantcriteria to
be consideredwhen selectingaUAV.
A drone must
provideaerodynamiclifttomaintaintheequipment,
ensure appropriately high flight precision and
provideasufficientlylargespaceforthemeasurement
module.Therearemanymanufacturersonthemarket
thatofferavarietyofUAVs.Foroverviewpurposes,
the study adopted the criterion of a min. drone
payload
of 5 kg. Another aspect considered in the
analysis in question was having a price under PLN
100,000.Thecomparativeanalysisconsidered6 UAVs
that meet the assumptions made. Selected drones
differfromeach other,amongothers, inthenumber
of rotors, flight duration and resistance to weather
conditions. Individual
characteristics of UAVs may
haveadifferentrankdependingontheirapplication,
thereforetheselectionofdronesshouldbemadeafter
prioritisationcriteriaofagivenproject.
Funding:ThisresearchwasfundedbytheNationalCentre
for Research and Development in Poland, grant number
LIDER/10/0030/L‐11/19/NCBR/2020.Moreover,thisresearch
wasfundedfromthestatutoryactivitiesofGdyniaMaritime
University,grantnumberWN/2023/PZ/05.
442
REFERENCES
1.Lewicka, O.; Specht, M.; Specht, C. Assessment of the
Steering Precision of a UAV along the Flight Profiles
Using a GNSS RTK Receiver. Remote Sens. 2022, 14,
6127.
2.Merkisz, J.; Nykaza, A. Risk Estimation and Risk
Evaluation on Examination Flight Unmanned Aerial
Vehicle Operator on Visual Line of Sight.
Buses:
Technique,Exploitation,TransportSystems2016,6,297–
307.(InPolish)
3.Chamola,V.;Kotesh,P.;Agarwal,A.;Naren;Gupta,N.;
Guizani, M. A Comprehensive Review of Unmanned
Aerial Vehicle Attacks and Neutralization Techniques.
AdHocNetw.2021,111,102324.
4.Nex, F.; Remondino, F. UAV for 3D Mapping
Applications:A
Review.Appl.Geomat.2014,6,1–15.
5.Burdziakowski, P. Increasing the Geometrical and
Interpretation Quality of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
Photogrammetry Products Using Super‐resolution
Algorithms.RemoteSens.2020,12,810.
6.Frankenberger, J.R.; Huang, C.; Nouwakpo, K. Low‐
altitude Digital Photogrammetry Technique to Assess
Ephemeral Gully Erosion. In Proceedings of
the IEEE
International Geoscience and Remote Sensing
Symposium2008(IGARSS2008),Boston,MA,USA,6–11
July2008.
7.Hashim,K.A.;Ahmad,A.;Samad,A.M.;NizamTahar,K.;
Udin,W.S.IntegrationofLowAltitudeAerialTerrestrial
Photogrammetry Data in 3D Heritage Building
Modeling. In Proceedings of the IEEE Control and
System Graduate Research
Colloquium 2012 (ICSGRC
2012),ShahAlam,Malaysia,16–17July2012.
8.Jizhou,W.;Zongjian,L.;Chengming,L.Reconstructionof
Buildingsfroma SingleUAVImage. InProceedingsof
the International Society for Photogrammetry and
Remote Sensing Congress 2004 (ISPRS 2004), Zurich,
Switzerland,6–12September2004.
9.Saleri, R.; Cappellini, V.;
Nony, N.; de Luca, L.; Pierrot‐
Deseilligny, M.; Bardiere, E.; Campi, M. UAV
Photogrammetry for Archaeological Survey: The
TheatersAreaofPompeii.InProceedingsoftheDigital
Heritage International Congress 2013 (Digital Heritage
2013),Marseille,France,28October–1November2013.
10.Tariq, A.; Gillani, S.M.O.A.; Qureshi, H.K.; Haneef, I.
HeritagePreservation
UsingAerialImageryfromLight
Weight Low Cost Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV). In
Proceedings of the International Conference on
Communication Technologies 2017 (ICCT 2017),
Guayaquil,Ecuador,6–9November2017.
11.Fernández, T.; Pérez, J.L.; Cardenal, J.; Gómez, J.M.;
Colomo,C.;Delgado,J.AnalysisofLandslideEvolution
Affecting Olive Groves Using
UAV and
PhotogrammetricTechniques.RemoteSens.2016,8,837.
12.Mansoori,S.A.;Al‐Ruzouq,R.;Dogom,D.A.;alShamsi,
M.; Mazzm, A.A.; Aburaed, N. Photogrammetric
Techniques and UAV for Drainage Pattern and
Overflow Assessment in Mountainous Terrains—
Hatta/UAE. In Proceedings of the IEEE International
Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium 2019
(IGARSS
2019), Yokohama, Japan, 28 July–2 August
2019.
13.Nevalainen,O.;Honkavaara,E.;Tuominen,S.;Viljanen,
N.;Hakala,T.;Yu,X.;Hyyppä,J.;Saari,H.;Pölönen,I.;
Imai, N.N.; et al. Individual Tree Detection and
Classification with UAV‐based Photogrammetric Point
CloudsandHyperspectralImaging.RemoteSens.2017,
9,185.
14.Song,
Y.;Wang,J.;Shan,B.AnEffectiveLeafAreaIndex
Estimation Method for Wheat from UAV‐based Point
Cloud Data. In Proceedings of the IEEE International
Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium 2019
(IGARSS 2019), Yokohama, Japan, 28 July–2 August
2019.
15.Tariq, A.; Osama, S.M.; Gillani, A. Development of a
LowCost andLightWeight UAV forPhotogrammetry
and Precision Land Mapping Using AerialImagery. In
ProceedingsoftheInternationalConferenceonFrontiers
of Information Technology 2016 (FIT 2016), Islamabad,
Pakistan,19–21December2016.
16.Chou,T.‐Y.;Yeh,M.‐L.;Chen,Y.‐C.;Chen,Y.‐H.Disaster
Monitoringand Management
by theUnmanned Aerial
Vehicle Technology. Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote
Sens.Spat.Inf.Sci.ISPRSArch.2010,38,137–142.
17.Haarbrink, R.B.; Koers, E. Helicopter UAV for
Photogrammetry and Rapid Response. Int. Arch.
Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. ISPRS Arch.
2006,XXXVI‐1/W44,1–4.
18.Mohd Daud, S.M.S.; Mohd
Yusof, M.Y.P.; Heo, C.C.;
Khoo, L.S.; Chainchel Singh, M.K.; Mahmood, M.S.;
Nawawi, H. Applications of Drone in Disaster
Management: A Scoping Review. Sci. Justice 2022, 62,
30–42.
19.Molina,P.;Colomina,I.;Vitoria,T.;Silva,P.F.;Skaloud,
J.; Kornus, W.; Prades, R.; Aguilera, C. Searching Lost
PeoplewithUAVs:TheSystem
andResultsoftheClose‐
search Project. Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens.
Spat.Inf.Sci.ISPRSArch.2012,39,441–446.
20.Półka, M.; Ptak, S.; Kuziora,Ł. The Use of UAV’s for
SearchandRescueOperations.ProcediaEng.2017,192,
748–752.
21.Hartmann, W.; Tilch, S.; Eisenbeiss, H.; Schindler,
K.
Determination of the UAV Position by Automatic
Processingof Thermal Images.Int. Arch. Photogramm.
RemoteSens.Spat.Inf.Sci.2012,39,111–116.
22.Manyoky, M.; Theiler, P.; Steudler, D.; Eisenbeiss, H.
UnmannedAerial VehicleinCadastralApplications.Int.
Arch.Photogramm.RemoteSens.Spat.Inf.Sci.2011,38,
57–62.
23.Agrafiotis,
P.; Skarlatos, D.; Georgopoulos, A.;
Karantzalos, K. Shallow Water Bathymetry Mapping
from UAV Imagery Based on Machine Learning. Int.
Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. 2019,
XLII‐2/W10,9–16.
24.Burdziakowski, P.; Specht, C.; Dabrowski, P.S.; Specht,
M.;Lewicka,O.;Makar,A.UsingUAVPhotogrammetry
to Analyse Changes in
the Coastal Zone Based on the
Sopot Tombolo (Salient) Measurement Project. Sensors
2020,20,4000.
25.Nikolakopoulos, K.G.; Lampropoulou, P.; Fakiris, E.;
Sardelianos, D.; Papatheodorou, G. Synergistic Use of
UAVandUSVDataandPetrographicAnalysesforthe
Investigation of Beachrock Formations: A Case Study
fromSyrosIsland,AegeanSea,Greece.
Minerals2018,8,
534.
26.Zhang, C. An UAV‐based Photogrammetric Mapping
System for Road Condition Assessment. Int. Arch.
Photogramm.RemoteSens.Spat.Inf.Sci.2008,37,627–
632.
27.Berni, J.A.J.; Zarco‐Tejada, P.J.; Suárez, L.; Fereres, E.
ThermalandNarrowbandMultispectralRemoteSensing
for Vegetation Monitoring from an Unmanned
Aerial
Vehicle.Trans.Geosci.RemoteSens.2009,47,722–738.
28.Feng,Q.;Liu,J.;Gong,J.UAVRemoteSensingforUrban
VegetationMappingUsingRandomForestandTexture
Analysis.RemoteSens.2015,7,1074–1094.
29.Grenzdörffer, G.J.; Engel, A.; Teichert, B. The
Photogrammetric Potential of Low‐cost UAVs in
Forestry
and Agriculture. Int. Arch. Photogramm.
RemoteSens.Spat.Inf.Sci.ISPRSArch.2008,37,1207–
1213.
30.Torresan,C.;Berton, A.;Carotenuto,F.;diGennaro,S.F.;
Gioli,B.;Matese,A.;Miglietta,F.;Vagnoli,C.;Zaldei,A.;
Wallace,L.ForestryApplicationsofUAVsinEurope:A
Review.Int.J.RemoteSens.2017,
38,2427–2447.
31.Zhang,Y.;Wu,H.;Yang,W.ForestsGrowthMonitoring
Based on Tree Canopy 3D Reconstruction Using UAV
AerialPhotogrammetry.Forests2019,10,1052.
443
32.Alioua,A.;Djeghri,H.‐E.;Cherif,M.E.T.;Senouci,S.‐M.;
Sedjelmaci, H. UAVs for Traffic Monitoring: A
Sequential Game‐based Computation
Offloading/SharingApproach.Comput.Netw.2020,177,
107273.
33.Puri,A.;Valavanis,K.P.;Kontitsis,M.StatisticalProfile
GenerationforTrafficMonitoringUsingReal‐timeUAV
Based Video Data. In Proceedings
of the 15th
Mediterranean Conference on Control & Automation
(MED2007),Athens,Greece,27–29June2007.
34.Ro,K.;Oh,J.‐S.;Dong,L.LessonsLearned:Application
ofSmallUAVforUrbanHighwayTrafficMonitoring.In
Proceedings of the 45th AIAA Aerospace Sciences
Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, USA, 8–11
November
2007.
35.Semsch, E.; Jakob, M.; Pavlicek, D.; Pechoucek, M.
Autonomous UAV Surveillance in Complex Urban
Environments. In Proceedings of the IEEE/WIC/ACM
International Joint Conference on WebIntelligenceand
Intelligent Agent Technology 2009 (WI‐IAT 2009),
Washington,DC,USA,15–18September2009.
36.Tan, Y.; Li, Y. UAV Photogrammetry‐based
3D Road
DistressDetection.ISPRSInt.J.Geo.Inf.2019,8,409.
37.Kubat,M.;Smyczyński,P.;Granosik,G.UnmannedAir
Vehicle Selection Criteria for Inspection and Transport
Tasks.MeasurementAutomationRobotics2018,22,23–
32.(InPolish)
38.European Commission. Commission Delegated
Regulation (EU) 2019/945 of 12 March 2019
on
Unmanned Aircraft Systems and on Third‐country
Operators of Unmanned Aircraft Systems; European
Commission:Brussels,Belgium,2019.
39.Eisenbeiss,H.AMiniUnmannedAerialVehicle(UAV):
System Overview and Image Acquisition. In
Proceedings of the International Workshop on
Processing and Visualization Using High Resolution
Imagery,Pitsanulok,Thailand,18–20November
2004.
40.Amin, R.; Aijun, L.; Shamshirband, S. A Review of
Quadrotor UAV: Control Methodologies and
PerformanceEvaluation.Int.J.Autom.Control.2016,10,
87–103.
41.Connect ESCs and Motors. Available online:
https://ardupilot.org/copter/docs/connect‐escs‐and‐
motors.html(accessedon24December2022).
42.DroneTypes:Multi‐rotorvsFixed‐wingvsSingle
Rotor
vs Hybrid VTOL. Available online:
https://www.auav.com.au/articles/drone‐types/
(accessedon24December2022).
43.Hong, Y.; Fang, J.; Tao, Y. Ground Control Station
Development for Autonomous UAV. In Intelligent
RoboticsandApplications;XiongC.,LiuH.,HuangY.,
Xiong Y.; Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany, 2008;
Volume5315,pp.36–44.
44.
Yin,N.;Liu,R.;Zeng,B.;Liu,N.AReview:UAV‐based
Remote Sensing. IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. 2019,
490,062014.
45.Drummond, C.D.; Harley, M.D.; Turner, I.L.; Matheen,
N.; Glamore, W.C. UAV Applications to Coastal
Engineering. In Proceedingsof theAustralasian Coasts
&PortsConference2015,Auckland,New
Zealand,15–
18September2015.
46.Siebert,S.;Teizer,J.Mobile3DMappingforSurveying
EarthworkProjectsUsinganUnmannedAerialVehicle
(UAV)System.Autom.Constr.2014,41,1–14.
47.NEXUS 800 Powered by HYPACK. Available online:
https://www.hypack.com/File%20Library/Resource%20L
ibrary/Brochures%20and%20Catalogs/Nexus‐800‐
Brochure.pdf(accessedon24December2022).
48.Lewicka, O.; Specht, M.; Stateczny,
A.; Specht, C.;
Dardanelli, G.; Brčić, D.; Szostak, B.; Halicki, A.;
Stateczny,M.;Widźgowski,S.IntegrationDataModelof
the Bathymetric Monitoring System for Shallow
Waterbodies Using UAV and USV Platforms. Remote
Sens.2022,14,4075.
49.Specht, M.; Stateczny, A.; Specht, C.; Widźgowski, S.;
Lewicka,
O.;Wiśniewska, M. Concept of an Innovative
Autonomous Unmanned System for Bathymetric
Monitoring of Shallow Waterbodies (INNOBAT
System).Energies2021,14,5370.
50.Specht, M.; Wiśniewska, M.; Stateczny, A.; Specht, C.;
Szostak,B.;Lewicka,O.;Stateczny,M.;Widźgowski,S.;
Halicki, A. Analysis of Methods for Determining
ShallowWaterbody
DepthsBasedonImagesTakenby
UnmannedAerialVehicles.Sensors2022,22,1844.
51.Tuśnio, N.; Krzysztofik, I.; Tuśnio, J. Application of
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles as a Mobile Monitoring of
Fire Hazard. Problems of Mechatronics. Armament,
Aviation and Safety Engineering 2014, 5, 101–114. (In
Polish)
52.Explore DJI
Products in Different Fields. Available
online:https://www.dji.com/(accessedon24 December
2022).
53.Hercules 10. Available online:
https://www.dronevolt.com/en/expert‐
solutions/hercules‐10/(accessedon24December2022).
54.Zoe Portable Versality. Available online:
https://acecoretechnologies.com/zoe/ (accessed on 24
December2022).
55.DroneHexa AG. Available online:
https://www.dronetools.es/index.php/dronehexa‐ag
(accessedon24December2022).
56.FOX
‐C8 XT. Available online:
https://www.onyxstar.net/fox‐c8‐xt/ (accessed on 24
December2022).
57.UAV Systems International. Available online:
https://uavsystemsinternational.com/ (accessed on 24
December2022).
