Technology
A drone raced an ambulance to deliver medical supplies and won
In a drone vs. ambulance showdown, first aid supplies get to patients faster when flown rather than driven through surface streets, sirens wailing.
That’s what researchers from Iraq and Australia found during test scenarios with a DJI Phantom 3 Professional remote-controlled drone pitted against a human-driven ambulance vehicle in a busy Iraqi city.
In four tests, the drone raced an ambulance from a hospital in Erbil, Iraq, to crowded neighborhoods near schools and markets with narrow streets. Each delivery method was timed to see how long it took to get the first aid kit to “patients.”
The results from the team — comprised of people from Middle Technical University in Baghdad, University of Mosul, University of South Australia, and the Defence Science and Technology Group — were published in July in the Sensors journal. The findings made it clear that drone transport reduces delivery time and gets there quicker.
The drone arrived 90 seconds and 120 seconds before the ambulance in two different locations during each test run. Crowded roads with obstacles meant an ambulance took 300 seconds compared to the drone’s 210 seconds for one particular drop-off spot. That’s 31 percent time savings when deciding to use one method over the other.
For time-critical scenarios those seconds add up.
-
Entertainment6 days ago
Hands-on with the Claude AI app: It’s pleasant to use, but janky
-
Entertainment4 days ago
Apple Watch Series 9 vs. SE: A smartwatch skeptic tested both for 13 days
-
Business6 days ago
Haun Ventures is riding the bitcoin high
-
Entertainment5 days ago
5 essential gadgets for turning your home into a self-care sanctuary
-
Entertainment4 days ago
The greatest films on Prime Video right now
-
Business5 days ago
Apple: pay attention to emerging markets, not falling China sales
-
Business3 days ago
Google lays off workers, Tesla cans its Supercharger team and UnitedHealthcare reveals security lapses
-
Business4 days ago
Google dubs Epic’s demands from its antitrust win ‘unnecessary’ and ‘far beyond the scope’ of the verdict