Overview
How do flight constraints change what a drone swarm can observe of a known moving target in confined geometry? Flies 62 constraint cells closed loop on 27 maps from nine geometry families (4,878 episodes) and reports, for each, the bearing-only CRLB the placement planned, the CRLB the drones' real positions realised, feasibility at window entry, and safety.
Technologies
Features
- Plan vs. Flight - Three constraints are mild on paper and severe in flight: nadir 20° +1.98 cm planned vs +9.06 cm flown, communication 0.8 m +0.26 vs +6.92 cm, separation 1.5 m +0.25 vs +3.32 cm. Standoff and swarm size transfer almost exactly.
- Geometry Acts Through Constraints - Baseline CRLB is 2.56–2.64 cm across all nine families; the separation loss ranges from 3.3 cm in open space to 18.8 cm in closed corners, while the communication loss appears even without walls.
- Grid-Certified Feasibility - Every episode certified at window entry (987 grid-infeasible, 102 undecided, all still flown and marked); safety held in 4,800/4,878 episodes, all 78 violations wall clearance around the turn.
- Archived Static Study - The first, static-placement study (1,404 placements, estimator check with median RMSE/CRLB 0.999, 108 flights) is archived unchanged and not merged.