Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Collapse
Brand Logo

ModalAI Forum

  1. ModalAI Support Forum
  2. Ask your questions right here!
  3. Outdoor metric depth + velocity estimation on Starling 2 Max for target tracking

Outdoor metric depth + velocity estimation on Starling 2 Max for target tracking

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Ask your questions right here!
2 Posts 2 Posters 49 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • Masa ChauM Offline
    Masa ChauM Offline
    Masa Chau
    wrote last edited by
    #1

    Hi all,

    I'm a researcher evaluating the Starling 2 Max for an outdoor + indoor target-tracking project, and I'd appreciate guidance from the team and anyone running a similar setup before we order.

    Our onboard pipeline is a YOLO detector, a BoT-SORT tracker, and a Kalman filter that estimates a moving target's position and velocity, with a small RL policy for guidance.

    From reading the docs and forum, here's my current understanding, and I want to check I have it right:

    Outdoor depth: The PMD ToF is indoor-only. Depth-from-stereo (voxl-dfs-server) exists, but the supported stereo hardware is EOL and the Starling 2 Max's color cameras are rolling shutter, so DFS isn't really an option on this airframe. That seems to leave monocular depth-from-mono for outdoor metric range. Is that the current recommended path, or is there a supported stereo/other option I've missed? For those using depth-from-mono outdoors, what usable range and accuracy are you seeing on a moving target at around 10 to 30 metres?

    Velocity estimation: For estimating a target's relative velocity outdoors, what would you recommend fusing? I'm aware VIO (OpenVINS / qVIO) handles ego-motion, and I've seen the thread where running both servers at once produced bad velocity output, so I'll pin to one. My question is more about relative-velocity-to-target: is the expectation that we get target range from a depth model and differentiate through the Kalman filter, or is there a better-supported approach on VOXL?

    GPS: I've read the EMI threads (GPS relocation to the rear, Lepton cable disconnect, wifi dongle offset, shielding/mast, the V3 GNSS changes). For a unit ordered today, is the EMI issue considered resolved in current hardware, or should we still plan to apply mitigations? Does that change with a 5G modem config?

    For context we'd be on a C28 camera config (no ToF), WiFi modem, developing a custom stack via the SDK. Any pointers from people doing outdoor tracking work on this platform would be hugely appreciated.

    Thanks!
    Masa

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • D Offline
      D Offline
      DavidTorres
      wrote last edited by
      #2

      Hi @masa-chau,

      It seems you are on the right track. A few pointers from my side:

      First, what are you actually trying to achieve? If you can avoid tracking in 3D and perform the task in 2D, I would strongly recommend doing that. Recovering 3D position from 2D observations is quite hard and can be very finicky/unreliable. For many tracking tasks, you can get away with tracking entirely in image space.

      If you really need to track in 3D:

      • Use the PX4 estimator output. VIO is fused into EKF2 in PX4, so I would probably use the PX4 estimated poses/velocities as the state of the drone rather than trying to fuse the raw VIO yourself. I believe these should be available in ROS 2 through voxl-microdds-agent, although someone from ModalAI should confirm the exact topics/data being exposed.

      • Your 2D observations from the object detector are fine, but pay close attention to latency. Also, I would not expect reliable detection at very long distances with the Starling 2 Max fisheye camera; in practice, the useful detection range may be significantly below what you might initially expect.

      • I would not rely on the ToF camera for this.

      • For the actual tracking algorithm, I would look at an EKF or MAP estimator that fuses the 2D observations (e.g. bearing and potentially bounding-box size) with the drone's 3D pose/velocity. The important point is that a single 2D observation does not give you reliable depth. To estimate the object's distance over time, you need additional constraints, typically through a motion model or assumptions about how the tracked object moves.

      Whether the object is flying or driving, you will probably need to make some approximation about its motion. I would look into the existing literature on monocular 3D object tracking / bearing-only tracking for this part.

      Good luck!

      1 Reply Last reply
      0

      Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.

      Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.

      With your input, this post could be even better 💗

      Register Login
      Reply
      • Reply as topic
      Log in to reply
      • Oldest to Newest
      • Newest to Oldest
      • Most Votes


      ModalAI
      Categories Recent Tags ModalAI.com Docs
      © 2026 ModalAI® · Accelerating autonomy for smaller, smarter, safer drones · Powered by NodeBB
      • Login

      • Don't have an account? Register

      • Login or register to search.
      • First post
        Last post
      0
      • Categories
      • Recent
      • Tags
      • Popular
      • Users
      • Groups