# Testing Procedure of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) Trajectory in Automatic Missions
## 3 Results
### Task 5--Photogrammetric Mission--Bank Turn  
The characteristics of this test has allowed for carrying out the flight trajectory analyses similarly to those that are contained in task 4. The specificity of the mission has consisted in the device constantly moving and performing the manoeuvres of changing direction without stopping at the turn points. The principle of determining the value of the deviation from the designed flight line has been adopted identical as in task 4. Figure 9a illustrates the deviations from the planned flight path for COM-1, which have occurred during the test performed in the light wind conditions, while Figure 9b depicts the graph for COM-2 for the strong wind test. The demonstrated data includes five flight lines and it is presented in the same sets as in task 4. In this test, the author has not presented the statistical data on the deviations from the designed line in a tabular form, as their values are significantly influenced by flight characteristics. An important element presented in Table 11 is the data on the distances from the ends of the planned flight lines, where the UAV has performed a turn. These values have been calculated as the projections of the shortest sections connecting the trajectory of the UAV movement projected onto a line perpendicular to the flight line Figure 10. Table 11 presents the minimum, maximum, mean and standard deviations of these values for the data captured from the MS50 and the LOG files. The differences in the results between COM-1 and COM-2 are not significant. However, the results for both on-board computers show the effect of wind force on the results. The standard deviation values are at least 25% higher for strong wind and they show more flight instability in turns. The analysis of the results from task 5 allows for asserting that a continuous flight without stopping is not susceptible to a strong wind as a flight during which the UAV stops. The comparison of the results for the PROJ-MS50 and PROJ-LOG data sets for the horizontal data, i.e., Figure 10 and 9a, demonstrates their similarity. When analysing the MS50-UAV differences in the horizontal plane, the differences visible in the light wind graph only indicate the occurrence of random errors in the GNSS observations of the receiver that was installed in the UAV.  
Figure 9b, which illustrates the results for the test performed in strong wind conditions, draws attention to the occurrence of a systematic factor related to wind pressure. However, it also has a repetitive nature that will not affect the side overlap. In instances of differences in altitude, the earlier observations regarding the failure of the UAV to reach the planned altitude have been confirmed. On the other hand, it is also apparent that during the continuous flight the trajectory is smooth. In addition, it is worth emphasising that the UAV has failed to attain the planned lengths  
Figure 10: Maps illustrating how distances from the ends of the planned flight lines have been measured in task 5.  
Figure 9: Data from flights in task 5: (**a**) for COM-1 in light wind conditions, (**b**) for COM-2 in strong wind conditions.  
of the flight lines. The recorded turn points have been approximately 9.50 m from the planned ones (mean values in Table 11). Moreover, Figure 9b illustrates that having made a turn, and having covered 25 to 30 m from the turn point. The UAV gradually approaches the planned flight line, reaching a transverse distance from the design flight trajectory of less than 2 m Figure 9a. It is worth noting that the wind strength has not significantly affected this parameter.