I think this violates ITAR. You aren't allowed put a guidance system on a rocket. And even if you were allowed to do it for your own fun/education, you certainly aren't allowed to provide instructions to foreign entities about how it do it.

It absolutely does. So many youtube projects do! Autonomous drones? Sorry, that's a guidance system.

(Edit: ^f 'itar' brought me straight here)

A friend of mine interested in model rocketry demoed a sun tracking model rocket at a state convention. Pretty soon after, he had a chat he described as "terrifying but friendly" with "a few dudes in windbreakers" who wanted to know what he was up to. He didn't get into any trouble but decided he'd stick to unguided rockets from then on.

Between that and playing spot the fed at the local machine gun shoot, I was surprised at just how much attention the state pays to these kind of hobby conventions, but I guess I shouldn't be.

It's life imprisonment just to possess a launcher (not even the rocket) that is intended to launch a rocket/missile that guides towards an aircraft. And the guy has another youtube short where he explicitly says the intended guidance system is cameras that update the location of a missile and then he shows a real drone and also the emblem of an aircraft as intended targets for this guidance system, while also calling it a MANPADS launcher.

That's before you even get to ITAR.

Those of us who have seen people get nailed to the wall for having a almost to scale picture of a machinegun part on a piece of metal, or people convicted of possessing rocket launchers because the ATF put an entirely different gun inside of an deactivated tube and claims it is a rocket launcher because the ATF's own gun could fire inside of it, are watching this with our jaws dropped because we've seen that even bad faith representation of intent that were so much looser than this end in serious convictions.