Many, many, may I say most auto manufacturers do in fact limit speed on cars they produce.
What exactly is DJI going to limit you on?
Confusing dji article
- Thread starter Dazzauk
- Start date
Many, many, may I say most auto manufacturers do in fact limit speed on cars they produce.
What exactly is DJI going to limit you on?
Yay!!!!! We finally have someone here's who's paying attention instead of wrapping themselves in a ball of fear, just "they" want us too....
Ya folks YOU DONT HAVE TO UPDATE!!!!!! If you feel your UAV will become a paper weight lol.
Pretty much everything you are trying to assert has already been addressed in this thread.
I think this more has to do with adding another regions (China) enforcement and limitation scheme to the mix. I bet that the aircraft has to be re activated so it can be reinitialized to acquire its first fix and set its regionalized flight restrictions and transmit power and operational channels. Sure this information could be retained but then it would allow people in China who had already activated to not have any certain type of hard coded restrictions or NFZ which have most recently changed. The NFZ region is set during activation? I mean I would just think it would be a few megs of data if not more to have hardcoded, world wide NFZs for the entire world. I bet it would make more sense to update this table during the activation process or with firmware. But if the bin is the same world wide then how would you update hardcoded NFZ (non temporary) information when it changes, especially when you know you have many users that stay off line to avoid adhoc NFZ's? Instead you get them an update when they activate checked against their current location. Then and only then do you force a table of NFZ. Of course I have no idea what I am talking about so do not even read this please but I make firmware for DVD and Bluray players that work (on the DVD side) by locking to the region of the first discs region that was inserted. I really don't think this is much to worry about. I'll just update the application (automatically) install firmware with assistant like always. Press activate and fly.
Until it descends into the 80 foot tree...
Could have fooled me, in my younger days I would go WAY over the speed limit, many do, my record was 113, that's when the GOVERNOR kicked in, which has nothing to do with laws and everything to do with keeping my engine from exploding. Not really the same thing.
It's not about what they are doing now, but what they COULD do in the future with this update.
No - you don't have to install these updates.
No - you don't have to install these updates.
No - you don't have to install these updates.
You can absolutely keep using the software and firmware that your drone came with, and continue to fly with complete disregard for Federal laws and guidelines - not that there is any reason to believe that the update will prevent you from doing that anyway. Just don't come whining here that the NFZs and other restrictions didn't save you when you get prosecuted for endangering the NAS.[/QUOTE]
But if you don't update you don't get the latest software improvements or support, something that you paid to recieve when you bought the drone. And if you do get the update and don't agree to the new terms then the product you paid for will be disabled, and there is no way to go back to the old firmware.
So your choices are never get software updates or support or get a disabled drone if you don't agree. Hardly a fair choice.
[/QUOTE]
What you refuse to understand is that it is my right to decide whether or not to follow the laws and my responsibility if I get caught nreaking them, not DJIs. I paid for a product with certain capabilities and I expect to keep them. Period. And you really don't have a problem with a company, especially in a foreign country, having the ability to remotely disable your drone at any time?
Most people HERE don't even seem to understand the law, do you really think DJI will? Just look at the current NFZs, many of them are completely inaccurate.
If I don't install the updates I will have to permanently keep automatic updates turned off for my entire device as Apple doesn't have the capability to just keep one app from not updating, I will also have to give up all improvements and foxes which might come with future updates, something which was included in the purchase price. Also, I will in effect never ne able to get service under warranty or even paid repair as the first thing they will do is update the firmware and it will be impossible to reflash the old firmware if it needs to ne reloaded.
The one question DJI could answer to settle this uproar is "Will this update give DJI the theoretical ability to remotely shutdown or restrict drones based on where they are in the world?"
DJI had the ability to disable your drone any time you installed an update, if they so chose, though why they would is a mystery to me. You paid for the hardware and software/firmware in place at the time of purchase. You did not enter into a contract of any kind that guaranteed what future, optional updates would look like. If you didn't like the configuration that you bought then you should not have bought it. If you don't like the optional updates then don't install them. You have every right to express disappointment if the updates don't head in a direction that you approve of, but you have no recourse beyond that other than to take your business elsewhere. I strongly encourage you to do that.
Really??
Those are not your choices, but you firmly believe they are. Have fun with your updates bud.
Speed limiters in automobiles have nothing to do with blowing up your engine, they do have a lot to do with tires and laws, but that's a whole nother topic we shouldn't be discussing. So maybe save the inaccurate car relationship comments for another day
How are those not the choices?
If you do not update you will not get any updates. You also will not be able to get warranty or repair service either as the first thing they will do is update the firmware.
If you do install the upgrade nut refuse to reregister to accept the new terms than your drone is a paperweight.
So how is what I said inaccurate?
Really? And where is the US is it legal to go 113? And my car was slow, many people can go much faster.Speed limiters in automobiles have nothing to do with blowing up your engine, they do have a lot to do with tires and laws, but that's a whole nother topic we shouldn't be discussing. So maybe save the inaccurate car relationship comments for another day
[/QUOTE]
I think a lot of folks on this forum are already "disregarding guidelines by flying beyond VLOS ,No ?
Of course. And they will no doubt continue to do so. Under some circumstances that may carry little extra risk - note that it is one of the waivable regulations under Part 107, and I'm sure that DJI will not do anything to prevent it since one of their selling points is aircraft control range.
Last edited:
LOL,So your comment before means nothing to you ,
"and continue to fly with complete disregard for Federal laws and guidelines "
I'm afraid that I don't understand the point you are trying to make - could you clarify?
Whats to clarify in one comment your sounding like the Jr. Drone Police and the next your minimizing is saying " Under some circumstances that may carry little extra risk" are you wearing a DJI ball cap or tee shirt ?
Whats to clarify in one comment your sounding like the Jr. Drone Police and the next your minimizing is saying " Under some circumstances that may carry little extra risk" are you wearing a DJI ball cap or tee shirt ?
Just to be clear - the poster I was responding to originally was complaining that he wanted to be able to make his own decisions as to which rules and guidelines to follow, and is concerned that DJI is going to prevent him from breaking some of them. I pointed out that he could simply not update the firmware and software, and then he would obviously be able to continue to disregard those rules and guidelines.
My answer to your question was that many pilots do fly beyond VLOS, which is contravenes either a Part 101 guideline and Part 107 rule (unless waived, which can be granted in certain circumstances if equivalent safety can be demonstrated). How are those statements inconsistent?
Similar threads
