Welcome to PhantomPilots.com

Sign up for a weekly email of the latest drone news & information

Do the FAA and DJI Have Monogrammed Towels?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by MVodhanel, Feb 16, 2016.

Tags:
  1. MVodhanel

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2016
    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    35
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Bear with me, please, I am not prone to conspiracies (smile), and I am new here. I almost didn’t post this because of that. I have an unusual point of view, I figured I should share it… If you don’t agree, OK.

    Has anyone noticed what appears to be a sickening, pathetic, stomach wrenching, well you get the idea … relationship between the FAA and DJI? I’ll bet they have monogrammed towels in their baths.

    Successful corporations usually show great loyalty to the customers that fund their product. Not DJI. I can tell you from personal experience as well as observation on their forum that they operate as though they have a Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free card from Parker Brothers. The latest genre of firmware that they call updates appear to be, incrementally, employing the FAA agenda. These updates also dumb down other subtle capabilities.

    The realities are such that the feds have huge exposure over these drones. The biggest exposures can’t be discussed publicly for security reasons. That is the US perspective, but it is true internationally, as well. I guess the FAA ended up taking the lead role in managing drones in the US.

    I have always been surprised at the general availability and access of these drones without a background check, or competence verification. I am a retired toolmaker that serviced the defense industry. I am fully aware of the significance of these drones, beyond cinematography. I am very sympathetic of the drone safety issue. I lost my sympathy for the FAA recently – I will explain…

    Something crazy started happening to this country (USA) starting just before the turn of the century. It was caused entirely by a Chinese desire to expand and modernize. Technically, they wanted to Westernize, but heaven help you if you used those words when talking to an Asian… Domestic manufacturers, complete with embedded technology were made offers they couldn’t refuse to relocate to China. Much of this technology, btw, was government subsidized. Right, tax dollars intended to keep local citizens employed in high-tech jobs went straight to China. Again, I will explain.

    There are trade agreements designed to maintain a level playing field between the US and China. Unfortunately, the US was hit by 911 in 2001. Our Pres, George W. responded by chasing the terrorists in Afghanistan. That probably would have been fine, but for some reason, Mr. George decided there were WMD’s somewhere in Iraq, and made it the US job to find them. That turned out to be a ridiculously expensive thing to do. Speaking of expensive….

    None of this is partisan, btw. I am independent. Back then it was a Rep. watch. Now it is a Dem. Watch. According to reports, Bush resorted to Chinese financing to pay for this excursion into Iraq using the latest smart weaponry. He couldn’t risk casualties with conventional weapons and troops on the ground.

    I’m going somewhere with this – I promise. The only way I can illustrate what I know is with recent history. Please bear with me. This is relevant. You can draw your own conclusion, but it can be informed. (I’m older than you – ha!)

    This is where it gets personal with me, and I get rubbed the wrong way by the FAA.

    To continue describing the awful, almost abrupt way domestic manufacturing migrated to China. Companies like the tooling company that my father and I had been running in S. CA for over 50 years, companies that serviced domestic manufacturing were abruptly left without clients. We simply had to shut down. This was during the period Mr. George was chasing WMDs in Iraq.

    The trade agreements between China and US went unenforced since those assaulting it were the new, US, (Chinese) financiers. When there is something resembling a war taking place the incumbents have a built in smoke screen and do what they want under the emergency of war. Anyone questioning it will have their patriotism questioned and accused of putting American troops in harm’s way. There is a reason why you now see so many ‘made in China’ tags.

    The FAA/drone parallel is that anyone questioning what the FAA is doing is subject to criticism and considered irresponsible and not being good for the sport or hobby.

    Like the Chinese financiers of the past that assaulted the hell out of our trade agreements, does DJI enjoy some sort of a special relationship with the FAA that none of the other drone manufacturers have? (but soon will)

    Like the emergencies of war used by the Bush admin, the FAA gets to claim public safety and take shortcuts when desired. Instead of doing something proactive to control something placed in their jurisdiction, they seem to have chosen to rely on unproven automation. Those paying the price are, once again, civilians. Victims of some sort of an arrangement between feds and Chinese that may or may not be appropriate.


    MY POINT:

    Actually, how about I just put down a few things I believe to be true. Just call it food for thought.

    1) FLY-ZONE (only) As opposed to NO-FLY-NONE being the final goal for the FAA

    2) The FAA registration is more of a diversion than anything constructive, #1 above is the FAA solution

    3) The ability to downgrade P3 firmware will solve consumer problems and force the FAA to do its job

    4) DJI’s loyalty is clearly directed toward the FAA. If the consumer regained control of the hardware they own, maybe this would change.

    5) The technology making smart drones possible was invented in the West. By the ‘West’ I mean America, Europe and Japan but not China. Chinese developers are consumers of Western, low-level technology that they probably don’t understand.

    6) A national US emergency would shut down civilian GPS and be the HS, post-response to something major. I guess that would satisfy safety issues there.


    · Btw I noticed this posting was moved from the P3 area. I understand why, but understand that this was written specifically about the P3. I doubt that it will apply to any other model. Also, please don’t think I dislike Asians, either. That would not be true. The reality is that I don’t look for, nor care much about ethnicity in people – this is the 21’st century after all. My comments are directed at my government. Please do enjoy your drone!
     
    #1 MVodhanel, Feb 16, 2016
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2016
    KyleMaxxUAV and ObiDon like this.
  2. DeputyDrone

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2015
    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    20
    DJI doesn't want to make a big payout when some jackass flies in front of a jet liner.
     
  3. ryantrax

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2015
    Messages:
    795
    Likes Received:
    179
    Location:
    Xenia, Ohio
    3DR has also been working closely with the FAA, they have someone on the FAA advisory board.
     
  4. N017RW

    Joined:
    May 2, 2014
    Messages:
    6,239
    Likes Received:
    1,613
    Location:
    Palm Beach Co.- FL


    This is a consumer class drone. All you need to fly is the $ to purchase.

    There are countless components free of DJI/FAA collusion to enable you to build your own conspiracy-free MR allowing you all the freedom you can afford and execute.

    There is such an idolization of the Phantom's that folks overlook the fact that it's a toy flying camera.
    A GREAT value for the $ but a toy in a closed eco-system.
     
    GoodnNuff likes this.
  5. Deputy Dog

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2016
    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    21
    Location:
    Wide Open AZ
    The FAA is King in DJI's world! Don't mock the King! And remember, It's FUN, FUN, FUN until the FAA takes your Phantom away!
     
  6. lookin4pain

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2015
    Messages:
    175
    Likes Received:
    93
    Location:
    Oregon
    edited
     
  7. Rasit

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2016
    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    32
    Somebody likes to write... Lost me after the second paragraph.
     
    GoodnNuff, Sagebrush and Deputy Dog like this.
  8. MVodhanel

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2016
    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    35
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Only when inspired, sorry man, don't know how else to pass stuff like this on...
     
  9. KyleMaxxUAV

    Approved Vendor

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Messages:
    1,108
    Likes Received:
    312



    Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots mobile app
     
  10. WetDog

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2015
    Messages:
    1,491
    Likes Received:
    640
    If you think that DJI sleeps with the FAA, how about Boeing, Rayethon, $Insert_Industry_Player_here? This is just how it works. Aircraft are highly complex, technical objects and regulating them requires highly complex technical knowledge - that the manufacturers have. They all pretty much HAVE to work closely with the FAA to get anything to work. Can that be an issue in terms of regulatory capture? Sure.

    Is that the case here? I doubt it. DJI is in a tough spot. They see the writing on the wall limiting UAV use. They want to sell lots of little Phantoms and it's sisters. So they need to sell something that the regulators will accept. And they need to do something to keep the Idiots from ruining it for everyone. The GeoFence is an obvious idea that DJI didn't implement all that well (sound familiar?). To it's credit, it did it as an open beta and so far seems to be ruminating about what it learned. I think most Phantom flyers wouldn't object to a decent Geofence but the DJI attempt had some serious deficiencies. None of them seemed insurmountable except perhaps getting decent mapping data.

    But we WANT DJI and the FAA to be good buddies. Or at least civil roommates. Otherwise you will get to fly inside your house and that's it.
     
    GoodnNuff likes this.
  11. Sagebrush

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    549
    Likes Received:
    155
    Right. It didn't shut down on 9/11. The banks use the GPS system to maintain accurate clocks for moving money. IFR approaches rely on (the FAA's WAAS enabled) GPS system. Higher end devices use a combination of GPS and Russia's GLONAAS satellites (as does DJI's P3 line) for positioning. The European system will be online next year.

    I could go back through your list... DJI in bed with FAA? I'm betting bigfoot is in bed with sasquatch. Now if I can catch that with my quad, I'll be smoking.

    S
     
    GoodnNuff and N017RW like this.
  12. MVodhanel

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2016
    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    35
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    What I posted here sat on my computer for a bunch of days and I re-wrote it a couple of times. Would you believe I cut the boring parts out? (ha!) It is a difficult read, and I can see that it is actually being read and understood enough to take apart. For that I am grateful Like I concluded at the bottom; I just wanted to take a shot at provoking thought (not that I did, I am no judge of such).

    There is no precedent for what began around the turn of the century regarding US, domestic manufacturing and the technology that goes with it and the way it was relocated to China. The damage that was done has not really been tallied and I think there is a sense of denial about it, furthermore, folks feel a general sense of comfort provided by the cheap goods from China. I really find this a difficult subject sometimes, certainly if there is no reason to discuss it.

    But how about looking at the drones from purely a consumer standpoint and question whether the practices between DJI / FAA are fair to the consumer? On date A consumer John purchases a drone that is able to fly in area D and E, and has range N. Two months later, the FAA decides that it is no longer going to have NO-FLY-ZONES, it is simply going to have designated FLY-ZONES in most big cities.John's drone will not even power up unless he is in a designated FLY-ZONE. DGI forced this change on John by way of a firmware update, and did not inform John about this in advance. John is not allowed to downgrade, either.

    This isn't exactly what is occurring right now, but it isn't far fetched. The question is: Is this fair to John the consumer?

    I guess I have made my feelings clear re: FAA Whats wrong with them getting off their... and actually managing the drones. They seem to be passing the buck. You have no idea how dearly I have paid for the privilege of being able to say stuff like that :) (it is kind of like insulting a member of own family)
     
  13. Sagebrush

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    549
    Likes Received:
    155
    The FAA has done a remarkable job with aviation safety for the last 60 years. (If you don't believe this, go fly with Malaysian Air.)

    They aren't looking at what's fair. I'm sure they are well aware they are five years behind on making this thing work.

    S
     
  14. Roadking

    Joined:
    May 23, 2013
    Messages:
    123
    Likes Received:
    47
    Location:
    Belmont, NC USA
    How is a drone any different from a remote control plane or helicopter? It just seems that the FAA and local governments are rushing to regulate when for years the rest of the flying hobbies were pretty much left alone.
     
  15. Sagebrush

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    549
    Likes Received:
    155
    Legally, if I understand the rules and legislation, nothing.

    S
     
  16. TYCORP

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2015
    Messages:
    109
    Likes Received:
    33
    Location:
    BC , CANADA
    It's easy.
    Market share protection.
    Who can afford $1000-$3000
    "Toys"
    If USA is a "primary" target, it's obvious that they will take steps to make sure their product or type of products are not blanket banned.
    Even if they are banned in 2 years it's 2 more profits out of USA than if they never returned a call from FAA
     
  17. MVodhanel

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2016
    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    35
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Criticize the FAA for general air safety? Not Me!

    Why is the FAA behind schedule in making civilian versions of our own technology safe for its own citizens? Like this wasn't predictable? (totally rhetorical - no one can answer this!)

    My original point was more with the consumer issue, and how the response of anything coming from a federal post is generally accepted, regardless of the consequences.