What an absurd listing (http://www.dji.com/fly-safe/category-mc). This isn't about safety it's about public relations and marketing.
Flight Restrictions in 3.0
- Thread starter ScottH
- Start date
ianwood
Taco Wrangler
ScottH said:
Think what you like but DJI is not in the business of selling pieces of plastic that can't fly. In other words, if you can't fly, they go out of business. So they must have had a good reason for doing it even if their implementation has some serious issues.
Everyone can see the FAA storm coming, including DJI. Once the new regulations come in effect, and you better believe they will, DJI will have a step ahead of everyone else.
I will say publically here that I believe all manufacturers will have requirements, like us the consumers. Flying limits will be one of them.
DJI sells more quad copters than all the others, maybe even combined together. So at least they are proactive. I see no problems with this. WE CAN'T FLY THERE ANYWAYS.
Also, as an aside to this topic, The P2V was under the Collin reign, and the P2V+, which is a definite improvement, is since he is gone. Public figure aside, DJI seems in good shape with what they are doing.
I will say publically here that I believe all manufacturers will have requirements, like us the consumers. Flying limits will be one of them.
DJI sells more quad copters than all the others, maybe even combined together. So at least they are proactive. I see no problems with this. WE CAN'T FLY THERE ANYWAYS.
Also, as an aside to this topic, The P2V was under the Collin reign, and the P2V+, which is a definite improvement, is since he is gone. Public figure aside, DJI seems in good shape with what they are doing.
I totally agree but you can bet that the next thing that will happen is airport managers and commissioners from Teterboro to Timbuktu will want their airports on the list. And what will DJI do? Risk a mid-air after they said no? Doubt it. And what of the busy city heliports and EMS heliports at hospitals? That's where the true risk is IMO. Some kind of online awareness program is needed.
ericdes said:
+1
For the hobby to survive it needs to be out of the media. The big contributing companies that make the hobby better have to be publicly showing that safety is an ongoing concern for them. A lot of people see it as removing 'free will from the people' but apart from RC planes, the only things in the air is something larger, heavier and with souls on board. Anything they can do to keep that 1% of idiots from causing chaos can only be a good thing for the rest.
This comment puzzles me? I can't see any good argument for any airport with active runways being off the list. Why on earth would anyone need to fly a Phantom in or around an airport anyway? Its not like there aren't a fair few million square miles of land that can be used still afterall.
ianwood
Taco Wrangler
Any airfield should have a proportional no fly area around it. It's only common sense. The slippery slope is when other "sensitive" areas get added to the list which have less to do with safety and more to do with other interests. The interview with Colin Guinn highlighted that perfectly. I'm pretty darn sure Tienanmen Square is not an airport! So yes, we should all be watching this very closely.
I could give a shut less what the Chinese think is right or wrong. We are a country of laws, if the US makes a law it's up to us to follow it, or challenge it. I do not like being controlled by a foreign government. I will find a way to safely hack it or change it.
I do not and will not risk an accident by flying near an airport. It's common sense. But I will fly at RC clubs that share the airport at specific times.
I'm tired of entities playing nanny with my shut. And you all know what shut means.
I do not and will not risk an accident by flying near an airport. It's common sense. But I will fly at RC clubs that share the airport at specific times.
I'm tired of entities playing nanny with my shut. And you all know what shut means.
Look the last thing I want to see coming out of the clouds on the approach to 4L at Logan is a quadcopter taking pictures of the hot dog stand at Castle Island. But DJI have set a bad precedent now with the notion that they can set flight restrictions this way. They cannot go back. The list of airports will grow. Will sport stadiums be next, state parks, monuments, etc? Get it?
And who is making the decisions on what else will be on the no-fly list? The Chinese?
At least in the regulated world of the FAA, we have an established means of setting flight restrictions around certain areas like military installations, vip visits, etc. and of course a complicated airspace system that takes into account traffic density, instrument approach procedures, airways. You can't just throw up a TFR.
Look at it this way.. Ford thinks you drive too fast, they're tired of the lawsuits.. so from now on in your F150 your GPS location will be used to set the appropriate throttle limit depending on the speed limit. I do think DJI must be proactive, totally agree. But this was not the way to do it.
And who is making the decisions on what else will be on the no-fly list? The Chinese?
At least in the regulated world of the FAA, we have an established means of setting flight restrictions around certain areas like military installations, vip visits, etc. and of course a complicated airspace system that takes into account traffic density, instrument approach procedures, airways. You can't just throw up a TFR.
Look at it this way.. Ford thinks you drive too fast, they're tired of the lawsuits.. so from now on in your F150 your GPS location will be used to set the appropriate throttle limit depending on the speed limit. I do think DJI must be proactive, totally agree. But this was not the way to do it.
ianwood
Taco Wrangler
WeaponsHot said:
I'd suggest maybe not lumping all things Chinese into one amalgamated mass of xenophobic inspired foreignness. Furthermore, as "a country of laws" we have none relating to UAVs. The FAA in it's shear incompetence has failed produce anything in 30 years. DJI effectively did what the FAA has failed to do despite being repeatedly asked by the White House, Congress, and the public countless times. You may not agree with what DJI did or how they did it but at least they did something!
ScottH said:
How is stopping people being in front of that plane over 4L in anyway a bad prescedent? They are simply making it so you go take pictures of a hot dog stand in a place without active air traffic. That to me is only a good thing.
Yes probably they will add to the list. All airporst should be on the list anyway for obvious reasons. Likewise stadiums or other venues where there is a large density of unaware people. Why should 1 persons wish for a nice video risk anyone on the ground?
Also bare in mind that this is a Phantom 2 restriction. Not currently a NAZA v2 or Wookang restriction. Likely reason is that the Phantom 2 'out of the box' nature means it is more likely used by people who are blissfully unaware of their surroundings or FAA laws. The fact we are all in here is great.... we clearly both care and know about restrictions but how many Phantoms owners are out there that just got it is a fun gift?
The Ford argument on speed restriction is fairly irrelevent here but it makes a good point. Ford's equivilent tech here is their auto breaking system.... it stops owners hitting things by acting for them. It saves lives by making sensible restrictions 'Huh I don't know why you've not braked as there is an object you are about to hit... I'll do it for you'
DJI version 'Huh you seem to want to fly over that runway with planes landing... I'll stop it for you'
I would still rather promote safety through education rather than some mechanical means. A simple online course with a knowledge test at the end.
I just don't think DJI is capable of determining where the busy airports really are. That was what precipitated my first comment. Teterboro is a hell of a busy place with lots of jet traffic. Why isn't that on the list? Or White Plains? And besides, the Cubs that fly off the grass strip up the street are just as vulnerable. There's no end.
I just don't think DJI is capable of determining where the busy airports really are. That was what precipitated my first comment. Teterboro is a hell of a busy place with lots of jet traffic. Why isn't that on the list? Or White Plains? And besides, the Cubs that fly off the grass strip up the street are just as vulnerable. There's no end.
"Look at it this way.. Ford thinks you drive too fast, they're tired of the lawsuits.. so from now on in your F150 your GPS location will be used to set the appropriate throttle limit depending on the speed limit. I do think DJI must be proactive, totally agree. But this was not the way to do it."
I wouldn't count this argument out the window either. Word is the next Nissan GTR will do 0-60 under 2 seconds.... Only at a registered track in its GPS unit. Outside of that their will be limitations to the horsepower and torque.
Be careful what you wish for.
I wouldn't count this argument out the window either. Word is the next Nissan GTR will do 0-60 under 2 seconds.... Only at a registered track in its GPS unit. Outside of that their will be limitations to the horsepower and torque.
Be careful what you wish for.
there seems to be an LED warning when flying in these areas; 4 green then fast blinking red LEDs, anyone experience?
Similar threads
