Is it possible to deactivate Kill switch?

[Romans109]

People with a month's experience and an over active imagination are obviously a much more reliable source of information.
There's no point listening to anyone that actually knows what they are talking about.

just because i joined phantom pilots a little over a month ago doesn't mean that's the amount of experience of flying i have, there you go assuming things again lol


Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[Tenly]

People with a month's experience and an over active imagination are obviously a much more reliable source of information.
There's no point listening to anyone that actually knows what they are talking about.

When will someone like that be coming along?

As far as I can tell, your only actual input on this subject has been:

1. An accidental CSC will never occur during normal flight.
2. Accidental CSC's do not occur as frequently as people think they do.

We completely accept the premise of your first point. During *NORMAL* flight, it is very unlikely that someone would choose to perform a manoeuvre that would cause a CSC. We all agree on that point so why keep repeating it?

On your second point - we vehemently disagree with you because you are clearly wrong. The evidence does not support your statement. It would be stupid to assume that every single incident of an unintentional CSC shutdown was reported to this forum - so that means they occur more frequently than what we see posted. DJI has admitted that unintentional CSC is one of the top ten forms of "Pilot Error". Without searching for it - I've seen at least 2 posts in the last month that report unintentional CSC's - and one of them was from an experienced pilot who wasn't doing anything wrong!

Your repeated refusal to acknowledge this evidence does nothing to convince any of us that you are "experienced and wise" or that your words should be respected - on the contrary, it makes you sound pompous, stubborn and narrow-minded.

So here's what we know about you:
- we know that you are aware that *some* crashes occur due to unintentional CSC
- we know that you are AGAINST the prevention of those crashes
- we know that you are feel superior to newer members regardless of their experience or knowledge

(I just deleted an observation I was trying to make because it used words like conceited, judgemental and condescending and no matter how I phrased it, it sounded like a personal attack when all it was meant to be was an observation of your writing style in this particular conversation thread.)

I've asked you directly - at least twice before now - and you've ignored the questions both times. So much for all of your wisdom and experience that we're supposed to value. What good is all that knowledge if you don't share it or explain how you came to your conclusions. It sounds more like you are presenting your own half-baked opinion and then attempting to bully other members into accepting it based on your "experience".

So - perhaps you'll answer these questions this time around?

1. How many incidents of unintentional CSC have to occur per year for you to change your stance and agree that it's a problem that needs improvement?

2. *IF* the process could be improved so that it is not possible to activate unintentionally (no matter how a person is flying), should they improve it?
- If your answer is no - please explain why not?

Please also acknowledge that you are aware these "rare" instances of accidental CSC could result in serious injuries or death to an innocent bystander, damage DJI's reputation and stir up further negative public opinion. Tell us again why this is okay.

Seriously. I don't understand your personal position on this. Some of these crashes are preventable - but because it's only 8 or 10 per year - and because you know it will never happen to you - you think we should not even bother to TRY to eliminate those crashes?

While you might be entitled to your own opinions, I find such a callous disregard for the safety of others to be deplorable and reprehensible! It's a selfish and arrogant view and I could never respect one that held such opinions. Opinions that socially irresponsible are usually best kept to oneself.

I would be willing to bet that you would be one of the first in line to name DJI in a lawsuit if a Phantom were to fall out of the sky as a result of an accidental CSC and seriously or fatally injure one of your family members. It would be nice if you also cared what happens to the loved ones of other people.

Grow a conscience. If you don't want to participate in petitioning DJI to improve the feature - at least bow out of the conversation and don't get in the way of those of us that are more socially responsible and are trying to get DJI to do the right thing for everybody.

 

[dirkclod]

Grow a conscience. If you don't want to participate in petitioning DJI to improve the feature - at least bow out of the conversation and don't get in the way of those of us that are more socially responsible and are trying to get DJI to do the right thing for everybody.

Talking to a mod that way is a good way to start here Tenly .

 

[Myetkt]

One thing you say is true Tenly, your posts are so long that I'm not sure I have enough years left on my life or battery on my iPad to make it through them all! Kidding..
Can you clearly and concisely say what you would like to see done to replace CSC?
I think DJI has to make it easy to do the CSC for a quick shut down, so it needs to be a easy to do function. I also think anything it's changed too, some people won't like it and will complain.
Last I think what Meta4 is trying to say is just as you would have to be jacking around like a"monkey" to throw a manual transmission car from 4th gear into reverse, the same can be said for flying a Phantom. It's simply a matter of thinking about what you are doing.

 

[Tenly]

Talking to a mod that way is a good way to start here Tenly .
View attachment 51688

I hear you - but I don't think I'm all that far out of line.
Certainly when it comes to enforcing the forums rules - right or wrong - a mods decision/opinion is final - but that's not true when debating/discussing an issue - any issue! If mods are going to participate in discussions, they have to expect that their opinions are going to be challenged. Being a forum mod does not make their opinions better, more accurate or ore valuable than anyone else's and when they're wrong, they're going to get called on it.

I've seen some of his posts in other threads and in most of them, he seems to be level headed and polite - and that's why I've framed most of my comments about his opinions to "in this thread" or "on this topic" because the way he addresses members on this topic - and the way he ignores actual evidence in this thread is very different from other threads I've seen him participate in.

I don't think I've said anything that is inaccurate in my post. If I did, and its pointed out to me, I'll withdraw the statement and even apologize if appropriate.

But when discussing something unrelated to forum policy - a mod is just another person and they don't deserve any more respect than any other forum member just because they hold the position of mod.

In this thread, I've been shocked almost to the point of outrage by the morality he exhibits on this particular issue. If this forum is not a place where I can challenge that opinion and point out the flaws in his arguments and the potential dangerous repercussions of his position - so that other readers see a balanced perspective - or so he can perhaps re-evaluate his position - then he can ban me and I'll find another forum to participate in.

If this is a forum where its not appropriate or not allowed to challenge a mod's opinion - then it's not a place I want to be anyhow. I've met a couple of really good people through this forum who have earned my respect and whose opinions I value. I'll keep in touch with them privately.

Apart from the morality of his position on this topic , what makes things worse is that he's not simply agreeing to disagree. He's actively promoting that the feature in question should NOT be reviewed to even attempt to learn whether there is a better way - and because he holds the position of mod - there are brown-nosers here (as there are everywhere) that will blindly follow his lead and jump on the bandwagon to actively demand that the feature not be changed - even if a better way is discovered.

It's hard enough to get DJI to listen to their users at the best of times - but when another group of users is actively working against them, it's downright impossible. If he doesn't back off, things will continue the way they are today until someone is killed by a crashing drone and it is discovered that the crash was caused by an unintentional CSC. A lawsuit will be filed naming DJI and THEN they will change the process. I think the responsibility for that death lands squarely on the shoulders of those advocating that the feature not be changed.

 

[Tenly]

One thing you say is true Tenly, your posts are so long that I'm not sure I have enough years left on my life or battery on my iPad to make it through them all! Kidding..
Can you clearly and concisely say what you would like to see done to replace CSC?
I think DJI has to make it easy to do the CSC for a quick shut down, so it needs to be a easy to do function. I also think anything it's changed too, some people won't like it and will complain.
Last I think what Meta4 is trying to say is just as you would have to be jacking around like a"monkey" to throw a manual transmission car from 4th gear into reverse, the same can be said for flying a Phantom. It's simply a matter of thinking about what you are doing.

At this point, clearly and concisely - I'd like DJI engineers to take a look at the feature and see if they can't come up with a way to make it impossible to trigger it unintentionally.

I'm not arrogant enough to think that my way is the best way or the only way - but if I were the product manager at DJI, I would leave the trigger mechanism the way it is now - but have an extra option under settings called "Confirm CSC" which defaults to "On". When set to "off" the feature would continue to work exactly the way it does today. When set to "On", when putting the sticks in the CSC position, a tone would sound from the remote - this would be the indication that the emergency shutdown was armed. At this point, a quick single tap on the power button would confirm the intent and kill the motors. Any other stick movement or button press would disarm/abort the shutdown.

With that kind of process in place - those who like it the way it is have the option to continue to use it that way - but those who think they need greater peace of mind can also have the protection they want.

For the life of me - I can't imagine why that is not a reasonable, balanced approach to the problem!

The naysayers will argue that it takes longer to hit the power button to confirm than it would take without the confirmation - and they may be right - but:
A) it wouldn't take MUCH longer, and
B) this feature is being aimed at the type of person who purchase the plastic blocker that makes CSC impossible - whether intentionally or not.

I understand what Meta4 is saying about it not occurring during "normal" flight by any kind of qualified or competent pilot. But I also know people - and some will trigger it unintentionally. I don't know all the reasons why a person might do it - but there is evidence that it happens. And given the damage that can occur to innocent bystanders when this does happen - why wouldn't we try to prevent those crashes? Even if it's the worlds biggest jackass that is drunk, incompetent and intentionally flying like a crazy chimp - if we can keep his drone from crashing into a crowd of people - we need to do so! All you need to do is picture one of your loved ones as the victim is the crash and the choice is clear. Meta4 thinks it's more important to punish the jackass pilot with an expensive repair bill than to protect the innocent bystander.

I'm sorry for the length of my messages. I usually start them with the intent of keeping them short but then they always seems to get away from me.

 

[Myetkt]

Well, I do think you make a good case for what it is you are asking for. And I don't want to speak for Meta but I think what he was getting at is with his years of experience he has learned that this isn't something DJI is going to change no matter how many people get behind it.
This is a none issue for DJI. They have a system in place that works and until someone comes along and proves to them in court that it could be a problem it will stay.
Ever see those commercials where a company comes out and says something like "you talked, we listened".. Yea, that's not DJI..

 

[dirkclod]

I hear you - but I don't think I'm all that far out of line.
Certainly when it comes to enforcing the forums rules - right or wrong - a mods decision/opinion is final - but that's not true when debating/discussing an issue - any issue! If mods are going to participate in discussions, they have to expect that their opinions are going to be challenged. Being a forum mod does not make their opinions better, more accurate or ore valuable than anyone else's and when they're wrong, they're going to get called on it.

I've seen some of his posts in other threads and in most of them, he seems to be level headed and polite - and that's why I've framed most of my comments about his opinions to "in this thread" or "on this topic" because the way he addresses members on this topic - and the way he ignores actual evidence in this thread is very different from other threads I've seen him participate in.

I don't think I've said anything that is inaccurate in my post. If I did, and its pointed out to me, I'll withdraw the statement and even apologize if appropriate.

But when discussing something unrelated to forum policy - a mod is just another person and they don't deserve any more respect than any other forum member just because they hold the position of mod.

In this thread, I've been shocked almost to the point of outrage by the morality he exhibits on this particular issue. If this forum is not a place where I can challenge that opinion and point out the flaws in his arguments and the potential dangerous repercussions of his position - so that other readers see a balanced perspective - or so he can perhaps re-evaluate his position - then he can ban me and I'll find another forum to participate in.

If this is a forum where its not appropriate or not allowed to challenge a mod's opinion - then it's not a place I want to be anyhow. I've met a couple of really good people through this forum who have earned my respect and whose opinions I value. I'll keep in touch with them privately.

Apart from the morality of his position on this topic , what makes things worse is that he's not simply agreeing to disagree. He's actively promoting that the feature in question should NOT be reviewed to even attempt to learn whether there is a better way - and because he holds the position of mod - there are brown-nosers here (as there are everywhere) that will blindly follow his lead and jump on the bandwagon to actively demand that the feature not be changed - even if a better way is discovered.

It's hard enough to get DJI to listen to their users at the best of times - but when another group of users is actively working against them, it's downright impossible. If he doesn't back off, things will continue the way they are today until someone is killed by a crashing drone and it is discovered that the crash was caused by an unintentional CSC. A lawsuit will be filed naming DJI and THEN they will change the process. I think the responsibility for that death lands squarely on the shoulders of those advocating that the feature not be changed.

You like to type a lot.
my statement stands .and again..

 

[Tenly]

You like to type a lot.
my statement stands .and again..
View attachment 51708

Fair enough. You're certainly entitled to your own opinion - and since my words won't change you're mind, I'll just agree to disagree and leave all my extra words inside the keyboard!

 

[dirkclod]

Fair enough. You're certainly entitled to your own opinion - and since my words won't change you're mind, I'll just agree to disagree and leave all my extra words inside the keyboard!

 

[Tenly]

...with his years of experience he has learned that this isn't something DJI is going to change no matter how many people get behind it.

Ever see those commercials where a company comes out and says something like "you talked, we listened".. Yea, that's not DJI..

Maybe - but as opposed to wisdom - that's a cynical, defeatist attitude. Just because something has never happened before - doesn't mean it can't or won't happen in the future. It may be extremely unlikely - but if we just give up and resign ourselves to the assumption that they won't fix it and we don't even bother asking for the fix - then it's guaranteed that they won't do anything. Also - if we're not willing to stand up and ask for it - then I think we should lose the right to complain about it.

In any case - I think you're trying to smooth things over and play peacemaker here. I don't think that's what he was trying to say. If it were, then once would end enough and he could have just wished us well on our futile effort. But he definitely insisted, quite clearly in numerous posts that the feature did not need to change and should not be changed because it happens so rarely.

My problem is that "rarely" is not "never" and the difference between the two will almost certainly cost the pilot $ and more importantly, could harm an innocent and make negative headlines.

DJI - if they put their mind to it - can probably come up with a solution better than the one I proposed - but if they can't - my proposal is about as innocuous as can be. Those who don't like need or want the extra protection can continue to use the feature as it exists today. The new safe mode would be something that can be turned on or off at will. The only reason a person could object to such a flexible solution would be if they WANTED bad, irresponsible pilots to experience the crash - as a lesson or punishment for not flying "correctly" - but the fact that they are willing to risk harm to an innocent to preserve the punishment is disgusting to me. As is the assumption that this ONLY happens to bad, irresponsible pilots. Just this week it happened to a responsible, experienced pilot - and with 3rd party software re-mapping the control sticks to provide value added functionality to some of their modes - accidental invocation is only going to become more frequent.

 

[Romans109]

lol good one sir


Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[Tenly]

@dirtclod i mean dirkclod, tenly is at least explaining things, you're just saying how much he types that's not really inputting on what you think about the topic like tenly is but if you don't want to then you don't have to


Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots mobile app

@Romans109 - They can't win any part of this discussion using logic or actual evidence so at this point, their off-topic replies without content are an admission of defeat.

They have no way to defend their earlier statements. They have been thoroughly trounced and they know it. Instead of graciously admitting defeat - or thanking us for helping them see the flaws in their arguments - they choose to go the route of the sore loser and resort to bullying, belittling and mocking. Perhaps they're not used to losing - although I find that quite difficult to believe.

 

[Romans109]

@Romans109 - They can't win any part of this discussion using logic or actual evidence so at this point, their off-topic replies without content are an admission of defeat.

They have no way to defend their earlier statements. They have been thoroughly trounced and they know it. Instead of graciously admitting defeat - or thanking us for helping them see the flaws in their arguments - they choose to go the route of the sore loser and resort to bullying, belittling and mocking. Perhaps they're not used to losing - although I find that quite difficult to believe.

sometimes some of them bully sometimes they just joke around sometimes it's hard to tell


Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[LuvMyTJ]

Lets all step back from the keyboard and take a deep breath. While mods are just like you & me they do deserve respect on any forum as they are the front line in keeping the forum running smoothly. There is no need to belittle anyone on the forum, even if you don't agree with them. Everyone has a right to his or her opinion here, including mods.

As far as the topic here... many of you newer people to the hobby may not be aware but DJI did not come up with that concept. The CSC is an industry standard that has existed almost since the beginning of radio controlled aircraft and I doubt it will be going away anytime soon. Pilots for many, many, many years have had it at their disposal and it has never been an issue before. There is more to popping a quad out of the box and turning it on to become a good RC pilot. You need to know how your aircraft works and the standard operational functions. You wouldn't climb into the seat of a full scale aircraft and just take off would you? No, you would learn all about it before you decided to fly it. The same applies here with your Phantom. Everyone should have a basic understanding of how it works, and how to fly it manually without all the transistor nannies. The biggest mistake DJI made is to say "anyone can fly it right out of the box". That makes everyone with more brains than money think they are pro pilot after 5 minutes. The real way to be a pro is to understand how the aircraft you are operating works and the rules for safe flights.

It appears all those involved have expressed their opinions so lets all agree to disagree on this particular topic.

 

[N017RW]

@Romans109 - They can't win any part of this discussion using logic or actual evidence so at this point, their off-topic replies without content are an admission of defeat.

They have no way to defend their earlier statements. They have been thoroughly trounced and they know it. Instead of graciously admitting defeat - or thanking us for helping them see the flaws in their arguments - they choose to go the route of the sore loser and resort to bullying, belittling and mocking. Perhaps they're not used to losing - although I find that quite difficult to believe.

The only thing anyone can 'win' around here is: r e s p e c t.

 

[Romans109]

i didn't post that tenly did, i posted about the bullying deal


Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[N017RW]

i didn't post that tenly did, i posted about the bullying deal


Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots mobile app

Yea... at the top is says "Tenly said:"

 

[LuvMyTJ]

The only thing anyone can 'win' around here is: r e s p e c t.

 

[Romans109]

so take it up with him if you any concerns lol


Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots mobile app