rfernandez said:
So all the ones that look like that are p1 that they are trying to pass of as visions?
There are more then one of these listings
The camera just looks different that's why I noticed
You should Sell your P2V's Now!
- Thread starter semaj
- Start date
So all the ones that look like that are p1 that they are trying to pass of as visions?
There are more then one of these listings
The camera just looks different that's why I noticed
mr_3_0_5 said:
That's a very strange picture. It looks like a Phantom FC40 with what kind of looks like a P2V camera, but isn't. It's definitely not a P2 in any case...
-slinger
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2014
- Messages
- 373
- Reaction score
- 0
I should not trust those listings look at the official site. they they look different . don't buy it.
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2014
- Messages
- 373
- Reaction score
- 0
Quote "That is a very valid concern. In the end, it all comes down to intent. If someone intent to fly in no-fly zone then you got to wonder why (that is, the no-fly zone is the reason they wouldn't upgrade)."
what are you implying? I refused the upgrade, made a mistake in upgrading then reverted back to 1.08 and that is where i am staying.
I don't fly in restricted airspace unless i have explicit permission with airport authorities and tower control and only then with coordinated plans. when I do aerials of regional airports without commercial traffic.
Not every one who don't like the restrictions have some kind of agenda or ill intent. stop watching conspiracy movies..
PS the restrictions won't stop anyone from entering restricted airspace, and contrary to peoples opinion they won't stop possible flyways.
These restrictions have to be redone and set up current ICAO and FAA airspace regulations and classification. Not the crap they made up as they went along.
This .6 of a mile without satellite lock and 364 feet altitude is a failure..for any airport that boundary is still inside the fence. which is restricted airspace from surface to a minimum of 1200 feet depending on airport airspace classification i.e C,D,G
what are you implying? I refused the upgrade, made a mistake in upgrading then reverted back to 1.08 and that is where i am staying.
I don't fly in restricted airspace unless i have explicit permission with airport authorities and tower control and only then with coordinated plans. when I do aerials of regional airports without commercial traffic.
Not every one who don't like the restrictions have some kind of agenda or ill intent. stop watching conspiracy movies..
PS the restrictions won't stop anyone from entering restricted airspace, and contrary to peoples opinion they won't stop possible flyways.
These restrictions have to be redone and set up current ICAO and FAA airspace regulations and classification. Not the crap they made up as they went along.
This .6 of a mile without satellite lock and 364 feet altitude is a failure..for any airport that boundary is still inside the fence. which is restricted airspace from surface to a minimum of 1200 feet depending on airport airspace classification i.e C,D,G
rfernandez said:
I don't think I am implying anything. There are thousands of Phantom owner and therefore thousands of circumstances. I couldn't possibly imply something for someone specific without knowing that person let along thousands of owners.
It's a generic statement.
All I was saying is that you take 2 person.
One owner says: "I have concern with hovering stability on the V.3 firmware. I'll wait until they've fix the bug before upgrading"
Another owner says: "I do not want to have the no-fly zone limit restriction. I want to fly anywhere I want as long as I deem safe as I am not an idiot. I won't upgrade until they remove that limit".
Would you have same perception of both individual or different perception? The outcome is the same: no upgrade.
That's all I am saying.
Realistically, when the Waypoint (BVR) Flying firmware update is out, that's when you'll see a lot of people upgrading their firmware and begrudgingly accepting the no-fly zone limit / fail-safe feature.
I don't know yawn.... I barely trust this technology when I am doing the flying that it won't decide to have a mind of it's own. Setting waypoints and letting it fly by wire so to speak would kinda have my stomach in knots. I do not see waypoints as a plus for me either. I want to feel as if I have some control over what it does and how it does it so I will know almost right away when something is not right. I see waypoint flight as AWAYpoint flight 
and a sure way for DJI to see more quads to replace the ones swimming with the fishes.
and a sure way for DJI to see more quads to replace the ones swimming with the fishes.JimDE said:I don't know yawn.... I barely trust this technology when I am doing the flying that it won't decide to have a mind of it's own. Setting waypoints and letting it fly by wire so to speak would kinda have my stomach in knots. I do not see waypoints as a plus for me either. I want to feel as if I have some control over what it does and how it does it so I will know almost right away when something is not right. I see waypoint flight as AWAYpoint flight
LOL
For sure something to test out on a small scale first to get comfortable. I am thinking of heading to a state forest or national forest or beach to test it out
People are idiots..
Want proof?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eV21f1MZ5iU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfUfBWvmzA4
I wonder if anyone will try to fly a quad there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6AwPDdwS8c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vv9_JYAADnE
Want proof?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eV21f1MZ5iU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfUfBWvmzA4
I wonder if anyone will try to fly a quad there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6AwPDdwS8c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vv9_JYAADnE
Similar threads
