DJI has abandoned professionals

At some point there was a meeting for DJI developers & Managment;
Man: Doing good guys, Say, how's that tilted horiz fix coming?
Dev: we're still ignoring it
Man: it's annoying a lot of people and should be trivial to fix
Dev: how are sales?
Man: good
Dev: right. So, we have a new feature
Man: yea? Awesome! Bette faster further cooler?
Dev: No, this will cost us a ton of money to develop, operate and at some point defend against in litigation
Man: but is it a selling point?
Dev: no, it's a restriction everyone will hate
Man: so we need it?
Dev: nope
Man: our competitors have it so we need to?
Dev: nope, they are wisely avoiding it
Man: why do we need it?
Dev: because if we don't spend time and money on it we'll have to spend those resources on fixing bugs and improving our products as customers want. Bah! Customers! What do they know! Lol
Man: ok, sounds great, let's do it!
 
It is absolutely impossible to predict the future.

Quite the contrary. The future is very easy to predict by looking at the present and the past. People will continue to do stupid things with their drones. We will eventually have a major incident. The public will cry out for massive restrictions or bans on drones. The government will gladly comply to score reelection points.

DJI knows this. The industry knows this. What DJI did is its attempt to save its consumer business. The only problem is, they suck at programming so they didn't do it very well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sar104
I can turn any feature of my drone on and off. Some of them are obviously useful, but; it's my choice, I'm the pilot, I'm responsible and in charge.
But I can't control Geo? A system I didn't ask for, don't want and didn't initially pay for but am forced to use?!
 
Quite the contrary. The future is very easy to predict by looking at the present and the past. People will continue to do stupid things with their drones. We will eventually have a major incident. The public will cry out for massive restrictions or bans on drones. The government will gladly comply to score reelection points.

DJI knows this. The industry knows this. What DJI did is its attempt to save its consumer business. The only problem is, they suck at programming so they didn't do it very well.

That's a guess. Even if it's a good guess it's a guess. NO ORHER AIRCRAFT on the planet earth has such a system and as far as I know no one is stupid enough to make one.

Dji are not the airspace police, it's not their job.

Imagine if DJi made cars, one morning you wake up for work and you car says "firmware updates automatically, thank you using Dji"

Then it won't start "cannot drive" on display - why? Presidential motorcade using the road you use to get to work. You have to wait. Or it detected that one headlight is out and that you cannot legally drive without two, even its daytime. Or or has detected that one tire tread is below what dji thinks is "safe" Sorry, your car won't drive. Sucks to be you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peio64270
I can turn any feature of my drone on and off. Some of them are obviously useful, but; it's my choice, I'm the pilot, I'm responsible and in charge.
But I can't control Geo? A system I didn't ask for, don't want and didn't initially pay for but am forced to use?!

Until there are regulations, training, testing and certification in place to ensure that UAV owners have an appropriate level of skill and knowledge as real pilots then expecting equivalent freedom in the sky is unrealistic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AyeYo
Imagine the Phantom 5:

New features : automatic air police enforcement module.

It uses FPS to get your location and then current time and looks up
Sunrise and sunset values and determines it nighttime - sorry, can't take off

Dji determines, arbitrarily, that no one can see a drone with the unaided eye further the 1.9 miles away so now limits all maximum distances from the controller to 1.9 miles. Exceed that and it initiates an unstoppable immediate landing wherever it is.

Winds over 30 mph will cause unpredictable stability... sometimes... so if it think you are at 29+ mph wind speed it will auto land.

Flying over water is dangerous, aircraft could sink - using Google maps it prevents any flight over water.

Flying in the rain is inadvisable. Using the weather channel RSS feed, if there is a 51% or higher chance of rain if won't let you fly. We know how spot on accurate that is.
 
Until there are regulations, training, testing and certification in place to ensure that UAV owners have an appropriate level of skill and knowledge as real pilots then expecting equivalent freedom in the sky is unrealistic.

Says who?
Not being "mean" - but. Says who?
FAA doesn't. No other law making body has. No other drone maker has or or has announced a GeoJail system like DJIs.
And "real" pilots fly much bigger and way way way way way way way more dangerous craft, they should have higher levels of training. We're flying advanced plastic toys with sharp props as their scariest threat.
 
That's a guess. Even if it's a good guess it's a guess. NO ORHER AIRCRAFT on the planet earth has such a system and as far as I know no one is stupid enough to make one.

Dji are not the airspace police, it's not their job.

Imagine if DJi made cars, one morning you wake up for work and you car says "firmware updates automatically, thank you using Dji"

Then it won't start "cannot drive" on display - why? Presidential motorcade using the road you use to get to work. You have to wait. Or it detected that one headlight is out and that you cannot legally drive without two, even its daytime. Or or has detected that one tire tread is below what dji thinks is "safe" Sorry, your car won't drive. Sucks to be you.

Cars do have speed limiters. They have undefeatable traction control and stability control.

The potential for drones to wreck havoc whether by intention or accident is massive. DJI is not only covering it's own *** from a liability perspective, it is preserving it's business by showing governments around the world it is taking action to prevent irresponsible use so that they don't have to. If you think Geo is restrictive to your "muh ratz" and "muh freedumbz", just wait and see what governments come up with.
 
Cars do have speed limiters. They have undefeatable traction control and stability control.
Untrue. All are defeatible BUT huge difference. These protect YOU and the vehicle. And none will prevent you from driving. Apples vs oranges here.

Speed limiters protect the tires. Rev limiters protect the engine. Neither prevent you from driving and can be defeated.

The potential for drones to wreck havoc whether by intention or accident is massive. DJI is not only covering it's own *** from a liability perspective, it is preserving it's business by showing governments around the world it is taking action to prevent irresponsible use so that they don't have to. If you think Geo is restrictive to your "muh ratz" and "muh freedumbz", just wait and see what governments come up with.

Those are your opinions
 
That just so happen to be shared by DJI leadership, law makers, industry leaders, and regulators.

Says you. DJI may want to do this but no one is making then do it. You are trying to be a mind reader.

Name another drone maker who has a mandatory Geo system; law makers, industry leaders and regulators ignoring them?
 
When firmware 2.5 rolls out and has new limits; 400 foot max altitude. 1 mile (Los low average) max range, only flies during day light hours I'm sure industry leaders will applaud it...
 
Says you. DJI may want to do this but no one is making then do it.

Typically you don't need anyone "making" you engage in self-preservation of your business.

Name another drone maker who has a mandatory Geo system; law makers, industry leaders and regulators ignoring them?

The other major consumer drone manufacturer: Yuneec. Their drones are limited to 400ft and even after proving Part 107 with proper airspace authorization they will only allow 30ft (not a typo, only 3-0 feet) in whatever they determine in an NFZ.
 
Says who?
Not being "mean" - but. Says who?
FAA doesn't. No other law making body has. No other drone maker has or or has announced a GeoJail system like DJIs.
And "real" pilots fly much bigger and way way way way way way way more dangerous craft, they should have higher levels of training. We're flying advanced plastic toys with sharp props as their scariest threat.

In the US the FAA has been prevented from saying that, and implementing that, by the Special Rule for Model Aircraft. And perhaps you misunderstood my comment - I was not saying that equivalent freedom in the sky is forbidden, I said that expecting it is unrealistic.

On the issue of hazards, it doesn't matter whether you regard it as a toy (although that seems inconsistent with your claim to be an abandoned professional) - all that matters is the set of hazards that it presents. And the major hazards in question when discussing engineered controls such as Geo are clearly not the sharp propellers - this is about either deliberate or inadvertent intrusion into airspace that risks collision with manned aircraft.

Commercial operators are a small minority and are relatively well trained. I doubt that many are flying illegally. The problem is that the relatively much larger group of untrained, uncertified recreational pilots clearly includes a minority who engage in dangerous flying. While it is clear that determined risk takers will find their way around even well-engineered controls, even if only a subset of potential risk-takers are deterred or prevented from dangerous flying by an engineered control then the aggregate risk is reduced, and DJI (as the largest player) can take some credit for a level of implemented safety that at least suggests that it is attempting to prevent unsafe practices. That may well delay/deter more draconian legislation driven by the appearance that the industry cannot self-regulate. So just because legislation does not currently exist to require them to do that does not mean that it is not a good idea. And I think it is very likely that they have made a very careful study of the risk/benefit balance, given the implications to their business model.

Personally I think that the best solution is a better Geo system, or similar, which gives certified pilots full ability to use their certification and, additionally, any authorizations and waivers to bypass the restrictions. But those basic restrictions probably need to be there because, as has been demonstrated time and time again, you cannot trust many recreational pilots to follow basic safety guidelines.

There is further hope on the horizon via the introduction of enterprise solutions that explicitly address the needs of some (especially corporate/government) professional users that, since they will not be available to recreational pilots, will not need all the same restrictions.
 
In the US the FAA has been prevented from saying that, and implementing that, by the Special Rule for Model Aircraft. And perhaps you misunderstood my comment - I was not saying that equivalent freedom in the sky is forbidden, I said that expecting it is unrealistic.

On the issue of hazards, it doesn't matter whether you regard it as a toy (although that seems inconsistent with your claim to be an abandoned professional) - all that matters is the set of hazards that it presents. And the major hazards in question when discussing engineered controls such as Geo are clearly not the sharp propellers - this is about either deliberate or inadvertent intrusion into airspace that risks collision with manned aircraft.

Commercial operators are a small minority and are relatively well trained. I doubt that many are flying illegally. The problem is that the relatively much larger group of untrained, uncertified recreational pilots clearly includes a minority who engage in dangerous flying. While it is clear that determined risk takers will find their way around even well-engineered controls, even if only a subset of potential risk-takers are deterred or prevented from dangerous flying by an engineered control then the aggregate risk is reduced, and DJI (as the largest player) can take some credit for a level of implemented safety that at least suggests that it is attempting to prevent unsafe practices. That may well delay/deter more draconian legislation driven by the appearance that the industry cannot self-regulate. So just because legislation does not currently exist to require them to do that does not mean that it is not a good idea. And I think it is very likely that they have made a very careful study of the risk/benefit balance, given the implications to their business model.

Personally I think that the best solution is a better Geo system, or similar, which gives certified pilots full ability to use their certification and, additionally, any authorizations and waivers to bypass the restrictions. But those basic restrictions probably need to be there because, as has been demonstrated time and time again, you cannot trust many recreational pilots to follow basic safety guidelines.

There is further hope on the horizon via the introduction of enterprise solutions that explicitly address the needs of some (especially corporate/government) professional users that, since they will not be available to recreational pilots, will not need all the same restrictions.

I'm authorised to fly commercially in Aus.
How are DJI going to sort that one out?
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
143,066
Messages
1,467,358
Members
104,936
Latest member
hirehackers