DJI has abandoned professionals

[Drestin Black]

Allow me to be constructive and more realistic (given DJIs record listening to its customers): Here is an easy solution that address all the issues.

Enable DJI World Air Police "We Know What's Good For You" Geo system.

If you try to take off from or enter a NFZ it should prompt you.
This is the restriction(s) you are interacting with: x, y and z...
Do you acknowledge this message, accurate or not?
Do you certify that you are the owner of the DJI account you are logged in as either a) the pilot or b) acting pilot with permission of the account holder.
Do you certify that you accept responsibility for continuing to fly, at your discretion, despite this warning?
You agree to hold DJI Lord Protector of the Sky, First of its Name, Writer of its Own Rules and Warden of the Air up to 400 ft, harmless and not responsible (legally, morally, ethically, monetarily, especially monetarily and publicly) for your actions?

Click Yes, Grant me permission to use what I paid for
No - I submit to you and your wisdom, dictator DJI, I am not worthy.

 

[Phill2]

No idea. Is the situation markedly different from in the US? Are they preventing you from flying? If so, have you asked them?

I stopped connecting to the net when DJI announced the change.
I no longer update so no probs.

 

[Dronefriend]

I haven't updated since sometime in May.

Do I need to worry about this? I operate in Sweden and haven't had a geo problem so far.

 

[AyeYo]

I stopped connecting to the net when DJI announced the change.
I no longer update so no probs.

This is what all the smart people did.

 

[TrustyCowDog]

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.

So when I come across an incorrectly marked NFZ with my drone and then it proceeds to auto land and on the way down it destroys property or worse maims someone, who is responsible.

I don't have any control of the craft at that point. Is DJI going to come in and pay the damages and fines?

 

[sar104]

So when I come across an incorrectly marked NFZ with my drone and then it proceeds to auto land and on the way down it destroys property or worse maims someone, who is responsible.

I don't have any control of the craft at that point. Is DJI going to come in and pay the damages and fines?

Sounds like you would have a good case that the manufacturer was responsible, just as with any other device that malfunctions in normal use and causes damages. The same as if it were to crash due to any other defect.

Is this some kind of straw man argument? If so, what point are you trying to make?

 

[Drestin Black]

This is what all the smart people did.

Excuse me?! That's rude.

Most people update their app automatically in the background.

Then the app tells them they MUST upgrade firmware 0or cannot fly.

"Smart people" are psychics who know when to ignore mandatory upgrades that promise new features?

I'm tired of the holier than thou attitude of some...

 

[Drestin Black]

Geo needs an on/off switch.

That simple.

If you like it, use it. If you don't, or it's not working correctly, turn it off. That's it. Period.

 

[TrustyCowDog]

Sounds like you would have a good case that the manufacturer was responsible, just as with any other device that malfunctions in normal use and causes damages. The same as if it were to crash due to any other defect.

Is this some kind of straw man argument? If so, what point are you trying to make?

The point is if that this was about safety they've achieved the complete opposite. Removing control from the operator is not safe under any circumstances.

There's no real argument to be made that dji should have any say when and where a drone should be flown.

 

[TrustyCowDog]

Geo needs an on/off switch.

That simple.

If you like it, use it. If you don't, or it's not working correctly, turn it off. That's it. Period.

It just needs removed completely.

 

[sar104]

The point is if that this was about safety they've achieved the complete opposite. Removing control from the operator is not safe under any circumstances.

There's no real argument to be made that dji should have any say when and where a drone should be flown.

Oh - right. But you are making an unsupported assertion, based on an arbitrary scenario that has not, to my knowledge, happened. I can play the same game. For example, if removing control from an operator prevents the operator from flying into the approach or departure lanes of an airport, either deliberately or inadvertently, then that almost certainly has made that situation safer. So it's not even remotely as simple as some of you are claiming.

 

[microlinux]

There's no real argument to be made that dji should have any say when and where a drone should be flown.

Flying doesn't become a free-for-all without geo-fencing. DJI is trying to get ahead of the game. If manufacturers don't attempt to take any responsibility, your government will gladly take over under the guise of the sky becoming the Wild West. The underlying issue doesn't magically disappear if DJI doesn't implement geo-fencing. Granted, the implementation could be better.

 

[Drestin Black]

Again and again I must repeat: it is not DJIs job to be the world air police. No one has asked them to, no one really wants it.

Why do other model airplanes and helicopters, which are far bigger and more dangerous (some go 100 mph, weigh over 50 lbs, have gasoline or jet fuel engines!) not have it? No aircraft has it - but DJI thinks they can pull it off? Lol!
No, because professionals and real pilots and engineers and even lawyers will tell you, the pilot should always be the final authority, he is in charge, even if he does something wrong or illegal, it's in him and his choice. There may be a life SAVING reason to violate controlled airspace, I can come with scenario after scenario.

Until it's required by law it is not DJIs place to do this to its customers,

Reminder: when we bought the drone it didn't have Geo. They have changed its underlying performance out from under us! We may not have purchased at drone had we known it would one day be a brick with flashing lights. I promise you, this IS a lawsuit waiting to happen. Just the right guy at the right time in the right scenario will make the move and DJI will lose, according to the drone law attorney I've spoken to. I'm working on Just such a thing, but it has to be exactly right

 

[Drestin Black]

Imagine: you rush out and buy the new Dodge Demon. The fastest product car in America - amazing! You go to the track a few times and post sub-10 second quarter miles by putting your 16 y/o daughter behind the wheel and telling her, just jam down the gas pedal honey when the lights go out, its automatic.
You take the Demon to the dealership a while later for an oil change, while it's there they update the onboard computers firmware, for free.
Dodge has decided that this is just too risky, people can get hurt going so fast and having lame brakes and terrible steering. Now, the car will only do quarter mile in 14 seconds and it uses its GPS to make sure you are at a race track. If not then it further slows the car.
You are angry when you find out and decide to drive to dealership to complain. You get into car, turn key and the dashboard shows the message: cannot drive. Why? Well, the GPS determines your location, checks the weather channel and sees there is rain in the forecast and this car has stock slicks for tires, they are not factory rated for driving in rain, car won't even start. Oh, and it's not even raining, weatherman was wrong.

But it's ok, dodge knows better than us idiots, right? It's just protecting itself and ahead of the curve, right?

 

[microlinux]

Why do other model airplanes and helicopters, which are far bigger and more dangerous (some go 100 mph, weigh over 50 lbs, have gasoline or jet fuel engines!) not have it?

They generally don't have the hardware/technology to implement it.

 

[Drestin Black]

They generally don't have the hardware/technology to implement it.

And yet these death waiting to happen machines are flying Day and night in and out of controlled airspace and no one has sued their manufacturers! Amazing lol

 

[microlinux]

And yet these death waiting to happen machines are flying Day and night in and out of controlled airspace and no one has sued their manufacturers! Amazing lol

The accessibility of a drone is much higher than that of an RC airplane or helicopter, and I'd hazard a guess the majority of RC flyers are doing so at clubs, etc . . . how many sensational news articles have you seen about RC planes?

I don't think DJI is as much worried about getting sued as they are government regulations stifling their business.

If RC airplanes got as "hot" as drones, you can bet your first born child we'd be having the same discussions.

 

[Drestin Black]

The accessibility of a drone is much higher than that of an RC airplane or helicopter, and I'd hazard a guess the majority of RC flyers are doing so at clubs, etc . . . how many sensational news articles have you seen about RC planes?

I don't think DJI is as much worried about getting sued as they are government regulations stifling their business.

If RC airplanes got as "hot" as drones, you can bet your first born child we'd be having the same discussions.

Drones are being sold by the millions. How many injuries per year? A handful of cuts. How many accidents with damage of any significance? I am not even aware of one. And, frankly, from conversations I've had and heard, the original buzz is already dying down. People buy them as gimmicks, play for a while then get bored. Most don't buy the $1500 units, but looking for the <$750 smaller units. They don't fly as far or fast, they aren't heavy.

And then there is this idea that if we Police ourselves they won't, never been true before.

Why doesn't the model airplane hobby have FAA interference: gooood question with enlightening answer. They cannot! The FAA is not allowed to make rules or laws regarding model aircraft. Recently it was determined that drones are model aircraft. There is a lawsuit in the works that basically says, FAA get out of the drone rule making biz. A prior lawsuit eliminated the registration process on those grounds. Sec 107 is being targeted next. So, no, I do NOT see the FAA telling DJI and everyone else they NEED a Geo system or else.

 

[V tail]

Will someone please tell me why I read these threads.

It's like the car crash you can't ignore as you drive by I guess.

 

[DarkDayz]

I agree that DJI needs to amend their software for responsible pilots.
Part of this issue are ones ability to obey the rules as stated by the FAA.
Professional pilots do not need this software. But there are a few that do.
Just read posts on this and other drone owner sites and all you hear is 3, 4, 6 etc. mile flights. (Line of sight). Yes it's yours. Yes you brought it. But the potential is what is my point. Do we need a tragedy to say we need X. Or is being proactive a problem. Some of the people complaining aren't thinking logically just emotionally.
For those that are serious all it would take is a look at the map of DJI Geo Zone to tell your employer that no this drone cannot map your land.
Cars didn't have seat belts or safety glass until too many people were injured and or died.
Your choice to click it. You risk a ticket tho. Apples and oranges right.
If you didn't own a drone you might applaud DJI's proactive approach.
I own a drone. I consider myself responsible. No I need the fencing. No. And I do believe most people on this forum are responsible persons.

BUT all it takes is one major incident and no one. I mean no one will get to fly a drone without serious fencing.