DJI has abandoned professionals

Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
1,117
Reaction score
796
Age
56
Location
Sterling Heights, MI
I'm totally with you, but I think that in order to be able to sell their products in the USA (or Europe), they are required to install NFZ and TFR software restrictions. Might prevent crazy people from deliberately crashing their drones into planes, or the president's golf cart.
There is no legal requirement for a system like Geo.
 
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
36
Reaction score
10
Age
64
I'm totally with you, but I think that in order to be able to sell their products in the USA (or Europe), they are required to install NFZ and TFR software restrictions. Might prevent crazy people from deliberately crashing their drones into planes, or the president's golf cart.
The "idiot" could always operate the aircraft in direct (non-gps) mode to interfere with his golf cart. Adding geo restrictions is not likely to stop the "idiots".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pulsar747n
Joined
Jan 15, 2017
Messages
158
Reaction score
25
Age
79
Will I have a problem using Litchi? Or will it still be controlled by NFZ software.
 

sar104

Dic mihi solum facta, domina.
Premium Pilot
Joined
Mar 22, 2014
Messages
5,305
Reaction score
2,694
Location
Los Alamos, NM.
The "idiot" could always operate the aircraft in direct (non-gps) mode to interfere with his golf cart. Adding geo restrictions is not likely to stop the "idiots".
Actually I think you have that backwards. A determined intruder may be able to circumvent the restrictions. It is precisely the simple "idiots" who have no clue and/or don't care that they are operating unsafely that restrictions such as Geo will mitigate, at least to some extent.
 

IKW

Joined
Jul 15, 2017
Messages
74
Reaction score
13
Age
58
I'm surely not buying a Phantom 5 until these yoyos get their act together, IE eliminate GEO or fix it so professionals can work with their craft. I stopped upgrading firmware months ago, and I'll likely hack the crap out of my firmware if needed. I don't need big brother pulling my leash.
Totally agree
 
Joined
Jun 16, 2017
Messages
236
Reaction score
157
Age
83
Location
Brookings, Oregon
Not so bad in my country (Czech Republic), because we are a tiny country, which nobody cares about. But the EU prepares new common law, in other words repression - and I'm sure the situation will be as bad as in the USA in a short time.
More people care about your country than you think, please don't sell it short. It is a beautiful country with beautiful people. As a bonus, you make a great firearm named "CZ".
 
  • Like
Reactions: jr257944
Joined
Jul 14, 2015
Messages
91
Reaction score
36
Location
USA
DJI is a business and they want to sell more drones. Driving away the current customer base is counter productive to their bottom line. They may be in the People's Republic, but they want to make money. When they block a 107 license holder from flying, there is a cost to that license holder. Losing commercial customers will hit DJI harder than losing hobbyist fliers.

There is a lot of noise about terrorists using drones to deliver mortars, idiots flying too close to airports, and other idiots flying too close to people's homes. You can debate the seriousness of the actions, but it's happening and that is what is showing up in the news. DJI (and other UAV companies) does not want to see more restrictive laws put into place. That has to be a larger part of the reasoning with why they made the geofencing much more restrictive.

I think it's just a matter of time before DJI includes ADS-B technology in the hobbyist line of drones. They already have that in the commercial drones like the M200. If the drones are identifiable to aviation authorities, that accomplishes a few things. First off, it lets them know that there are UAVs in the neighborhood, but flying safely. They don't have to worry about those pilots. It also identifies UAVs flying in places where they shouldn't be (at a fire, too low over a swimming pool, etc). If you make the UAVs more accountable, then you can give them more responsibility. That's one of the reasons that trying to compare a UAV with a car doesn't really work. You need to have license plates, registration, and insurance with the car.

The drawback is that you'll need a drone that has the ADS-B as part of the system or retrofitted so that the firmware sees it. I would like see some official DJI participation at a conference where they could take questions and engage in a dialog to talk about where they are going with the geofencing.
I think you are opening a can of worms and some of your information may not be correct.

1. Many aircrafts with no electrical systems such as the Piper J3 Cub are not required to have ADS-B.
2. Aircrafts flying in Class G airspace are not required to have ADS-B.
3. Certified ADS-B units costs around $2500, not realistic for a drone.
4. The Matrice 200 may be available with an ADS-B receiver only. This means that full size aircrafts equipped with ADS-B will never see the drone. The Matrice will be able to see other aircraft equipped with ADS-B but you will need software to decide what to do with that information. (Autoland?)
5. ADS-B does not ground an aircraft. Only pilots do.

I think Geofencing and ADS-B should be an informational system only. Manufacturers should not be involved is regulating.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Roach
Joined
Jan 27, 2016
Messages
101
Reaction score
33
Age
48
Location
Madison, Al
I think the arguments, all though well made on both sides, are getting away from the original posts. And if DJI is reading these threads, please keep this in mind.

Quite a number of customers who purchase DJI's line of UASs do so for commercial business reasons. The Geo restrictions hinder pilots from effectively conducting business. So DJI should do one of a few things.

If they insist on continuing with the Geo restrictions, they need to either:
1. Flat out say DJI drones are not for commercial use....
2. Make an on/off switch for the Geo software as it applies for commercial use. Or....
3. Make a version of their drones that do not have the Geo software that can only be purchased by certified commercial pilots. (How they go about that can be argued) I think the best senerio would be having to order the Geo free drone directly from DJI.

The latter can easily be done. In 1998, Dodge made an ACR version of the Neon that could not be purchased unless you were a card carrying SCCR racer due to the performance tuning to the suspension etc....

If DJI doesn't make an option for commercial pilots, no matter how great their products are, they will loose business. As stated before, the novelty of drones is on a downward trend, especially at the prices DJI is commanding.
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2017
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Age
43
Sorry guys. I have to ask and I am wondering if people on the other side of the fence with a different brand is experiencing the same issues with the drone company (pick any topic/issues). Is it any green on the other side of the fence? Anyone???
Hello, saw your post because, I like too know what is happening across the drone industry and not just with the brand I own. I myself have not had any Geo Zone or NFZ issues. But plenty of others that have Xstars are having the same issues as you and feel the same way.
 
Joined
Jul 16, 2017
Messages
14
Reaction score
4
Age
57
I own the DJI Mavic for a reason, it's simply the best traveling drone out there money can buy. If someone else make a similar drone without GEO fencing I'd buy it in a hart beat.

Regarding license I don't mind. Actually it would be good to have it regulated somehow. However it should not become an expensive requirement, something online would be sufficient. The punishment to fly where it's dangerous, like airports and over large crowded areas should be a reworked license, and maybe one way would be an international recognized license to purchase a drone of a certain class.
 
Joined
Jul 3, 2017
Messages
49
Reaction score
6
Age
78
Here in the UK because there have been a few instances where idiots have flown near airports the Government & CAA are now forcing registration of drones and insisting that GEO is not negotiable.
I have just purchased a Dji P4 pro and am looking to find an alternative so that I can fly in a NFZ. Why you might ask? Because I found out afterwards that I live in the middle of a NFZ and cannot even start up the machine. I am an award winning heritage film maker and want to film some of the historic features in my village and close by. I can arrange with the airport owners to only fly when they have no air traffic movements and to arrange contact with the control tower by mobile phone when I want to go out on location in the NFZ. At no time would I think of endangering life or limb, or even the fast jets which thunder over our village on a daily basis.
The Dji Geo system is unfair and should have a facility to turn it off and make me, the drone pilot, accept responsibility for my own actions.
If anyone knows of a good drone with the same camera qualities as Dji, but no GEO system, please let me know and I will go and purchase one.
Kind regards
Chris

[email protected]
www.heritagevideoproductions.co.uk
www.eventspecialists.co.uk
 
Joined
Jul 2, 2017
Messages
111
Reaction score
83
Age
60
I'm done with DJI as well. Never in my life have I experienced such issues and poor customer service with a product costing thousands. I generally just go elsewhere when a company acts up, which I have done. Yet it was so bad it pushed me to do this - www.dji-advocacy.com. I've never even written a letter to complain about a company so you can imagine how disappointed I have become with DJI. I'm still gathering content for the site before I begin pushing traffic there - only had 4 days to work on it so far. But, yes even on the consumer side it has become a company killing issue. I give them 2 years if they don't change. Viable options are beginning to pop up.
 
Joined
Jun 16, 2017
Messages
39
Reaction score
10
Age
67
Location
Mackay, Queensland, Australia
Well that incident must have tested your patience and restraint, I would have been absolutely wild while trying to remain professional. Your experience is starting to occur over here as a number of posters are finding themselves blocked from either flying as a hobbyist or professionally with no way of overriding the restrictions in a timely manner.
CASA (your FAA) has released a 'can I fly there' app which you can check prior to venturing out. I live in the middle of a massive forest that has an airport 30 klms away and only impacts on me during the fire season with small spotter planes etc. Next to my location is a warning not to exceed 45 mtrs high due to a small airport. News to me, so I jumped on my trail bike and had a look, turns out to be an old dirt strip used during the war and overgrown with trees. To rescind that warning in the app involves either the owner (long gone/dead) or the local council to contact CASA and effect the change. The latter is not interested and neither am I.
I suspect DJI is taking the preemptive step of consolidating their market presence by appearing to appeal to their biggest market by being sincere and proactive.
You are right, it's none of their business, otherwise my 145 kW superbike would have a governor on it. It doesn't and I'm generally regarded with more contempt by the public than when I'm out flying.
Tevek, i get the same message here. I live just outside Mackay in central Queensland. This area, which is outside Mackay airport's NFZ, is in a zone allocated for light aircraft as a practise zone and i'm also restricted by the 45 meter altitude restriction. One of the guys at work who also lives in my street, is a pilot who regularly flies a Tiger Moth around my area doing joy flights. I asked him about the restriction and he said it applies because of a "grass" runway in our area. He also said that any light aircraft flying in this area are restricted to a minium altitude of 500ft. As it stands, i'm quite happy to adhere to the 45 meter altitude restriction as it means i can fly my bird from my yard and out over the huge expanse of cane fields that lie beyond. It makes it very convenient for me to practise any time i want but i can understand the frustrations of the guys here on this forum !!
 
  • Like
Reactions: tevek
Joined
Jul 1, 2017
Messages
3
Reaction score
1
Age
50
CASA (your FAA) has released a 'can I fly there' app which you can check prior to venturing out. I live in the middle of a massive forest that has an airport 30 klms away and only impacts on me during the fire season with small spotter planes etc. Next to my location is a warning not to exceed 45 mtrs high due to a small airport. News to me, so I jumped on my trail bike and had a look, turns out to be an old dirt strip used during the war and overgrown with trees. To rescind that warning in the app involves either the owner (long gone/dead) or the local council to contact CASA and effect the change. The latter is not interested and neither am I.
I have a similar situation near me. There is a heliport listed at a local hospital. Problem is, the hospital removed it 10 years ago and replaced it with a carpark. I spoke to a hospital employee, and verified on google earth. I called CASA. They said, the data doesn't belong to them. You need to contact Air Services Australia. I called Air Services Australia, who seemed to be unaware of a process for removal. But they said there is no authorised contact, and over the next number of years, sites with no site contact will eventually be removed.

Thankfully, at the moment DJI don't use the data from CASA / Air Services Australia. If they did, we'd all be in trouble!
 
  • Like
Reactions: tevek
Joined
Jul 14, 2016
Messages
39
Reaction score
12
Age
68
It has caused me problems, I became frustrated enough to just pretty much stop flying it except from my yard. Just today after a month since my last flight, it would not let me connect to the camera without getting the updated prior to P4 app, I did not update the firmware, and tested if it would stop me at 400 ft. and it did not, but I got the need to update firmware message, which I hope that I do not have to do at all.
 
Joined
Jun 29, 2017
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Age
40
This is why I no longer connect to the net.
It was good of DJI to warn us in advance so I coul6turn it off.
What do you mean exactly when you say you no longer connect to the net and it was good of DJI to warn us so you could turn it off?
If this has already been thoroughly discussed or explained, I apologize. I'm new to the site.
 
Joined
Jun 20, 2015
Messages
255
Reaction score
17
Age
62
Location
Heart of Dixie and Ft. Walton Beach, FL.
Opinion: DJI has abandoned professionals

I agree 100% with this writer. DJI is not the FAA, they are not the air-police. Their firmware/flight software inaccurately implements "NFZs" and "TFRs" - it prevents a pilot from taking his/her craft off in areas in which the pilot is authorized, and there is no way to test if this error will be present at a particular site at a particular time prior to that time in that place.

We can't effectively sue them over it (check the ToS you "sign" when using the drone, arbitration and mediation only) so all we can do is complain. Via forums such as this and their own, and with our wallets. As SOON as I can find a UAS that performs as well as a Phantom 4 at a similar price point that does not employ a "Geo" system - I'm outta here. My loyalty ended the day they prevented me from using the product I purchased when I wanted to, where I wanted to (legally) and provide no option to remedy the situation. For the 3rd time in as many weeks I've gone to a location where either I've flown before or is in the middle of NO flight restrictions of any kind, and been told that I cannot take off and not offered any option to override it. My $1500 brick sat there flashing as the embarrassment in front of a client fell entirely upon me.

DJI needs not to fix, but to entirely remove their big brother Geo system. It's not their job, it's not their role, it's not their responsibility. Their responsibility should be to their paying customers. Pilots, not aircraft manufacturers, are responsible for where an aircraft GOES.

In My Humble Opinion...
I've printed out some material to prep for the FAA Part 107 exam to go into real estate photography but I'm questioning why I want to it. One thing I will not do is upgrade firmware unless the DJI Gestapo forces me to. My next aircraft will likely NOT be a DJI product. Are they reacting to FAA pressure? It doesn't make sense to me.
 
Joined
Aug 6, 2016
Messages
2,746
Reaction score
1,388
Age
61
Location
Western Australia
I have a similar situation near me. There is a heliport listed at a local hospital. Problem is, the hospital removed it 10 years ago and replaced it with a carpark. I spoke to a hospital employee, and verified on google earth. I called CASA. They said, the data doesn't belong to them. You need to contact Air Services Australia. I called Air Services Australia, who seemed to be unaware of a process for removal. But they said there is no authorised contact, and over the next number of years, sites with no site contact will eventually be removed.

Thankfully, at the moment DJI don't use the data from CASA / Air Services Australia. If they did, we'd all be in trouble!
Have to agree with you WRT to DJI using information from the CASA app to enforce geo fencing with their proprietary system. The trees here average 30 mtrs in height and I always allow another 20 mtrs of contour clearance so if the NFZ were applied, I'd have to break out the chainsaw to take off..I certainly agree with the intent of informing drone pilots of potentially hazardous areas as part of an education process, but it needs to be intuitive, sensible and appropriate for use by as many people as possible.
 

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
138,796
Messages
1,432,806
Members
100,761
Latest member
Mischo77