DJI's new restricted areas are arbitrary.

macheung said:
DJI or any other manufacture should not even bother putting theses type of restrictions on as rules change across times and places. In fact putting some restriction on may open them up to more liability as people think the craft is smart and will stop their silly behavior when it clearly wont. We need to use our judgement when acting, and the ability to choose is important aspect of freedom, even when that includes the ability to choose wrongly.

How would you like it if Toyota trucks can go max 100hm/h or uses the GPS to limit your speed to exactly the speed limit?
Where do u think DJI will stop? Will downtown flying be banned? How about over roadways?

On a more practical side, it is likely that the Phantom FC has limited memory and there is a finite number of restricted points that can be programmed. That is why the restricted zones are circular and not polygonal and there is a limited number. I can see that the GS app include a lot more restrictions as one can have almost unlimited storage on an app/pc software.

I am torn between staying on v1.08 forever and not having GS function or "upgrading" to v3 now before more restrictions come to play. Then again, v3 may be buggy and i'll be forced to v3.x with perhaps even more restrictions.

It is a great idea if cars max was 100 mph or below. That would save lives. No excuse for allowing vehicles to drive so much faster than law allows.
 
MikeySoft said:
Drone Camera Films said:
MikeySoft said:
Drone Camera Firms, While dji does have a repetition of introduction bugs in new firmware, sometime catastrophe bugs, are you saying the database will be updated to include flight paths and common sense that airlines don’t fly below the height of tall city buildings? This DB will take up all the memory of the product.

According of a dji video, the no fly zone feature is always enabled no matter what mode the phantom is in. Unless it does not have the number of GPS satellites needed (does not have to be in GPS mode). Once it has the number of satellites needed, it will take no fly zone action, including landing if it “thinks” it is in a no fly zone.

MikeySoft, I've no idea what they may have planned. I was simply pointing out that there seems to be a lot of expectation about a new feature that is complex and difficult to be comprehensively accurate and always up to date. I agree it's highly unlikely that all controlled airspace in every country will be listed. This is not a substitute for accurate flying which is why I suggested that flight planning with more conventional methods is needed.
OK, Thanks for the reply. So I think you agree that the no fly zone should be optional and should be able to be disabled at the owner's risk. I hope they do that.

There is some confusion if the no fly zone only works in GPS mode. A dji video said it is enabled in any mode. While someone in a different thread thinks it only works in GPS mode.

Edit to add the following:
A interview with Colin Guinn stated that the Chinese Government had dji put in a no fly zone around an area in China. Colin did not state where this area was. But Colin stated it only worked in GPS mode. He also stated dji may do that for other governments if they felt it was reasonable. Colin also said it should be a tool to guide users, not an action for dji to police laws and governments regulations. However, that was last year and Colin Guinn is no longer with dji. I'll post a link to the video when I find it.

I found the video.
As many of us know, Colin Guinn is no longer with dji but has a law suit on them.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7h8x28rKMg[/youtube]
 
rustysd said:
It is a great idea if cars max was 100 mph or below. That would save lives. No excuse for allowing vehicles to drive so much faster than law allows.

If such a governor were to be implemented, the first thing I'd do after buying a new car would be to have someone remove that restriction. It's not that I routinely drive that speed (I've only ever driven that fast twice in my life on an empty highway late at night, and only for a minute or two); it's that I object to a product manufacturer having any say regarding how its product is used after it is sold.

If someone buys a product - paying for it completely so it is theirs, and theirs alone - they have the right to determine how it is used. It is government's responsibility to create laws, and then enforce those laws for people who choose to ignore them. Manufacturers do not play a role in this, nor should they ever. (Imagine the problems that this would create in the firearms industry and some others!)

I understand that this is not everyone's perspective - and we all have a right to our own opinions (which are all equally valid). What's right and acceptable for some areas of the world might be objectionable and go against "conventional standards" for others. I think this is probably one of those times.

That's why it would be best for DJI to include these types of limitations when flying in "Phantom" mode out of the box, but also allow for all limitations to be disabled under advanced settings once someone switches over to "NAZA" mode. This promotes safe flying and likely keeps recreational pilots (who won't fiddle with advanced setting) comfortable, while still providing the flexibility required by others. (It also places full responsibility on the end user, should the default safe flight settings be disabled - thus keeping DJI "in the clear" for any incidents arising from the use of their product.)
 
MikeySoft said:
OK, Thanks for the reply. So I think you agree that the no fly zone should be optional and should be able to be disabled at the owner's risk. I hope they do that.

There is some confusion if the no fly zone only works in GPS mode. A dji video said it is enabled in any mode. While someone in a different thread thinks it only works in GPS mode.

How could the NFZ feature work if it didn't have a GPS lock to find out where it was in relation to the zone? :? I think there's video that said the height limit worked in any mode i.e. not above 394ft but I don't think the NFZ feature works without GPS lock.

MikeySoft said:
Edit to add the following:
A interview with Colin Guinn stated that the Chinese Government had dji put in a no fly zone around an area in China. Colin did not state where this area was. But Colin stated it only worked in GPS mode. He also stated dji may do that for other governments if they felt it was reasonable. Colin also said it should be a tool to guide users, not an action for dji to police laws and governments regulations. However, that was last year and Colin Guinn is no longer with dji. I'll post a link to the video when I find it.

I found the video.
As many of us know, Colin Guinn is no longer with dji but has a law suit on them.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7h8x28rKMg[/youtube]

Some may accuse governments of locking down airspace or preventing the filming of protests as the interviewer was suggesting. That may be true of China, but let's remind ourselves that where legislation has been put in place it's not primarily for sinister reasons - it's for safety. If you read the UK's CAA guidelines it's all about preventing collisions between drones and other aircraft, particularly light aircraft which will inevitably be flying in the lowest of altitudes.

Now, I know a lot of people will think "Oh safety. Yeah. Right.", but if you're in a crowd of people (protest, party, wedding, whatever) do you really want a 20Kg multirotor flying over your head while the pilot navigates around buildings, overhead wires, street lamps, billboards etc? How do you know the pilot is sufficiently qualified and experienced? How do you know the drone is well maintained?

The technology is young and the pilots operating it are comparatively inexperienced compared to aviation generally. We've seen two licence types emerge in Europe and in time there'll probably be as much legislation as there is for a Cessna 172 and the pilot; logbooks for the airframe, propellers, motors, annual servicing, pilot recency tests on type etc.
 
rustysd said:
It is a great idea if cars max was 100 mph or below. That would save lives. No excuse for allowing vehicles to drive so much faster than law allows.

This is a great example of a horrible idea. There are plenty of legitimate excuses for driving over 100MPH. You just don't use them. And it would make SFA of a difference in terms of saving lives. None.

I would have no issue with DJI's flight restrictions if they:

  • Stuck with ICAO designations for class B and C airports instead of applying an arbitrary selection criteria.
  • Provided an option to disable.
  • Gave us sufficient notice of the changes before making them.

Odds are I would keep the setting enabled as I observe controlled space restrictions anyway.
 
Drone Camera Films said:
MikeySoft said:
OK, Thanks for the reply. So I think you agree that the no fly zone should be optional and should be able to be disabled at the owner's risk. I hope they do that.

There is some confusion if the no fly zone only works in GPS mode. A dji video said it is enabled in any mode. While someone in a different thread thinks it only works in GPS mode.

How could the NFZ feature work if it didn't have a GPS lock to find out where it was in relation to the zone? :? I think there's video that said the height limit worked in any mode i.e. not above 394ft but I don't think the NFZ feature works without GPS lock.
I said GPS mode and any mode, not GPS lock. I have additional information in a different post which I did not repeat here but I will now.

The below recent official dji video appears to indicate the No Fly Zone is active for ANY MODE unless you don't have the number of satellites required. But once it gets the number of satellites, it will be active and the Phantom will take any required action which includes landings if it “thinks” it is in a No Fly Zone, even when in ATT or manual mode. Pay attention around 0:30 in the dji video below. This is not verified yet but someone said he in a different thread they will try it later this week.

It is very obvious the interviewer in the Colin Guinn Chinese No Fly Zone video had his own agenda. Mr Guinn was very diplomatic to try to persuade the interviewer it was no big thing. Mr Guinn also said the No Fly Zone only works in GPS mode in that interview. However, that was last year, Mr Guinn is no longer with dji and the more recent official dji video appears to indicate the No Fly Zone is active in ANY MODE as I said above.

Edit: April 9, 2014. for some reason dji disabled the video I first posted but this one appears to be the same.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoXAMRQoIAA[/youtube]
 
I found it on page 47 of the P2V+ manual. The release notes for firmware version 3.0 states it restricts flights over the airports so I assume it is the same.

No Fly Zone is enable in GPS and ATTI mode when the number of satellites is equal to or over 6.
No Fly Zone is never enabled in manual mode. But manual mode is too difficult for me.
 
So even without a GPS signal no Phantom can fly above 394 feet? Some of the best shots I've seen are those spectacular high altitude shots way up in the 1000 + foot range.

This could pose a problem in say Denver (or any location above 394 feet sea level) where you might have enjoyed a great rocky mountain high (pun intended) and now all of a sudden you are grounded even 20 miles, 30 miles, 1000 miles away from an airport because you are already way above your 394 foot high. I am assuming the 394 feet limit is based on the FAA's 400 foot AGL (above ground level) regulation for unlicensed aircraft. If there is no GPS signal how in the heck does the phantom know that you are below the 400 foot GPS level? The altimeter can't compensate for ground level versus sea level... can it?

While I may commend DJI for giving attention to safety no company, DJI or otherwise should be in the business of policing safety. They should only offer options for the user to activate in order to be responsible and fly safe. if the user doesn't activate these features then if the black suited men come to take him away, well, it's his own **** fault. Fly responsibly! Fly safe! Much like an automobile company offers the option to turn off certain airbags; it's the owner's **** fault if they forget to reactivate the airbag. This isn't McDonald’s where you can sue for millions because you spilled lukewarm coffee on your crotch!

There are many RC model aircraft clubs throughout the US. Many of these get permission on off peak hours from the airports to fly on airport grounds if not on runways or taxiways.

It appears that DJI's classification scheme is entirely their own. It has nothing to do with the ICAO's designation. So don't confuse DJI's categories with the ICAO's classification system. It also seems to be based merely on the "international" designation. I live in Oregon. Portland and Rogue Valley (Medford) are designated "International". That is the only correlation that I can see for DJI's apparently arbitrary classification. There is only one airport that is on the ICAO list, and that is Portland. it is class C. Eugene is the second busiest airport in Oregon followed by Rogue Valley (Medford) International Airport. Rogue Valley International Airport is restricted category B in terms of DJI. The poor AMA certified RC model aircraft club there is one of the largest in the Pacific Northwest. If anyone has a Phantom they will be grounded or altitude limited. But at the Eugene airport there is more traffic and more people and yet it is not restricted from DJI. Bizarre!

I haven't baught a Phantom and I was looking into getting one. But now I may not or at least I'll wait until they figure this out. Also, do these "flight rules" apply to ALL DJI products? In otherwords even if I don't get a Phantom 2 does this apply to Phantom 1, the NAZA controllers, the A2 controllers, and the GPS units? NAZA/A2/GPS units are in a ton of products. Are these now going to be affected?

From what I have seen from Colin, he seemed like he was offering up logical explanations for everything and like what was said before, he seemed to be able to assure people that there shouldn't be any concern. But I see a lot of change since Colin left. And that change doesn't seem to be necessarily for the better.
 
According to page 42 of the P2V+, manual mode does not limit altitude but gps and atti modes are.

I can not say for sure but on dji web site, every Phantom 2 has a link to the safe flight page. While the P1s do not have this web link.
 
I believes the 394 hight limit is only when you have less then 6 sat and not in manual mode. When you have 6 or more SATs, you are limited to how close to an no fly zone or the max height you set when you are away from a no flight zone. However, there are no limits in manual mode.
 
MikeySoft said:
I believes the 394 hight limit is only when you have less then 6 sat and not in manual mode. When you have 6 or more SATs, you are limited to how close to an no fly zone or the max height you set when you are away from a no flight zone. However, there are no limits in manual mode.
Not real sure about that. The way I understood it was that every mode will limit you to 394' with no GPS signal.
 
LuvMyTJ said:
MikeySoft said:
I believes the 394 hight limit is only when you have less then 6 sat and not in manual mode. When you have 6 or more SATs, you are limited to how close to an no fly zone or the max height you set when you are away from a no flight zone. However, there are no limits in manual mode.
Not real sure about that. The way I understood it was that every mode will limit you to 394' with no GPS signal.

How exactly would it know you were over 394' feet WITHOUT GPS?
 
MikeySoft said:
I believe it has a barometer to compute height based on air pressure. I don't know how accurate it really is.

On a relative basis, more accurate than GPS.
 
MikeySoft said:
I believe it has a barometer to compute height based on air pressure. I don't know how accurate it really is.

Read that but it said it was inertia based and used in conjunction with the GPS to determine altitude. Oh well, doesn't really matter I guess.
 
depwraith said:
MikeySoft said:
I believe it has a barometer to compute height based on air pressure. I don't know how accurate it really is.

Read that but it said it was inertia based and used in conjunction with the GPS to determine altitude. Oh well, doesn't really matter I guess.
My car's nav system uses an inertia compass and accelerometers when the GPS is blocked by buildings or in a tunnel. It is very accurate in Boston big dig tunnels with all of the exits, entrances and turns inside the tunnel without GPS. I read someplace that the phantom also uses a barometer
 
Let's clear this up:

The vertical component of GPS is not very accurate. Margin of error is much bigger than horizontal. Using barometric pressure to measure relative height is more accurate and is what the P2 does. The P2 only cares about your altitude MSL (from the sea) if you cross into the restricted area between 1.5 and 5 miles in cat A (under the cone). The best way the P2 can measure your altitude MSL would be using the home location GPS altitude plus current height above home location based on relative barometric pressure. Why? Two reasons:

  • To calculate altitude MSL using barometric pressure, you need to calibrate it to a current pressure reading at a known nearby position and then adjust it further based on non-standard temperature (i.e. not 15C).
  • The GPS reading on the ground will be more accurate as it will have more static samples to average over time before take off. That's a guess but it makes sense even if you will likely acquire more satellites after lift off.

Finally, inertial systems can help smooth out bumps and gaps in location readings but they eventually drift without input from the original sensor (e.g. barometer, GPS).

Even more finally, the 394' no 3D GPS fix limit is relative to your home location (i.e. AGL) and not MSL.
 

Recent Posts

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
143,066
Messages
1,467,352
Members
104,933
Latest member
mactechnic