I KNEW this would happen...

[ethanunzicker]

As soon as I watched the reveal keynote of the Spark, and saw that it's marketed as a "selfie drone" that you can take anywhere and be up and flying in seconds, I knew it was going to cause problems.

What DJI has done is effectively encourage, by design, careless flying. A friends just posted this video on facebook from his Spark, flying above Laguna Beach:

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10155439725036668

Flying above people and in an area that is REALLY close to surface Class C airspace.

How's he to know? He just went to the beach with his family and took his drone with him like DJI encouraged him to do. He launched it in seconds and used to automatic flight modes, like DJI encouraged him to do.

For DJI being so obsessively controlling with their firmware "for the sake of public safety", they sure are careless with their design and marketing.

 

[N017RW]

As soon as I watched the reveal keynote of the Spark, and saw that it's marketed as a "selfie drone" that you can take anywhere and be up and flying in seconds, I knew it was going to cause problems.

What DJI has done is effectively encourage, by design, careless flying. A friends just posted this video on facebook from his Spark, flying above Laguna Beach:

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10155439725036668

Flying above people and in an area that is REALLY close to surface Class C airspace.

How's he to know? He just went to the beach with his family and took his drone with him like DJI encouraged him to do. He launched it in seconds and used to automatic flight modes, like DJI encouraged him to do.

For DJI being so obsessively controlling with their firmware "for the sake of public safety", they sure are careless with their design and marketing.

That 'type' of flying depicted in DJI ads that I have seen seems to me to be allowed if you assume that all persons are 'participants' such as with selfies. (However I don't claim to have seen ALL such ads.)

It's only when the subjects are not otherwise involved that it becomes an issue (in the USA).

 

[microlinux]

if a gun manufacturer markets their product as a toy, it's to be expected people will be more careless with a serious piece of equipment..

Not "people" . . . "dumb people". These folks generally can't be helped, except perhaps by Charles Darwin.

I'm not pushing the fault onto DJI, but they're also not free from responsibility

DJI did not fly the drone over people, your friend did. Rather than using common sense or doing even a very basic amount of research into regulations, he just did whatever he saw on "TV". Scary as ****.

 

[tcope]

I don't disagree. I think DJI could do much more and it would be easy for them to do. They could/should include _some_ information on country regulations with their products. Put it on a flyer, make the outside bright read and put it on top of the drone. Granted, DJI's products are sent out worldwide but a milti-country booklet could be included.

This is one reason why the FAA wanted the registration, to push this type of information out to people. I did not disagree with this part but the registration in general was a lie.

Is the flight safe? No. Do I see things like this as a huge issue? No. People throw footballs and Frisbees at the beach. These hit people all of the time.

 

[Neon Euc]

I have to admit. Anyone who is new would have seen the Facebook Vids that DJI put up of the rally cars racing. Dji is flying over crowds watching and fast cars. Naturally a newbie would be like "wow that's what I want to do"

DJI should be responsible enough to put a disclaimer at the start of the video to not fly over cars or people

 

[macoman]

I have to admit. Anyone who is new would have seen the Facebook Vids that DJI put up of the rally cars racing. Dji is flying over crowds watching and fast cars. Naturally a newbie would be like "wow that's what I want to do"

DJI should be responsible enough to put a disclaimer at the start of the video to not fly over cars or people

Legally talking, you can fly over people or cars if the drone is over a higher distance that is not close to them.

 

[BigAl07]

If we can't get along any better than this we can just go play somewhere else

I've REOPENED This thread. Let's not start insulting each other. We're better than this and if it continues we will get a much needed "break" from the forum.

 

[daveisim]

That 'type' of flying depicted in DJI ads that I have seen seems to me to be allowed if you assume that all persons are 'participants' such as with selfies.

The people are not 'participants'. They are not part of controlling the drone. That's what is allowed. A VO is. Just because someone is aware of the flight does not count. You'll need a waiver of 107.39 "Directly participating in the operation of the small unmanned aircraft". The people shown are NOT involved in any way of the operation of controlling the drone.

Operating your new Spark as a hobby / recreational drone, you cannot, of course, fly it over any people. No exceptions.

Their advertisement has no disclaimer (unlike fast car driving commercials) that you should not try this.

 

[daveisim]

Legally talking, you can fly over people or cars if the drone is over a higher distance that is not close to them.

Where? Not in the USA.

 

[N017RW]

The people are not 'participants'. They are not part of controlling the drone. That's what is allowed. A VO is. Just because someone is aware of the flight does not count. You'll need a waiver of 107.39 "Directly participating in the operation of the small unmanned aircraft". The people shown are NOT involved in any way of the operation of controlling the drone.

Operating your new Spark as a hobby / recreational drone, you cannot, of course, fly it over any people. No exceptions.

Their advertisement has no disclaimer (unlike fast car driving commercials) that you should not try this.

People (actors) in commercials/adverts are not participants?

Explain please?

Was this produced in the USA?

Is the distribution subject to FCC or other domestic laws?
I've never seen a DJI advert on USA broadcast TV.

What is your expertise in these areas?

 

[hit-n-run]

As soon as I watched the reveal keynote of the Spark, and saw that it's marketed as a "selfie drone" that you can take anywhere and be up and flying in seconds, I knew it was going to cause problems.

What DJI has done is effectively encourage, by design, careless flying. A friends just posted this video on facebook from his Spark, flying above Laguna Beach:

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10155439725036668

Flying above people and in an area that is REALLY close to surface Class C airspace.

How's he to know? He just went to the beach with his family and took his drone with him like DJI encouraged him to do. He launched it in seconds and used to automatic flight modes, like DJI encouraged him to do.

For DJI being so obsessively controlling with their firmware "for the sake of public safety", they sure are careless with their design and marketing.

So you feel people are inherently stupid and can not make rational, intelligent decisions on their own without big govt defining strict rules and regulations to protect us from ourselves?

 

[daveisim]

People (actors) in commercials/adverts are not participants?

No they are not. Not if we're following FAA rules. I've already stated this. Not if we're following CBO rules either.

Let's go over this again from my optics. 107.39 says they must be participants in the operation of the UAV. Simple. If you're not the pilot (manipulator of the controls) , nor the RPIC or nor a VO then you're not involved in the operation of the actual vehicle. You must be 107 certified pilot (or FAA cert. pilot operating under a 333 cert., but that's going away) or the pilot controlling it (not the PIC - but having a 107 pilot / 333 pilot near) or a VO looking at airspace or watching out for other No No's.

People being object of the videoing / flown over are no part on the actual UAV operationt, unless they are VO's. It would be a tough argument to say the you read in everybody (that is being videoing / flown over) to the rules of being a VO and that they are actual VO's. It's a weak defense. This is why, IIRC, that only CNN has obtained a 107.39 exception.

There is not FAA exemption to the rules that says if you notify (or even obtain permission) from everyone that you fly over, then it's ok to do so.

As to where it was produced, I don't know. But we're talking FAA rules here aren't we?. And I can access the video from the USA. Unless I'm using a VPN, it knows where I am. So if I were a first time UAS operator (and I'm not - holding a PPL cert. and a 107 since the day it was available and building my own plane and flying UAV's since the 1960's ) or looking to buy a UAV, I would gather that I could do this kind of flights too. There is no disclaimer there that I see.

This is why I object to the video. It's showing something that is easily interpreted as normal and lawful, but not.

 

[ethanunzicker]

.

As to where it was produced, I don't know. But we're talking FAA rules here aren't we?. And I can access the video from the USA. Unless I'm using a VPN, it knows where I am. So if I were a first time UAS operator (and I'm not - holding a PPL cert. and a 107 since the day it was available and building my own plane and flying UAV's since the 1960's ) or looking to buy a UAV, I would gather that I could do this kind of flights too. There is no disclaimer there that I see.

This is why I object to the video. It's showing something that is easily interpreted as normal and lawful, but not.

The video I posted was a from a friend on facebook. He shot it at Laguna Beach in California. I just re-watched the Spark promo video on the DJI website and noticed they do have a small disclaimer (see attached screenshot).

What I don't understand (aside from unadulterated capitalistic gains) is why DJI so carelessly PROMOTES their products as toys, but then creates restrictive firmware saying it's their responsibility to ensure the safe operation of these highly sophisticated tools.


Perhaps it will just take time for the consumer to wise up to the fact that these quads are NOT toys, but tools. Overtime, with a little faith in humanity, commercials like DJI's may be seen in the same light as car commercials that demonstrate, what would be, illegal operation under normal circumstances and have the disclaimer "Professional driver on a closed course. Do not attempt". When we see these commercials, responsible adults understand we can't drive like that on the public roadways, because we have respect both for the car and the systems and laws that make operating vehicles safe(er) for everyone. Hopefully soon more people will have the same respect for UAVs and the accompanying laws.

 

[dangerd]

People (actors) in commercials/adverts are not participants?

Explain please?

Was this produced in the USA?

Is the distribution subject to FCC or other domestic laws?
I've never seen a DJI advert on USA broadcast TV.

What is your expertise in these areas?

§ 107.39 Operation over human beings.
No person may operate a small unmanned aircraft over a human being unless that human being is:
(a) Directly participating in the operation of the small unmanned aircraft; or
(b) Located under a covered structure or inside a stationary vehicle that can provide reasonable protection from a falling small unmanned aircraft.

See (a) Directly participating in the operation of the small unmanned aircraft(a) Directly participating in the operation of the small unmanned aircraft.
Actors are not part of the operation of the UAV, they are NOT its CREW (pilot,operator,designated AND briefed safety staff.)
And even that designated and briefed safety staff would be questionable to the FAA.
It's not so hard a concept to grasp. If you are in the USA do not fly over anyone who is not the pilot (the guy with the 107 cert., or the operator holding the remote, or the visual observer.)
Also if you don't have a 107 cert NEVER FLY OVER PEOPLE. As recreational flyers are not allowed at all.

My expertise is that I hold a 107 and can read.
If you are not in the USA read the laws for the country you are in.

 

[Neon Euc]

§ 107.39 Operation over human beings.
No person may operate a small unmanned aircraft over a human being unless that human being is:
(a) Directly participating in the operation of the small unmanned aircraft; or
(b) Located under a covered structure or inside a stationary vehicle that can provide reasonable protection from a falling small unmanned aircraft.

See (a) Directly participating in the operation of the small unmanned aircraft(a) Directly participating in the operation of the small unmanned aircraft.
Actors are not part of the operation of the UAV, they are NOT its CREW (pilot,operator,designated AND briefed safety staff.)
And even that designated and briefed safety staff would be questionable to the FAA.
It's not so hard a concept to grasp. If you are in the USA do not fly over anyone who is not the pilot (the guy with the 107 cert., or the operator holding the remote, or the visual observer.)
Also if you don't have a 107 cert NEVER FLY OVER PEOPLE. As recreational flyers are not allowed at all.

My expertise is that I hold a 107 and can read.
If you are not in the USA read the laws for the country you are in.

He's friend shot the clip. Any chances that maybe he knew these people or has a sister actually playing in the team?