Hey Yo's:
Whilst not at the level of confidence or control I have for my Bebop 2, I am pleased to be able to report that I'm at least operating my new (to me) Phantom 3 Standard in ways which are not as consistent with what most would expect from someone who has a touch of the Downs. So that's good, and listen, no complaints that my crass humor somehow hurt someone's feelers. It was done deliberately as part of your community's cultural tweaks needed now that you're part of my industry. Now then, back to the matter at hand.
Obviously, like most who would still consider themselves as new to the sUAS/ Drone sector/ community, I am in full acknowledgment of the 800 lbs. gorilla who plays the part of the sector leader, that being of course DJI. For the record, and completely off topic (again), being accustomed to the US dominating every other global players in absolutely all aspects of civil aviation (I'll concede gliders and Light Sport are the domains of the EU, but NOTHING goes to China), having to watch even the newest sector, the drone community, all being expected to kiss the ring of the most influential stakeholder by an unacceptable margin, and the fact that we're talking about a single Chinese company, well, it makes me sad. It makes my tummy-tum feel yucky anytime I'm faced with the realities of the sUAS community's already culturally entrenched large scale resignation exhibited by the masses that all major or relevant sector-wide decisions regarding the priorities, next directions, and the potential resources invested towards for developing the next generations of innovations and feature advancements for both sUAS hardware and software, are being trusted to be unilaterally developed by one Chinese company.
I know that's the norm for you guys, you probably don't see why that's a problem, and would be content to allow it to perpetuate moving forward. Well, one profit-driven corporation based in the US, never mind one based wholly in country which represents the US's most capable "near-peer" military adversaries, is absolutely not going to remain. That type of setup is beyond inconsistent, and I'd be comfortable saying a scenario which will never be irreconcilable with some of the US aviation industry's core cultural tenets.
Don't worry, this is a good thing for you. Now, instead of a single company having all the say, releasing to the marketplace what they decided will be the next direction, then having the rest of the other manufacturers scrambling to play catch up, the industry as a whole will be provided resources to use, and as a community will set what is needed and what the next level of awesome will be. Then, all the manufacturers who feel they have something to offer with the strategy are all invited to come together and decide how the resources get used. And all the juicy data and innovations developed are free for all users and stake holders to use in their initiatives.
Why? Because as a member of this industry, yes, you're beholden to regulations and limitations. But those big-boy pants rules also come with a codified mandate that the FAA place an equal level of priority and resources in the expansion and growth of the industry as a whole. Yeah, so, I'm just saying, forget stupid Remote ID tantrums, you guys are going to watch this **** get real and do so all while DJI tries to figure out just how they will fit into this new reality which will develop. If they are smart, and keep doing what they have, only being WAY more open about tech, they'll be good. But trust me, if they try to outdo or retain their asinine superhero level of global market-share, or even the elevated industry stature they've enjoyed for the last decade by foolishly trying to compete with the super-nerds working at the FAA Tech Center in Atlantic City or match the resources being funneled by the FAA, it'll be embarrassing for them. I hope they don't.
For the record, I still maintain the single reason the Chinese were able to somehow claim an unprecedented global dominance in an emerging industry which I had always anticipated would eventually find it's way over to the rest of the aviation industry, where the US is the undisputed and readily acknowledged pimp boss of the world. China's civil aerospace industry is experiencing significant struggles at best, never getting out of the starting gates at worst. Their mistake was trying to emulate the designs and processes of the Russians. Yeah, oops. Anyhoo, I was a very vocal critic of the FAA's stated and clearly understood reluctance, thus decision not to begin regulating drones, at least the Commercial ops and Manufacturers. My concern was the fact that by not regulating these aircraft, they were not providing the regulatory framework which could be used to provide them access to the NAS, even if just limited. Because when I was there in 2009, there were no Commercial Drone Ops which were legally being conducted in the US anywhere, because they were told, No. This was back before the waiver or COA systems were mature enough to be used in any way to allow a manufacturer the access to airspace they would need to innovate and conduct R&D.
I warned the guy's I knew in the UAS Program Office that if they didn't let companies innovate in our airspace, they would not wait, and would simply pull up stakes and go to a country which would. Does China have a less restrictive national airspace that DJI was able to access? Nope, in fact, their airspace is ALL locked down HARD by the military and General Aviation can go eat a *** *** if they don't like it. Because the Chinese can make some no **** savvy decisions, someone saw the potential, and was high enough in the party to get the military to give the company plenty of access, and we have now what results.
Whilst not at the level of confidence or control I have for my Bebop 2, I am pleased to be able to report that I'm at least operating my new (to me) Phantom 3 Standard in ways which are not as consistent with what most would expect from someone who has a touch of the Downs. So that's good, and listen, no complaints that my crass humor somehow hurt someone's feelers. It was done deliberately as part of your community's cultural tweaks needed now that you're part of my industry. Now then, back to the matter at hand.
Obviously, like most who would still consider themselves as new to the sUAS/ Drone sector/ community, I am in full acknowledgment of the 800 lbs. gorilla who plays the part of the sector leader, that being of course DJI. For the record, and completely off topic (again), being accustomed to the US dominating every other global players in absolutely all aspects of civil aviation (I'll concede gliders and Light Sport are the domains of the EU, but NOTHING goes to China), having to watch even the newest sector, the drone community, all being expected to kiss the ring of the most influential stakeholder by an unacceptable margin, and the fact that we're talking about a single Chinese company, well, it makes me sad. It makes my tummy-tum feel yucky anytime I'm faced with the realities of the sUAS community's already culturally entrenched large scale resignation exhibited by the masses that all major or relevant sector-wide decisions regarding the priorities, next directions, and the potential resources invested towards for developing the next generations of innovations and feature advancements for both sUAS hardware and software, are being trusted to be unilaterally developed by one Chinese company.
I know that's the norm for you guys, you probably don't see why that's a problem, and would be content to allow it to perpetuate moving forward. Well, one profit-driven corporation based in the US, never mind one based wholly in country which represents the US's most capable "near-peer" military adversaries, is absolutely not going to remain. That type of setup is beyond inconsistent, and I'd be comfortable saying a scenario which will never be irreconcilable with some of the US aviation industry's core cultural tenets.
Don't worry, this is a good thing for you. Now, instead of a single company having all the say, releasing to the marketplace what they decided will be the next direction, then having the rest of the other manufacturers scrambling to play catch up, the industry as a whole will be provided resources to use, and as a community will set what is needed and what the next level of awesome will be. Then, all the manufacturers who feel they have something to offer with the strategy are all invited to come together and decide how the resources get used. And all the juicy data and innovations developed are free for all users and stake holders to use in their initiatives.
Why? Because as a member of this industry, yes, you're beholden to regulations and limitations. But those big-boy pants rules also come with a codified mandate that the FAA place an equal level of priority and resources in the expansion and growth of the industry as a whole. Yeah, so, I'm just saying, forget stupid Remote ID tantrums, you guys are going to watch this **** get real and do so all while DJI tries to figure out just how they will fit into this new reality which will develop. If they are smart, and keep doing what they have, only being WAY more open about tech, they'll be good. But trust me, if they try to outdo or retain their asinine superhero level of global market-share, or even the elevated industry stature they've enjoyed for the last decade by foolishly trying to compete with the super-nerds working at the FAA Tech Center in Atlantic City or match the resources being funneled by the FAA, it'll be embarrassing for them. I hope they don't.
For the record, I still maintain the single reason the Chinese were able to somehow claim an unprecedented global dominance in an emerging industry which I had always anticipated would eventually find it's way over to the rest of the aviation industry, where the US is the undisputed and readily acknowledged pimp boss of the world. China's civil aerospace industry is experiencing significant struggles at best, never getting out of the starting gates at worst. Their mistake was trying to emulate the designs and processes of the Russians. Yeah, oops. Anyhoo, I was a very vocal critic of the FAA's stated and clearly understood reluctance, thus decision not to begin regulating drones, at least the Commercial ops and Manufacturers. My concern was the fact that by not regulating these aircraft, they were not providing the regulatory framework which could be used to provide them access to the NAS, even if just limited. Because when I was there in 2009, there were no Commercial Drone Ops which were legally being conducted in the US anywhere, because they were told, No. This was back before the waiver or COA systems were mature enough to be used in any way to allow a manufacturer the access to airspace they would need to innovate and conduct R&D.
I warned the guy's I knew in the UAS Program Office that if they didn't let companies innovate in our airspace, they would not wait, and would simply pull up stakes and go to a country which would. Does China have a less restrictive national airspace that DJI was able to access? Nope, in fact, their airspace is ALL locked down HARD by the military and General Aviation can go eat a *** *** if they don't like it. Because the Chinese can make some no **** savvy decisions, someone saw the potential, and was high enough in the party to get the military to give the company plenty of access, and we have now what results.