Although occasional malfunctioning of our birds is natural as for every machine, the growing number of users raging and venting about flight restrictions implied by DJI with every FW/app update seems to reach annoying levels on every related forum. Let's face it: Phantom/Mavic/Spark class drones are NOT designed to challenge world distance/speed flight records, period. As a hobbyists and/or amateur videographers we should fly our toys within the Line Of Sight distance (100, 150 m perhaps?) and within non-restricted air space. This is the law, generally established all around the world. So, if you're complaining about video transmission lost at 500 m distance, I suggest you don't. Do not expect any improvements of such with future FW. I'll be not surprised by flight height and speed tweaks as well. That's my 2 cents, folks ...

Yeah I can't help but feel the same way. Even today here in the UK another criminal prosecution by the police. I am a CAA approved operator and can see real issues with flying drones period. Believe me once the crown prosecution have a few court wins under there belt, the police will actively seek the misuse of drones, in my opinion it's already difficult to fly in many places the " Being reasonabily satisfied that a flight can be made saftly" is open to  courts interpretaions I guess and will ultimately deliver a winning blow. I may be wrong but watch this space this was the headline....

Drone Flight Investigation Concluded: Stratford-upon-Avon male summonsed to appear at Leamington Spa Magistrates Court

Following an investigation by Shipston Police Safer Neighbourhood Team a 37 year old male from Stratford-upon-Avon, Warwickshire has been summonsed to appear at Leamington Spa Magistrates Court on 5th July 2017.

The Police investigation surrounded the use of a DJI Phantom 3 Standard Drone during several flights around South Warwickshire between December 2016 and January 2017.

The following offences under the Air Navigation Order 2016 will be considered at court.

1) Recklessly / negligently cause / permit aircraft to endanger person or property

2) Fail to maintain direct, unaided visual contact with small unmanned aircraft

3) Fly small unmanned surveillance aircraft during take-off or landing within 30 metres of any person

4) Fly small unmanned surveillance aircraft as described in 95(2) not in accordance with permission issued by the Civil Aviation Authority

a) over or within 150 metres of a congested area
b) within 50 metres of a vessel, vehicle or structure which was not under your control
c) within 50 metres of a person

5) Fly small unmanned aircraft when not reasonably satisfied that the flight can safely be made

PC Craig Purcell
Shipston Police Safer Neighbourhood Team

Dobmatt, I agree with your forecast, and personally don't feel threatened by it.  This will upset many self-appointed "professional videographers" who tend to forget that the Phantom and Mavic lines of drones are NOT "professional" UAVs but simply "consumer products"...  and as the number of users -wheter responsible or irresponsible- increases, so will the legal requirements be more restrictive. Remember that there aren't only the rights of UAV pilots but also -and probably more important- those of bystanders, passers-by and anybody else who might be hit by an UAV out of control, falling,  or recklessly piloted...

If DJI wants to limit the range they must do it by putting limits within the DJI GO App 4 or within Firmware, but never by limiting the range a transmitter can communicate with its receiver. And second, the customers must know about these limits before they spend hundreds/thousands of dollars/euro/pounds/etc., so they will be able to take the right decision for them.

kykphantom Posted at 2017-6-25 10:19
If DJI wants to limit the range they must do it by putting limits within the DJI GO App 4 or within Firmware, but never by limiting the range a transmitter can communicate with its receiver. And second, the customers must know about these limits before they spend hundreds/thousands of dollars/euro/pounds/etc., so they will be able to take the right decision for them.

Agree to a degree. Consumer grade drones like Spark, Mavic or Phantom are designed to perform - basically - the duties of extension pole for iPhone. Advanced extension, of course. Every place you go and something unusual, uncommon is happening you'll see hundreds of arms raised with this small rectangle in hands. Not high enough? OK, hop on the picnic table top ... Still not good?  Now, imagine all these rectangles flying above crowded places like Venice, Manhattan or Eiffel Tower ... Scary, isn't?

It doesn't really matter how the performance limits are executed, by FW or by app, and after sale or before. If a given product is challenging public safety issues when improperly used, decisions must be made. It is every manufacturer fine-printed right to make necessary changes as the product evolves.

So, I was out flying today, early morning partially overcast and I was able to maintain VLOS out to 1700 feet @ an altitude of 300'.    Who determines VLOS limits?

samuraiz Posted at 2017-6-25 13:58
So, I was out flying today, early morning partially overcast and I was able to maintain VLOS out to 1700 feet @ an altitude of 300'.    Who determines VLOS limits?

Not WHO, but WHAT ... Your eyes, my friend ... Not bad, not bad at all if you can see your bird 1700' away ... Can you really maintain Visual Line Of Sight at 1700' distance?

samuraiz Posted at 2017-6-25 13:58
So, I was out flying today, early morning partially overcast and I was able to maintain VLOS out to 1700 feet @ an altitude of 300'.    Who determines VLOS limits?

In the U.K the CAA have set an arbitrary figure of 500 m (1640) feet) as being the limit of VLOS for the small UAS. With correct contrast and concentration I can see my p4 at that and a bit beyond perhaps. But it seems to be a well chosen figure.

I'm not sure if the FAA have a similar distance set, or is it left open to interpretation ?

kykphantom Posted at 2017-6-25 10:19
If DJI wants to limit the range they must do it by putting limits within the DJI GO App 4 or within Firmware, but never by limiting the range a transmitter can communicate with its receiver. And second, the customers must know about these limits before they spend hundreds/thousands of dollars/euro/pounds/etc., so they will be able to take the right decision for them.

DJI do not intentionally limit the range of the transmitters, that is pure conjecture. What they do is respect the maximum RF output rules for different countries, as they should.

"the growing number of users raging and venting about flight restrictions implied by DJI with every FW/app update seems to reach annoying levels on every related forum"

Yes .. it does reach an annoying level.
But most cases are due to confused operators that read other confused reports and perpetuate the silly myth that DJI is reducing performance when they aren't.

If DJI did reduce performance with an update, everyone would suffer the same effects and they aren't.

At a distance of 1500-1700 ft, an binoculars in the emergency box will probably be required. I can just see a white quad on a dark background/sky 500 meters out but would not be happy to fly it home in ATTI mode !.

Regards Leif.

Landbo Posted at 2017-6-25 18:08
At a distance of 1500-1700 ft, an binoculars in the emergency box will probably be required. I can just see a white quad on a dark background/sky 500 meters out but would not be happy to fly it home in ATTI mode !.

Regards Leif.

And why would you fly home in Atti! Just curious ...
Anyway, some ugly things come with age ... In my case I can barely see Phantom on the sky background within 200m radius from home point, give or take. And that is with assumption that I keep my eyes constantly on the bird. The moment I switch my attention to a device display she's gone and only arrow on the map allowes me to navigate...

Said that, a young stud with eagle eyes may be able to pilot the drone without peripheral device,  visually, perhaps within 250-300m radius. Thankfully we have this amazing RTH feature handy ...

Dobmatt Posted at 2017-6-25 19:19
And why would you fly home in Atti! Just curious ...
Anyway, some ugly things come with age ... In my case I can barely see Phantom on the sky background within 200m radius from home point, give or take. And that is with assumption that I keep my eyes constantly on the bird. The moment I switch my attention to a device display she's gone and only arrow on the map allowes me to navigate...

Safe flight depends on the pilot's ability to predict what might go wrong. Exactly the same as when driving a car or sailing your ship.

Then I'm a happy man of age 60+ with my vision. Just a shame I have to use strong glasses too read the newspaper or computer.

RTH is a nice thing when it works. Uses the function almost every time I fly home. However, the function is dependent on having a good GPS fix as well as putting your home point on the right place and setting the altitude right so the quaden does not encounter an obstacle on the way home. It seemed to bother too many and make it work in real life. Practicing, however, helps.

Regards Leif.