http://news.mnogoinfo.net/dji-la ... -system-for-drones/


Any one?

More government intrusion into our lives.

I don't think I'd trust the police with this type of information.

I consider this to be a major progress indeed that will help to rehabilitate the drone pilot community from false accusations (at least those who respect their local flight regulations and restrictions). It will enable us to demonstrate at any time that we are not engaged in illegal activities and make all essential information available to aviation authorities. And it will  help to prevent even stricter regulations to be set up in many countries. Great move!
P.S. Any real aircraft must have a transponder that does exactly the same. So now we are getting real too ;-)

I don’t see any practical application for it with a spark. Range and battery life too short. The spark won’t fly in an airport anyway.
Only works with DJI stuff.

Hi, there. I think the policy will enhance the safety in public place. Thanks for understanding.

In Germany you have to place a fireproof-plate with your name, address and phonenumber on your drone.

The main cause for more stuff, like the article is saying is caued by people who are flying with drones but do not care about the dangers and responsibilities comming with that. Regarding security of other people, privacy or even endangering airplanes.

Well if the spark weighed in at 250 g ,(since that is the proposed unregisterable limit in the uk) and transmitted that info so that it drew no attention from the powers that be, it would be most welcome.
But that may well never happen.

I can live with that, I respect regulations so I'm not bothered.

I can see how it'd help track some drones. The only issue I see, is that those who aren't flying responsibly are most likely to opt out. For me, I'll probably opt in, since I don't care if the police see where I fly, as I tend to fly over fields, to avoid hitting someone/something.

xfirf_ Posted at 2017-12-8 02:20
In Germany you have to place a fireproof-plate with your name, address and phonenumber on your drone.

The main cause for more stuff, like the article is saying is caued by people who are flying with drones but do not care about the dangers and responsibilities comming with that. Regarding security of other people, privacy or even endangering airplanes.

" caued by people who are flying with drones but do not care about the dangers and responsibilities comming with that."

We call those people "Photographers."  They are not RC model hobbyists!  That is why radio control aircraft have been around for 50+ years without causing social problems.  Flying enthusiasts in comparison to "making money on a photo" at all cost/risk enthusiasts.

Wellllllll.... as long as it is optional the crooks still don't care. But I see a future mandatory activation by law if those certain idiots out there keep crashing their drones into sensitive locations. Or passenger planes...

If this system works this will be the closest we get to realtime position & identification transponders like in passenger airplanes. We'll see what the future has in store for us drone pilots...

All points well made.
I personally only want to fly legally with the wonderful photo  and flight capabilities of the spark without upsetting any one.
Now if the weight limit is set to 250 grams, then dji with ongoing technology will soon  easily be able to  cram the  spark's spec  into that format.
As it gets known quads of that class are legal, and not threatening, maybe public hysteria will subside.
Of course crooks will ignore it, but a drone of that spec will be of little or no use for their nefarious behaviour.

I thought that this is what the Geofencing did so that you could only fly in certain areas.

By adding all this layers of tracking, it sounds like there will be some kind of financial impact if there is a problem. In that case I think you could make a case for developing a similar system to the way the car industry works. You license the drone and carry insurance. Depending on where you live the rates go up or down.

Sidd

Gunship9 Posted at 2017-12-8 09:15
" caued by people who are flying with drones but do not care about the dangers and responsibilities comming with that."

We call those people "Photographers."  They are not RC model hobbyists!  That is why radio control aircraft have been around for 50+ years without causing social problems.  Flying enthusiasts in comparison to "making money on a photo" at all cost/risk enthusiasts.

I am a professional photographer.  I have a UAVS license from the FAA.  I always follow the rules, I always fly VLOS, and seldom fly more than 100 ft. from the controller.  Please do not assume photographers are the problem.

mtnlandpix Posted at 2017-12-8 15:27
I am a professional photographer.  I have a UAVS license from the FAA.  I always follow the rules, I always fly VLOS, and seldom fly more than 100 ft. from the controller.  Please do not assume photographers are the problem.

You sir, are the exception.  Casey Neistat is the rule.   Have you not seen the "distant record" or city landscape videos?  Posters hoping their video goes viral $$.  Those aren't model aviation enthusiasts.  Those are photographers.

Ban by law any publication (social media or MSM) of drone photos or videos and the problem goes away.  Radio control model airplane flying once again becomes thought of as a cute hobby of aviation enthusiasts.  

You may say professional photographers aren't the problem and that hobby photographers are but then you are missing Casey Neistat and the pro photographer the FAA first tried to charge for drone flight (aerial shots at a hospital helicopter landing pad).  Drones and photography is $$$$ that people can't resist even thought they aren't interested in model aviation.

On one hand I think the topic is very much a jest.  Purely in humor.  On the other hand I like building flying my model airplanes (8 of them now) on my own property and see drone pilots as a threat to that hobby.  Little collumn A, little collumn B.

Gunship9 Posted at 2017-12-8 16:47
You sir, are the exception.  Casey Neistat is the rule.   Have you not seen the "distant record" or city landscape videos?  Posters hoping their video goes viral $$.  Those aren't model aviation enthusiasts.  Those are photographers.

Ban by law any publication (social media or MSM) of drone photos or videos and the problem goes away.  Radio control model airplane flying once again becomes thought of as a cute hobby of aviation enthusiasts.  

Your point is well taken.  I don't consider these guys as professional photographers.

Gunship9 Posted at 2017-12-8 09:15
" caued by people who are flying with drones but do not care about the dangers and responsibilities comming with that."

We call those people "Photographers."  They are not RC model hobbyists!  That is why radio control aircraft have been around for 50+ years without causing social problems.  Flying enthusiasts in comparison to "making money on a photo" at all cost/risk enthusiasts.

I think youre partitially right:

There are "photographers" who give a sh.. about risks, security or saftey (of them, their drone or their surrounding) and there are those photographers that like to take new views but take care of their enviroment and people aound.

And you, as a model-pilot, and those serious photographers are treaten in the same now as those troublemakers.

More government does not equal better practices or more efficient operations, ever
At the moment this does not appear to be a government program but a corporate one, and considering the source I'm sure there is no concerns whatsoever about personal privacy, freedom, or property.  
In fact this appears to be another sales pitch to nations and regulatory agencies to simply ensure continued product sales...meaning the going in assumption would be that the customers don't have any other alternatives so they will continue to buy regardless of the situation so the real sales concerns focuses on the regulatory agencies to avoid anything that might curtail sales.
Based on the article you have to have access to the corporate data to do the tracking, unlike the FAA who uses it's own proprietary equipment.  If it were to really come down to it, I'd rather be dealing directly and solely with the FAA on this matter than through a 3rd party.  As a hobbyist I will be opting OUT!

To anyone defending aeroscope, what's the matter with all of you? This isn't okay.