David_ Posted at 2017-12-28 19:45
I get the strong impressions that DJI wishes to avoid actually fixing the problem. The solution is to remove the login requirement, not add a few more servers and hope they don't go down for the 5th time. You absolutely cannot justify logging in as something that is more important than being able to fly. It is a fake, unnecessary restriction that was added by DJI, that benefits no one but DJI, at the customer's expense. If you actually cared about the issue never happening again, you would remove the login requirement completely and not add any other limitations in place of it. All of these restrictions are for your benefit, not ours.

Haven't I read this somewhere before already (several times)?

It's deja vu all over again.

I'm glad I made popcorn.

DJI Thor Posted at 2017-12-27 03:28
David, we are so sorry for the inconvenience that has been caused. We had noticed the issue and had the related team to get it resolved immediately.
We do care about the customers' satisfaction, your experience and the user's feedback will be important to us. But for the concern of the flight safety, we will request the users to log in the app first and fly, or the drone will be limited to 30 meters altitude and 50 meters height.
We really appreciate all users' reports of the issue. Sincerely sorry again for the inconvenience, and thank you for your kind understanding.

I get the strong impressions that DJI wishes to avoid actually fixing the problem. The solution is to remove the login requirement, not add a few more servers and hope they don't go down for the 5th time. You absolutely cannot justify logging in as something that is more important than being able to fly. It is a fake, unnecessary restriction that was added by DJI, that benefits no one but DJI, at the customer's expense. If you actually cared about the issue never happening again, you would remove the login requirement completely and not add any other limitations in place of it. All of these restrictions are for your benefit, not ours.

David_ Posted at 2017-12-29 10:42
I get the strong impressions that DJI wishes to avoid actually fixing the problem. The solution is to remove the login requirement, not add a few more servers and hope they don't go down for the 5th time. You absolutely cannot justify logging in as something that is more important than being able to fly. It is a fake, unnecessary restriction that was added by DJI, that benefits no one but DJI, at the customer's expense. If you actually cared about the issue never happening again, you would remove the login requirement completely and not add any other limitations in place of it. All of these restrictions are for your benefit, not ours.

You are ONE DJI user, so please talk for yourself.  

Kuya Kano Posted at 2017-12-26 17:34
I didn't find any problems on Christmas day, or any other day for that matter.

Same here. That's why these threads are dear, they Bring joy to my thumping hydraulic pumper.  

Do it once and forget about it.



RedHotPoker

rolling56 Posted at 2017-12-26 14:05
Are you one of the unlucky ones that got signed up/logged in? oops i mean lucky ones. In 6 months you will be a pro....

I wondered how this Christmas was going to go over and it seems not well......

I like your "Keef" avatar. Haha



RedHotPoker

Nebuchadnezzar Posted at 2017-12-26 22:01
This is why the next brand i buy...not will be Dji

You do that "Yoda speak" so well... Grinning like a rake


RedHotPoker

Dirty Bird Posted at 2017-12-29 14:53
Apparently you missed what happens if your bird enters the boundary of an NFZ. It goes into an irreversible auto-landing sequence which I witnessed first hand.  That's what David was referring to and, while the helicopter example may have been extreme, it is totally plausible the auto-landing could force the bird down on people.

Mine doesn’t auto land when it hits a NFZ boundary, it just stops going any further, I have full control at all times.

Dirty Bird Posted at 2017-12-29 14:59
That is how it worked on a P2 but not on the newer birds.

Neither my P3S or my P4P auto land, my GF lives on the edge of the NFZ for RAF valley so I hit the boundary a lot when I fly here.

Dirty Bird Posted at 2017-12-29 14:59
That is how it worked on a P2 but not on the newer birds.

Neither my P3S or my P4P auto land, my GF lives on the edge of the NFZ for RAF valley so I hit the boundary a lot when I fly here.

Dirty Bird Posted at 2017-12-29 15:11
I don't run the latest firmware or app to verify your statement so, unless this has been recently corrected, it is still an issue.  There are threads on the NFZ auto land issue.  I watched a friend's bird touch the NFZ around M&T Bank Stadium (Raven Park) and down she went!  No backing out, no abort, ZERO control.

You’ve got me worried now, I’ve not flown here with the P4P since I’ve installed the beta and i don’t want to take the chance that it could ditch as it’s got a fair chance of landing in water due to the inland sea here.

Dirty Bird Posted at 2017-12-29 14:38
Gee well I guess that settles it then!  YOU didn't have a problem so all those folks who couldn't sign in on Christmas, or last 4th of July weekend, or all the times since, are just imagining they were needlessly prevented from flying. Thanks for clearing things up...

Dirty Bird:  DID I SAY "all the folks who couldn't sign on Christmas" didn't have a problem?
All I said was from my end of the planet that I didn't have any problem.  Please explain why you turn soap-opera-dramatic over me speaking for myself?
This is a public forum whereby if you post something, you invite people to share their own comments related to the topic.  To falsely suggest that I "ACCUSE" people of "just imagining they were needlessly prevented from flying" merely because I spoke of my own experience in a very brief reply representing where I am in the world, is of absolute immature and irrational behavior.  
I truly am sorry for all those who were not fortunate to fly on Christmas.  My comment was only related to my personal experience and in no way was intended to insult or disregard the experiences of others as you so verbally have displayed.

David_ Posted at 2017-12-29 10:42
I get the strong impressions that DJI wishes to avoid actually fixing the problem. The solution is to remove the login requirement, not add a few more servers and hope they don't go down for the 5th time. You absolutely cannot justify logging in as something that is more important than being able to fly. It is a fake, unnecessary restriction that was added by DJI, that benefits no one but DJI, at the customer's expense. If you actually cared about the issue never happening again, you would remove the login requirement completely and not add any other limitations in place of it. All of these restrictions are for your benefit, not ours.

David, Did you contact DJI for assistance on this issue?  
I read a lot of comments about "it won't work" and then scrolling through the following comments find DJI admins offering FREE suggestions that might solve the problem.  Even myself, I'll admit that I've posted problems and within 24 hours, one of the DJI Admins gives the answer... or I figure it out myself.
With advanced technology come issues from time to time.  The rational mind would understand this.

Kuya Kano Posted at 2017-12-29 18:03
Dirty Bird:  DID I SAY "all the folks who couldn't sign on Christmas" didn't have a problem?
All I said was from my end of the planet that I didn't have any problem.  Please explain why you turn soap-opera-dramatic over me speaking for myself?
This is a public forum whereby if you post something, you invite people to share their own comments related to the topic.  To falsely suggest that I "ACCUSE" people of "just imagining they were needlessly prevented from flying" merely because I spoke of my own experience in a very brief reply representing where I am in the world, is of absolute immature and irrational behavior.  

Never had a probelem ever, on any day celebratory of the year. At all.


It's got to be partly from the infallible iPad Air2 Cellular. Thankfully.


RedHotPoker

RedHotPoker Posted at 2017-12-29 18:15
Never had a probelem ever, on any day celebratory of the year. At all.

Am I the only person left on the planet that doesn't have an iPad yet?  Maybe some day I'll be blessed to have such troubled technologies in my hands.  hahaha

Kuya Kano Posted at 2017-12-29 18:41
Am I the only person left on the planet that doesn't have an iPad yet?  Maybe some day I'll be blessed to have such troubled technologies in my hands.  hahaha

Dji and iApple are now estranged bedfellows. Intermingled under the satin silk sheets of business..

Not sure if there will ever be a similar entanglement with Android or those Googled affiliates.

You've got to figure there is a good reason for this marriage made in Heaven.

RedHotPoker

Dirty Bird Posted at 2017-12-29 18:52
Sorry but I must disagree.  What it should do is alert the pilot that the boundary of an NFZ has been reached, prevent further ingress into the zone, & allow the pilot to safely back out & withdraw.  It isn't complicated & it worked like this years ago with the Phantom 2! Forcing the aircraft to irreversibly land is foolish & dangerous. What if it lands on a highway or on people?  Is it more dangerous to allow the pilot to safely withdraw or force the bird to land on-the-spot regardless of what's below?

I don't disagree with what you propose, I was objecting to the stupid scenario that placed him above a helicopter and then descended into it's rotor. He should never have been above a manned aircraft.

The only thing wrong with the way the incursion works at present is that it does not (apparently) allow the pilot to withdraw. And unless something has changed, the last time this was discussed, the angry pilot admitted that he received several warnings but ignored all of them. He was more p*off because it descended into the water.

Dirty Bird Posted at 2017-12-29 19:51
Indeed this is a public forum where, by posting, you invite others to respond.  You replied to a thread by users complaining  of being unable to enjoy their expensive property with a brief comment about how it "worked for you."  That's great friend I'm very happy it's been working for you!  Do you reply to all the problem topics similarly saying "Been working great for me!"?  Imagine how "immature & irrational" it would be were one to take issue or offense at what certainly appeared to be a blatantly dismissive comment?  Peace...

It's called balance. Forums are full of people complaining, why not have people responding to let everyone know that the issue under discussion is not being experienced by everyone? I don't regard thaty as dismissive.

Dirty Bird Posted at 2017-12-29 19:24
Apparently some believe if a Cessna pilot inadvertently wanders into D.C. restricted airspace the "solution" is remotely kill his engine & force him down on-the-spot wherever that spot may be.  After all the pilot should have known better...

And yet every day someone comes on here and complains that the battery got down to 5% and the aircraft landed itself without his permission. What are DJI to do about this? The responsible thing is to take away control and land the aircraft in a controlled manner, rather than let it exhaust the battery and fall out of the sky like a rock. Which is going to do the least damage?

Dirty Bird Posted at 2017-12-29 20:10
I rather liked how things worked on the Phantom 2 where they had a total no fly boundary surrounded by a cone of gradually increased altitude.   i.e. Immediately surrounding the airport you can't start the motors.  Beyond a mile you can but altitude is limited to 50' & it slowly increases out to 5 miles where the limit is removed.  At my house I am about 2.5 miles from BWI & my P2 was limited to about 180'.  This makes sense because no commercial aircraft will be flying at 180' where I am located. If they are they have bigger concerns than my Phantom!

'I rather liked how things worked on the Phantom 2 where they had a total no fly boundary surrounded by a cone of gradually increased altitude. '

Interesting. I fly a P3P running on ancient firmware, and it does not implement any sort of action for an NFZ, how come an older aircraft does?

Dirty Bird Posted at 2017-12-29 20:20
Depends on the pilot.  Ultimately the user should have the option of making these decisions.  Arbitrarily imposing inflexible limits upon pilots has caused users to do what they always do.  They've taken to jailbreaking their aircraft.  A forced auto land at 10% is the difference between successfully completing a mission or landing in the drink 1500' short!

So, DJI should give the pilot a choice? Is that what you are saying? Consider this, the scenario I mentioned is most likely to occur when the pilot has no control over the aircraft at all. It is quite likely to happen when the pilot has lost contact and the aircraft is either returning home, or drifting away or the 'pilot' thinks ha can make it home because he doesn't have a clue about how long the battery will last. So giving a choice to a pilot who won't see it or react to it is pointless.

As I have said many times on this forum, DJI is devising these routines, not for the responsible pilots out there, but the morons who have no idea how to fly the aircraft, or more importantly, don't have any sense of responsibility in what they are doing.

Dirty Bird Posted at 2017-12-29 20:36
I hear ya & know exactly where you're coming from.  Me I'm a bit miffed with this entire reactionary BS of DJI declaring themselves the Drone Police.  There are countless other things causing far more harm & deaths than drones yet the manufacturers aren't unilaterally imposing conditions, restrictions, & limits on the ability to freely use them.

So Apple is not guilty of unilaterally deciding to take action to slow down processor speed to reduce the load on their batteries?

DJI are, to all practical purposes, the only manufacturer left in the game making aircraft that are capable of threatening the safety of others. At one end of the scale you have small toys that are no great threat and at the other, larger machines that are out of the price range of the morons I mentioned earlier.

The regulatory authorities world wide are completely clueless as to how to deal with the 'drone menace', and because the are almost always government departments, take the familiar course of trying to make it someone else's problem. You would have to be naive to believe that the FAA for example, has not approached DJI to build these limits into the aircraft and add features to make them trackable and identifiable. It is so easy on forums to blame DJI, but ask why they are putting these features into the aircraft when they could sell many thousands more without them. They are not the Drone Police by choice, they are being pressured into it. US government agencies exert pressure anywhere they like, and this will be a small example of it.

The question still remains; why does DJI force the customer to log in, even when this decision has resulted in so many upset customers? What is it about forcing a customer to log in that is so much more important than customer satisfaction?

Dirty Bird Posted at 2017-12-29 21:22
Apple is definitely guilty or arbitrarily slowing down their phones.  Diehard fruit fans may believe the battery excuse, but Apple sold millions of these phones, designed to run at stated speeds, with those batteries.  I think the real reason is simply to nudge users into believing their phone is old & slow so  they run out & plunk down $1000 for the iPhone X or whatever the latest model might be.

Is DJI being nudged by the U.S. government to impose controls & tracking?  Maybe. Probably as plausible as being nudged by the Chinese government to deploy what is perhaps the greatest topographical espionage tool ever conceived.  Imagine millions of networked high-definition cameras deployed everywhere from sea to shining sea!

'Is DJI being nudged by the U.S. government to impose controls & tracking?  Maybe. Probably as plausible as being nudged by the Chinese government to deploy what is perhaps the greatest topographical espionage tool ever conceived.  Imagine millions of networked high-definition cameras deployed everywhere from sea to shining sea!'

Yeah, that one doesn't hold water either. Unless you put all those videos and photos up on the 'net yourself, the Chinese have no way of getting hold of them. If you are not connected to the internet at the time of flying, it cannot happen.

'My issue is the whole "Drone Menace" narrative is truly a "phantom."  Despite all the hype, NO ONE IS DYING FROM DRONES!  It's all an excrement sandwich!  Even for injuries about the worst we see is some idiot cuts himself when one gets away while flying in the house.'

I agree, but it is a typical reaction to something the authorities have not yet learnt to control and regulate, at the same time, the media love a beat-up that fuels readers paranoia.

As for DJI being forced to implement these features, there was tangible evidence of it several years ago, most people will not remember or were not into drones then, but three drone makers made an announcement that, after consultation with the FAA, they had agreed to implent a Geo Fencing system in their products. This was before DJI came out with GEO. One of the three has since gone out of business and the other is a spent force anyway.

David_ Posted at 2017-12-29 21:23
The question still remains; why does DJI force the customer to log in, even when this decision has resulted in so many upset customers? What is it about forcing a customer to log in that is so much more important than customer satisfaction?

Yoiu sure love beating a dead horse....

Dirty Bird Posted at 2017-12-29 21:47
The Go app saves 720 video, as well as countless other bits of data, to the device.  How do you know what the Go app is doing in the background?  I reboot my phone every morning yet I've had inexplicable "DJI Go has stopped" messages pop up when I haven't run the program.  Why was it running?  There are numerous reports of the Go app accessing countless sites in the background.  There are reports of the military ceasing use of DJI products, as well as service members being barred from use of DJI drones on military installations.  Coincidence?  Who knows?

Totally agree on our own government's proclivity for spying.  Don't even let me get started!

Yeah, the Go App makes all sorts of odd connections, but if it was really sending cr*p low resolution copies to the Chinese, you would soon know about it as your data usage on your phone or tablet would soon reveal it. And, as far as I am aware, no-one has ever reported that. It has been discussed on here a number of times in the past.

Did I imagine it or did the US military repeal those orders recently anyway after investigating them?

Dirty Bird Posted at 2017-12-29 21:48
I think what he would like is a plausible answer.

He has been given several quite plausible replies but chooses to ignore them and pumps out the same question over and over.

It looks like forcing the customer to log in, to the point that their drone is bricked unless they do so, is completely for DJI's benefit, at the customer's expense. DJI's AeroScope product that they push to law enforcement, shares your personal data with law enforcement if you are within 5 miles of the device. There are likely other reasons for forcing a customer to log in that are also purely in DJI's best interests. I'm still looking...

David_ Posted at 2017-12-29 22:06
It looks like forcing the customer to log in, to the point that their drone is bricked unless they do so, is completely for DJI's benefit, at the customer's expense. DJI's AeroScope product that they push to law enforcement, shares your personal data with law enforcement if you are within 5 miles of the device. There are likely other reasons for forcing a customer to log in that are also purely in DJI's best interests. I'm still looking...

I am sure if you keep digging you will find someone else with an equal amount of paranoia that will confirm your suspicions. It is Number 30,450,000 With A Bullet on the official list of conspiracies.

It occurs to me that you may be expecting DJI to have a representative come on here and expl;ain it to you, but if you are, then you will be disappointed. DJI, historically, have never come onto this forum to explain their actions. Never. As for the rest of us, we don't know either, so there is no point in ranting on about it.

Dirty Bird Posted at 2017-12-29 19:51
Indeed this is a public forum where, by posting, you invite others to respond.  You replied to a thread by users complaining  of being unable to enjoy their expensive property with a brief comment about how it "worked for you."  That's great friend I'm very happy it's been working for you!  Do you reply to all the problem topics similarly saying "Been working great for me!"?  Imagine how "immature & irrational" it would be were one to take issue or offense at what certainly appeared to be a blatantly dismissive comment?  Peace...

I see... you want to make an issue of this, do you?

NO, I'm not the one offended.  Maybe disappointed by the inability of some to handle such an innocent comment as my own without lashing out with insinuations determined to draw a negative view of what was nothing more than me reporting my experience.

Do I reply to ALL problem topics?  No.  I enjoy browsing through the forums, but I don't reply to ALL problem topics.  I don't have that much time on my hands.  Are we finished here?

"DJI, historically, have never come onto this forum to explain their actions". ...  totally agreed ...

a strange policy facing the consumer ...people are sheeps ... and will continue to buy these products despite so many problems and failures......

"A sheep no more"

Wachtberger Posted at 2017-12-26 14:05
First of all I believe that simply asking why logging in is important would have been the appropriate wording and not putting it right away in conflict with customer satisfaction. In my opinion the purpose is quite understandable. You have to be online at least once before the first take off to allow GO 4 to check for potentially crucial firmware updates for flight security and security of your vessel. You also have to be online once to activate your vessel because this is the moment when your warranty period (and care refresh if you bought it) start. Valid reasons I believe.

And to go through the basic Q & A introduced before Xmas - which has also been blown out of all proportion. Would be interesting to see how many pilot's it actually bothers and how many just thought.....OK, needs doing so no issues. 2 mins of your time if you know the answers already.

Geebax Posted at 2017-12-29 19:55
I don't disagree with what you propose, I was objecting to the stupid scenario that placed him above a helicopter and then descended into it's rotor. He should never have been above a manned aircraft.

The only thing wrong with the way the incursion works at present is that it does not (apparently) allow the pilot to withdraw. And unless something has changed, the last time this was discussed, the angry pilot admitted that he received several warnings but ignored all of them. He was more p*off because it descended into the water.

Well the idea is which is safer: an in-control aircraft or an out-of-control aircraft? The advocates of GEO fencing, or auto-landing in a NFZ, etc., seem to be in favor of an out-of-control aircraft doing only DJI knows what in a restricted area, etc. And somehow that's safer than an aircraft still under the PIC's control, still offering the opportunity for human control to resolve the situation. Out-of-control, human intervention isn't possible anymore. And yet, the latter seems to be safer?.

As I said, I've been involved in aviation in one form or another for several decades and have never run across this particular idea. An aircraft doing its own thing in a restricted/sensitive area which is a restricted/sensitive area for good reasons..... That's absolutely a new one on me....

Dirty Bird Posted at 2017-12-29 19:24
Apparently some believe if a Cessna pilot inadvertently wanders into D.C. restricted airspace the "solution" is remotely kill his engine & force him down on-the-spot wherever that spot may be.  After all the pilot should have known better...

Exactly. And, when the manned aircraft decides to take control and autoland, what's the more likely scenario: the pilot is injured or killed as the aircraft descends for a landing in a neighborhood nearby, or the autolanding "feature" actually provides the benefit it was supposed to?

Well, the former is much more likely to be the outcome than the latter.

As I said, this idea of putting any aircraft out of control is far more likely to do harm to a) legitimate users of DJI aircraft and b) innocent bystanders on the ground. This is almost so intuitive it doesn't need to be demonstrated. The likelihood of this having a beneficial outcome is much lower....

Do wop a doooo!!


RedHotPoker

luciens Posted at 2017-12-30 08:06
Well the idea is which is safer: an in-control aircraft or an out-of-control aircraft? The advocates of GEO fencing, or auto-landing in a NFZ, etc., seem to be in favor of an out-of-control aircraft doing only DJI knows what in a restricted area, etc. And somehow that's safer than an aircraft still under the PIC's control, still offering the opportunity for human control to resolve the situation. Out-of-control, human intervention isn't possible anymore. And yet, the latter seems to be safer?.

As I said, I've been involved in aviation in one form or another for several decades and have never run across this particular idea. An aircraft doing its own thing in a restricted/sensitive area which is a restricted/sensitive area for good reasons..... That's absolutely a new one on me....

'As I said, I've been involved in aviation in one form or another for several decades and have never run across this particular idea. An aircraft doing its own thing in a restricted/sensitive area which is a restricted/sensitive area for good reasons..... That's absolutely a new one on me....'

Does "Being involved in aviation for several decades" give you some unique perspective? To be honest, I am sick of people who think that their involvement in General Aviation makes them better qualified to speak on matters regarding a radio controlled toy.

It is an absolute crock of sh*t comparing what happens in a full sized aircraft to what happens in a drone. In one case you have a pilot operating the craft who has had to undergo rigorous training to be qualified to fly the aircraft, while in the other you have a potential moron whose only qualification is enough money to buy the thing.

Forget what happens at the NFZ boundary, if the aircraft runs out of battery it will fall out of the sky with the same consequences as the NFZ scenario. What do you propose to do about that?

As I said earlier, the only problem is the inability of the operator to back the drone out of the area. DJI should address that.

Nebuchadnezzar Posted at 2017-12-30 01:42
"DJI, historically, have never come onto this forum to explain their actions". ...  totally agreed ...

a strange policy facing the consumer ...people are sheeps ... and will continue to buy these products despite so many problems and failures......

people are sheeps ... and will continue to buy these products despite so many problems and failures......
What problems and failures?
I continue to buy and use DJI equipment because it's a better product than anything else available and does the job extremely well.

David_ Posted at 2017-12-29 21:23
The question still remains; why does DJI force the customer to log in, even when this decision has resulted in so many upset customers? What is it about forcing a customer to log in that is so much more important than customer satisfaction?

I'll pull in an extract from my other Post, might add something to the discussion as to who might be making the decisions other than DJI:-

"Tim Johnson, Policy Director at the UK Civil Aviation Authority, said: “Anyone operating a drone must do so responsibly and observe all relevant rules and regulations. The rules for flying drones are designed to keep all airspace users safe. We welcome any initiative that reinforces the importance of safe and responsible drone use.”
The quiz will consist out of eight questions that must be answered correctly. Drone pilots can keep answering new questions until they pass successfully. DJI launched the Knowledge Quiz in the US in November with the backing of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). DJI plans to roll the quiz out to other countries soon.
According to DJI, ARPAS-UK, the professional trade association for Remotely Piloted Aircraft and Systems, welcomed the introduction of DJI’s Knowledge Quiz: “We fully support DJI’s new GO4 app feature, giving users the opportunity to demonstrate their understanding of the local laws & commitment to fly-safe when operating UAV/Drones in the UK”."

Geebax Posted at 2017-12-30 14:04
'As I said, I've been involved in aviation in one form or another for several decades and have never run across this particular idea. An aircraft doing its own thing in a restricted/sensitive area which is a restricted/sensitive area for good reasons..... That's absolutely a new one on me....'

Does "Being involved in aviation for several decades" give you some unique perspective? To be honest, I am sick of people who think that their involvement in General Aviation makes them better qualified to speak on matters regarding a radio controlled toy.

Does "Being involved in aviation for several decades" give you some unique perspective? To be honest, I am sick of people who think that their involvement in General Aviation makes them better qualified to speak on matters regarding a radio controlled toy.


Yes it does; the training involved for a part 61 license, for one thing, is a lot more stringent than it is for even a part 107 ticket - all due respect to part 107 pilots of course. Also, actually sitting inside the thing as it flies through the air gives you an, er, profound respect, I'll put it that way, for concepts like anything that impedes the control of the aircraft.
You don't have to like that, but that's the basic truth of the matter.

It is an absolute crock of sh*t comparing what happens in a full sized aircraft to what happens in a drone. In one case you have a pilot operating the craft who has had to undergo rigorous training to be qualified to fly the aircraft, while in the other you have a potential moron whose only qualification is enough money to buy the thing.


Not at all. I think the comparison you just made is absolutely spot on and demonstrates that it's not a crock of anything to compare the two. Aircraft are aircraft....

Forget what happens at the NFZ boundary, if the aircraft runs out of battery it will fall out of the sky with the same consequences as the NFZ scenario. What do you propose to do about that?


Not applicable. Running out of battery power is pilot error and not the fault of the craft or DJI. Intentional withdrawal of control of the aircraft, via busted firmware, is NOT pilot error - that most definitely IS the fault of the aircraft and DJI.


As I said earlier, the only problem is the inability of the operator to back the drone out of the area. DJI should address that.

I agree....

luciens Posted at 2017-12-30 17:08
Does "Being involved in aviation for several decades" give you some unique perspective? To be honest, I am sick of people who think that their involvement in General Aviation makes them better qualified to speak on matters regarding a radio controlled toy.

'Yes it does; the training involved for a part 61 license, for one thing, is a lot more stringent than it is for even a part 107 ticket. '

I have had my private pilot's licence here in Australia for 45 years, is that enough qualification for you. Actually, I did. I had to surrender it this year for medical reasons.

'Not applicable. Running out of battery power is pilot error and not the fault of the craft or DJI. Intentional withdrawal of control of the aircraft, via busted firmware, is NOT pilot error - that most definitely IS the fault of the aircraft and DJI.'

Yes, it is applicable, because it means the aircraft is going to descend out of control, possibly hitting someone or falling into the rotor of that helicopter you should not have been anywhere near. And under normal circumstances, the aircraft will automatically descend anyway under DJI's programming if the battery gets too low as well. So how is that any different to what you are arguing? It is still out of the control of the pilot, what is the difference between doing it in an NFZ to doing it over a housing area?

And why do you keep referring to 'busted firmware', it is not busted, it is intentionally programmed that way.

The other thing that makes this argument silly is that this action occurs some 5 miles from the zone it is trying to protect, in many cases well away from any dangerous area.