Please select Into the mobile phone version | Continue to access the computer ver.
DJI Supports new FAA rules that restrict your ability to fly
12Next >
1454 45 2018-9-29
Uploading and Loding Picture ...(0/1)
o(^-^)o
Jyunte
First Officer
Flight distance : 2103150 ft
Offline

In a Popular Mechanics article, DJI's Vice President of Policy and Legal Affairs, Brendan Schulman, explains that DJI supports the new FAA rules that could "drastically change who can fly drones in the USA". Before I go on, remember that the term "drone" applies to EVERY type of radio controlled aircraft weighing 0.55lbs - 55lbs that's flown outside in the USA.
Schulman, and therefore DJI, supports the new rules which would:



  • Restrict flying to 400 feet above ground level
  • Restrict flying to daylight hours only
  • Require pilots pass a written test
  • Limit the legal speed of any RC aircraft to 40 knots (46mph)
  • Requires pilots fly within line of sight
  • Requires pilots flying FPV to have a spotter who is in constant visual contact with the aircraft
  • Change the law from merely informing a nearby airport of your intention to fly, to requiring you to ASK the airport for PERMISSION to fly.


Why is this new FAA rule so bad? Because, in one swoop, it effectively bans individuals from flying FPV. It bans flying above 400 feet, and night flying. It makes drone racing illegal (drones reach much faster speeds than 46mph when racing). It bans RC pylon racing, glider racing, jets, and large scale aircraft which routinely cruise at speeds well above 46mph. If you want to fly within 5 miles of an airport, and your flights are at an attitude which pose no danger to manned aircraft, the airport tower will refuse to give you the required permission for you to fly... Just to cover their butts. If you're an excellent pilot, but have difficulty passing written tests, or if you're a kid and therefore ineligible to take the written test, well, you just can't fly, period.

Special Rule 336, which prohibits the FAA from making laws which affect model aircraft, is expected to be made obsolete by the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, which is being voted on today.

You can thank companies like DJI and Amazon for supporting these changes, because it's companies like DJI and Amazon who want to have unfettered access to the
skies above 400 feet for their own commercial ventures (such as drone delivery services).
https://www.popularmechanics.com/flight/drones/a23511212/faa-reauthorization-2018-section-336-repeal-regulation/



2018-9-29
Use props
Wachtberger
Captain
Flight distance : 261509 ft
Offline

In one point you are wrong. The ones to ''thank'' for these new rules are the reckless idiots who have caused many dangerous incidents. Now you get the result of their actions.
2018-9-29
Use props
HedgeTrimmer
Captain
United States
Offline

You can thank companies like DJI and Amazon for supporting these changes, because it's companies like DJI and Amazon who want to have unfettered access to the
skies above 400 feet for their own commercial ventures (such as drone delivery services).

Companies like NoZama and IJD, can have unfettered access to skies above 400 feet.  

But when they want their drones to come down below 400-feet, we deny them access.  My property, my rules.

2018-9-29
Use props
HedgeTrimmer
Captain
United States
Offline

Wachtberger Posted at 2018-9-29 12:51
In one point you are wrong. The ones to ''thank'' for these new rules are the reckless idiots who have caused many dangerous incidents. Now you get the result of their actions.

Not quite.  Those to "thank" are those in business of MAKING News, not reporting news.

We got the bubble headed
Bleached blonde
Comes on at five
She can tell you 'bout the plane crash
With a gleam in her eye
It's interesting when people die
Give us dirty laundry

We can do the Innuendo
We can dance and sing
When it's said and done
We haven't told you a thing
We all know that C__p is King
Give us dirty laundry
2018-9-29
Use props
Jyunte
First Officer
Flight distance : 2103150 ft
Offline

Page 346 of the Act, allows any FAA official to confiscate your aircraft if he/she believes you are not flying in full compliance of the Act. That's confiscation of your personal property, without due process of law... A direct violation of the 4th Ammendment of the US Constitution.
2018-9-29
Use props
HereForTheBeer
Captain
Flight distance : 5381368 ft
  • >>>
United States
Offline

Wachtberger Posted at 2018-9-29 12:51
In one point you are wrong. The ones to ''thank'' for these new rules are the reckless idiots who have caused many dangerous incidents. Now you get the result of their actions.

no, those are the scapegoats for companies that want that sweet sweet delivery drone money and federal grants for billions.   most companies will happily throw customers under the bus, call every single one of us, even responsable ones out, just so they can secure Amazon delivery spot and no federal oversight..
2018-9-29
Use props
LoSBoL
First Officer
Flight distance : 271650 ft
Netherlands
Offline

Any company that wants to sell their merchandise will have to oblige to the laws their market governments sets.
You really are barking up the wrong tree here...
2018-9-29
Use props
HereForTheBeer
Captain
Flight distance : 5381368 ft
  • >>>
United States
Offline

Jyunte Posted at 2018-9-29 13:25
Page 346 of the Act, allows any FAA official to confiscate your aircraft if he/she believes you are not flying in full compliance of the Act. That's confiscation of your personal property, without due process of law... A direct violation of the 4th Ammendment of the US Constitution.

technically true...  it does violate our constitution.    that's not the only dangerous part of this new bill..  another section that's asking for no government oversight and complete flexibility if they violate standing laws, claiming "research and development" that is critical as their reasoning..

between the fact that it gives local and federal authorities the rights to tax us and seize our property and that that main part of their bill is so that they can have zero oversight.... that is a dangerous game they are playing....
2018-9-29
Use props
LoSBoL
First Officer
Flight distance : 271650 ft
Netherlands
Offline

HereForTheBeer Posted at 2018-9-29 13:41
no, those are the scapegoats for companies that want that sweet sweet delivery drone money and federal grants for billions.   most companies will happily throw customers under the bus, call every single one of us, even responsable ones out, just so they can secure Amazon delivery spot and no federal oversight..

Meh, this is just advocating a false cause fallacy...
2018-9-29
Use props
Wachtberger
Captain
Flight distance : 261509 ft
Offline

LoSBoL Posted at 2018-9-29 13:47
Any company that wants to sell their merchandise will have to oblige to the laws their market governments sets.
You really are barking up the wrong tree here...

Very true, thank you friend!
2018-9-29
Use props
Jyunte
First Officer
Flight distance : 2103150 ft
Offline

LoSBoL Posted at 2018-9-29 13:47
Any company that wants to sell their merchandise will have to oblige to the laws their market governments sets.
You really are barking up the wrong tree here...

I disagree. These companies want the lucrative contracts to supply drones, parts, and maintenance services to the burgeoning commercial delivery industry. The CTA (Consumer Technology Association) says that the new rule "Is a win for consumers and commercial operations", saying that "The UAS title in this bill helps clear the way for the FAA to implement beyond line-of-sight, flight over people, and nighttime done operations, which our nation needs to fully realize the benefits of drone technology." Beyond line-of-sight, flight over people, and nighttime operations are all things specifically banned in the new law for hobbyists, so the CTA is clearly looking out for commercial interests.

Companies like DJI can make much more money in the commercial drone industry than they can by selling relatively cheap drones to consumers in the USA.
[The CTA is the trade association representing the $377 billion U.S. consumer Technology industry. They engage in policy advocation, market research and standards development. Want to bet they have a small amount tucked away for lobbying government officials?]
2018-9-29
Use props
HereForTheBeer
Captain
Flight distance : 5381368 ft
  • >>>
United States
Offline

LoSBoL Posted at 2018-9-29 13:47
Any company that wants to sell their merchandise will have to oblige to the laws their market governments sets.
You really are barking up the wrong tree here...

i wish that was completely true... companies like dji will obviously.. but always going to be chinese clone companies that give less than zero f's about laws..
2018-9-29
Use props
LoSBoL
First Officer
Flight distance : 271650 ft
Netherlands
Offline

Jyunte Posted at 2018-9-29 14:07
I disagree. These companies want the lucrative contracts to supply drones, parts, and maintenance services to the burgeoning commercial delivery industry. The CTA (Consumer Technology Association) says that the new rule "Is a win for consumers and commercial operations", saying that "The UAS title in this bill helps clear the way for the FAA to implement beyond line-of-sight, flight over people, and nighttime done operations, which our nation needs to fully realize the benefits of drone technology." Beyond line-of-sight, flight over people, and nighttime operations are all things specifically banned in the new law for hobbyists, so the CTA is clearly looking out for commercial interests.

Companies like DJI can make much more money in the commercial drone industry than they can by selling relatively cheap drones to consumers in the USA.

3 posts up, you are drawing conclusion from your underbelly. Sorry mate, you are also falling in to logical fallacies seeking relations that may, or may not exist.The only thing you can say for certain, is that for a company to survive in a foreign market, is that they have to oblige to the rules that that market sets for them.
2018-9-29
Use props
LoSBoL
First Officer
Flight distance : 271650 ft
Netherlands
Offline

HereForTheBeer Posted at 2018-9-29 14:08
i wish that was completely true... companies like dji will obviously.. but always going to be chinese clone companies that give less than zero f's about laws..

Where is your head at? DJI is not a cloning company, they are market leader and set the current standard of camera drones for the privately owned commercialy available camera drone. Hell yes they'll comply.
2018-9-29
Use props
Jyunte
First Officer
Flight distance : 2103150 ft
Offline

LoSBoL Posted at 2018-9-29 14:15
3 posts up, you are drawing conclusion from your underbelly. Sorry mate, you are also falling in to logical fallacies seeking relations that may, or may not exist.The only thing you can say for certain, is that for a company to survive in a foreign market, is that they have to oblige to the rules that that market sets for them.

You are ignoring the simple fact that multi-billion dollar companies, doing business in the USA, employ lobbyists to ensure that their assets, business interests and bottom line are all protected. Companies like DJI and Amazon all had input in this Act. Their input helped shape the language of this law.  Now these companies are coming out, publicly, voicing their support to this new law. As for DJI, this new law severely restricts their customer's use of their products, so why is DJI supporting it, unless they're winning on the back end?
2018-9-29
Use props
LoSBoL
First Officer
Flight distance : 271650 ft
Netherlands
Offline

Jyunte Posted at 2018-9-29 14:22
You are ignoring the simple fact that multi-billion dollar companies, doing business in the USA, employ lobbyists to ensure that their assets, business interests and bottom line are all protected. Companies like DJI and Amazon all had input in this Act. Their input helped shape the language of this law.  Now these companies are coming out, publicly, voicing their support to this new law. As for DJI, this new law severely restricts their customer's use of their products, so why is DJI supporting it, unless they're winning on the back end?

Because of the simple fact that they want to sell drones to the general public, you can not blame them for doing so. Yes, they are a big stakeholder, and therefore are to a certain point, listened to. You might feel that you are going to be restraint in the near future and try to blame it on a drone construction company, but you are barking up the wrong tree. Blame your government, but quite honestly, the rules you feel restraint by, make damn good sense  
2018-9-29
Use props
HereForTheBeer
Captain
Flight distance : 5381368 ft
  • >>>
United States
Offline

LoSBoL Posted at 2018-9-29 14:21
Where is your head at? DJI is not a cloning company, they are market leader and set the current standard of camera drones for the privately owned commercialy available camera drone. Hell yes they'll comply.

i didnt say dji is a cloning company, i said obviously companies like dji will comply with the rules...    but chinese cloning companies you always see selling drones for cheap, give no sh**ts about our laws or any laws really.. they are also like cockroaches of the electronics world, can't seem to kill em.. close one down and 5 more pop up making same stuff..
2018-9-29
Use props
LoSBoL
First Officer
Flight distance : 271650 ft
Netherlands
Offline

HereForTheBeer Posted at 2018-9-29 14:36
i didnt say dji is a cloning company, i said obviously companies like dji will comply with the rules...    but chinese cloning companies you always see selling drones for cheap, give no sh**ts about our laws or any laws really.. they are also like cockroaches of the electronics world, can't seem to kill em.. close one down and 5 more pop up making same stuff..

Supply and demand, so there is a market, and as long as there is a market, there will be manufacturers that will supply.Now what does that have to do with the market leader supplying camera drones?
2018-9-29
Use props
Bioluminous
lvl.3
Flight distance : 73077 ft
  • >>>
United States
Offline

I think flying at over 400 feet is not necessary unless you're inspecting some tall tower, in which case it will be okay as long as you're within 400 feet of the structure? The daylight restriction is inevitable because it is currently a restriction for commercial. Night waivers will likely apply just as with commercial. Written test - I don't like the current system that allows non-remote rated pilots to take the test online for free but require remote-only commercial pilots pay a testing center $150 every 2 years. That needs to change. They should at least allow remote-only pilots to renew online instead of at a testing center. 40 knots max seems fine for general, not so great for racing. Maybe they will allow this in certain areas where racing is present. Line of sight, that seems logical. It's present on the commercial rule. FPV generally should have a spotter unless racing, and there goes with the speed waiver I mentioned. And finally getting permission to fly from tower - it has always been normal to get permission when flying a non-remote aircraft, seems logical to make the same requirement for drones. In my experience, having flown within 5 miles of 3 medium to large airports (KPAE / KBFI / KSEA), in every case I spoke to the tower I was met with friendliness, and a general appreciation for me actually calling to let them know. I stay well away from any normal flight path, I doubt that getting permission to fly would be much of an issue.
2018-9-29
Use props
Jyunte
First Officer
Flight distance : 2103150 ft
Offline

LoSBoL Posted at 2018-9-29 14:34
Because of the simple fact that they want to sell drones to the general public, you can not blame them for doing so. Yes, they are a big stakeholder, and therefore are to a certain point, listened to. You might feel that you are going to be restraint in the near future and try to blame it on a drone construction company, but you are barking up the wrong tree. Blame your government, but quite honestly, the rules you feel restraint by, make damn good sense

I do blame the government... A 1,200 page piece of legislation that was passed by legislators who obviously didn't read it (it was given to them, and they made up their mind only 4 days later... Some, while simultaneously bogged down by the Kavanaugh hearings).

There is no doubt that I'll be restrained by this new law, because I don't just fly DJI drones. I fly fast fixed-wing aircraft that will now be illegal to fly under these new rules. I  fly racing quads which will be illegal under this new rule. I fly freestyle quads, which are not always in my direct line of sight, and therefore, illegal under this new rule. I fly a DJI Mavic Pro, which can't be seen past about 50 yards, so flying it from my local flying site will be illegal under this new rule. I will no longer have the option of flying fixed-wing or racing drones at night. My friends who fly jets won't be able to fly them. My buddy who holds a world record for long distance glider flying won't be able to try to beat this endurance record. The list goes on. The VAST majority of RC pilots fly responsibly. We should severely punish those who put lives in danger by flying irresponsibly, but this RC hobby has been doing just fine for a very long time.
2018-9-29
Use props
Jyunte
First Officer
Flight distance : 2103150 ft
Offline

Bioluminous Posted at 2018-9-29 14:46
I think flying at over 400 feet is not necessary unless you're inspecting some tall tower, in which case it will be okay as long as you're within 400 feet of the structure? The daylight restriction is inevitable because it is currently a restriction for commercial. Night waivers will likely apply just as with commercial. Written test - I don't like the current system that allows non-remote rated pilots to take the test online for free but require remote-only commercial pilots pay a testing center $150 every 2 years. That needs to change. They should at least allow remote-only pilots to renew online instead of at a testing center. 40 knots max seems fine for general, not so great for racing. Maybe they will allow this in certain areas where racing is present. Line of sight, that seems logical. It's present on the commercial rule. FPV generally should have a spotter unless racing, and there goes with the speed waiver I mentioned. And finally getting permission to fly from tower - it has always been normal to get permission when flying a non-remote aircraft, seems logical to make the same requirement for drones. In my experience, having flown within 5 miles of 3 medium to large airports (KPAE / KBFI / KSEA), in every case I spoke to the tower I was met with friendliness, and a general appreciation for me actually calling to let them know. I stay well away from any normal flight path, I doubt that getting permission to fly would be much of an issue.

Currently, you do not need PERMISSION from the airport to fly within 5 miles of the airport. You need to INFORM the airport. The difference between what happens now, and what will happen after the new rules come into effect, is that you will have to ask for PERMISSION, and the airport can say no. There are zero reasons for the airport to give you permission to fly, but there is a HUGE reason for them to deny your request: Liability. Consequently, the airport will deny your request every time.

You seem to be a pilot who enjoys flying your camera drone slow, straight and level, but it also seems like you have no interest in the rest of the RC flying hobby that's filled with pilots whose interests extend further than your own. You seem ok with rules that fit your interests, and don't care if those rules affect the majority of other pilots who have no interest in camera drones like the DJI aircraft. This is strange, because it is the pilots of the slow-moving camera drones who are the ones who are breaking the current rules, not the majority of fixed-wing/helicopter/freestyle/racing drone pilots.
2018-9-29
Use props
HereForTheBeer
Captain
Flight distance : 5381368 ft
  • >>>
United States
Offline

Jyunte Posted at 2018-9-29 14:58
I do blame the government... A 1,200 page piece of legislation that was passed by legislators who obviously didn't read it (it was given to them, and they made up their mind only 4 days later... Some, while simultaneously bogged down by the Kavanaugh hearings).

There is no doubt that I'll be restrained by this new law, because I don't just fly DJI drones. I fly fast fixed-wing aircraft that will now be illegal to fly under these new rules. I  fly racing quads which will be illegal under this new rule. I fly freestyle quads, which are not always in my direct line of sight, and therefore, illegal under this new rule. I fly a DJI Mavic Pro, which can't be seen past about 50 yards, so flying it from my local flying site will be illegal under this new rule. I will no longer have the option of flying fixed-wing or racing drones at night. My friends who fly jets won't be able to fly them. My buddy who holds a world record for long distance glider flying won't be able to try to beat this endurance record. The list goes on. The VAST majority of RC pilots fly responsibly. We should severely punish those who put lives in danger by flying irresponsibly, but this RC hobby has been doing just fine for a very long time.

i blame the government as well..  for all the points you mentioned actually, as well as they are easily influenced by money far too often and far too easily.  

nothing positive in this bill for us enthusiasts.   like you said a vast vast majority of pilots are not causing anyone problems and have no intentions of doing that.. the way i look at it is like driving..  most people are decent drivers but always someone that wants to reverse on the highway or cut massive amount of lanes at once or just crash about all the time..  lot like drones... but you dont see government making any strides to change how that gets handled on the roads..
2018-9-29
Use props
M Stuart K
First Officer
Flight distance : 1267717 ft
  • >>>
United States
Offline

Wachtberger Posted at 2018-9-29 12:51
In one point you are wrong. The ones to ''thank'' for these new rules are the reckless idiots who have caused many dangerous incidents. Now you get the result of their actions.

I don't know about that assertion either!  What incidents exactly are these "so called" reckless idiots guilty of?  Most of what you hear about drone incidents would not even register in comparison to "so called" reckless motorists or cyclists as well as other "law driven" privileges.  Motorists are crashing their cars into everything imaginable.  Cyclists are been mowed down by these hulking pieces of metal every day but you don't see any laws forbidding cyclists to ride on public roads.  Drones has become something to complain about and even drone pilots play a factor in keeping the hype going!  
2018-9-29
Use props
Bioluminous
lvl.3
Flight distance : 73077 ft
  • >>>
United States
Offline

Jyunte Posted at 2018-9-29 15:11
Currently, you do not need PERMISSION from the airport to fly within 5 miles of the airport. You need to INFORM the airport. The difference between what happens now, and what will happen after the new rules come into effect, is that you will have to ask for PERMISSION, and the airport can say no. There are zero reasons for the airport to give you permission to fly, but there is a HUGE reason for them to deny your request: Liability. Consequently, the airport will deny your request every time.

You seem to be a pilot who enjoys flying your camera drone slow, straight and level, but it also seems like you have no interest in the rest of the RC flying hobby that's filled with pilots whose interests extend further than your own. You seem ok with rules that fit your interests, and don't care if those rules affect the majority of other pilots who have no interest in camera drones like the DJI aircraft. This is strange, because it is the pilots of the slow-moving camera drones who are the ones who are breaking the current rules, not the majority of fixed-wing/helicopter/freestyle/racing drone pilots.

I understand. I just don't agree that the FAA would more likely deny permission than grant it. As a fixed-wing pilot in addition to being a remote pilot, I have found the FAA to be pro-flying rather than pro restrictive, at least on the business-end of the organization (meaning the people in the tower or center). I have been denied entry into airspace before, mostly when I'm trying to transit class bravo airspace surrounding KSEA. But whenever I contact them regarding drone flights, it has always been "sounds good, fly safe". Honestly, unless you're in direct flight path or very close to the airport, you're not much of a threat at or below 400 feet. I just don't see this as being much of an issue. If anything, it will educate non-commercial remote pilots about airspace classifications. However, regarding your other points, it's true. I fly my drone slow, straight and level because I use it for filming exclusively. I do not have an interest in RC flying as a hobby, but I do care about rules that affect the RC flying community in general. "...pilots of slow-moving camera drones who are the ones who are breaking the current rules..." Um, don't really agree with that one. There is more media attention on slow-moving camera drones because that is what is popular, I guess. But to classify slow-moving drone pilots as the major rule-breakers, and on this forum? I just don't think it's accurate description of the issues.
2018-9-29
Use props
Lamplighter55
Captain
Flight distance : 538596 ft
United Kingdom
Offline

The corpocracy rules. There is little the individual can do - but still en-mass form an interest ground and lobby your representative - law can always be changed if enough people vote down whoever just waved though this legislation. I think prior rights should be in effect - don't model flyers have any representation in the USA?
2018-9-29
Use props
Jyunte
First Officer
Flight distance : 2103150 ft
Offline

Bioluminous Posted at 2018-9-29 16:09
I understand. I just don't agree that the FAA would more likely deny permission than grant it. As a fixed-wing pilot in addition to being a remote pilot, I have found the FAA to be pro-flying rather than pro restrictive, at least on the business-end of the organization (meaning the people in the tower or center). I have been denied entry into airspace before, mostly when I'm trying to transit class bravo airspace surrounding KSEA. But whenever I contact them regarding drone flights, it has always been "sounds good, fly safe". Honestly, unless you're in direct flight path or very close to the airport, you're not much of a threat at or below 400 feet. I just don't see this as being much of an issue. If anything, it will educate non-commercial remote pilots about airspace classifications. However, regarding your other points, it's true. I fly my drone slow, straight and level because I use it for filming exclusively. I do not have an interest in RC flying as a hobby, but I do care about rules that affect the RC flying community in general. "...pilots of slow-moving camera drones who are the ones who are breaking the current rules..." Um, don't really agree with that one. There is more media attention on slow-moving camera drones because that is what is popular, I guess. But to classify slow-moving drone pilots as the major rule-breakers, and on this forum? I just don't think it's accurate description of the issues.

You must remember, that those in the tower know that they cannot currently deny an RC pilot when he/she calls to inform the tower of their intent to fly. So what else is the tower going to say, other than "Have fun, fly safely". Under the new rules, they have discretion as to whether to let you fly, or not. If they give the RC pilot permission to fly, and an accidental occurs, the tower will be blamed. Tacit liability for any accidents that involve RC aircraft that were specifically given permission by the tower to fly near manned aircraft, close to the airport, would dictate that the tower routinely deny any and all requests.

The recent FAA report where drone-related incidents (near-hits, drone sightings etc) were reported by licensed full scale pilots was investigated by the AMA. The AMA found that of the 700 incidents, only a handful (going from memory, something like 5 incidents) actually involved a drone/UAS that was being flown irresponsibly. As for the majority of sightings that actually did involve a drone/UAS, it was found that the drone/UAS was flying legally and responsibly... For example, at an RC flying field, at less than 400 feet and in full compliance with AMA safety guidelines! The rest of the reports, were objects that were mistakenly reported as being drones/UAS but, in fact, were NOT drones/UAS. These included birds, other full scale aircraft, and even a UFO or two! There have been several recent instances of people flying drones/UAS near wildfires, such that firefighting aircraft could not operate safely. These have ALL been camera drone models, like DJI drones. The model aircraft that hit the helicopter in New York in 2017, was a DJI phantom. The model aircraft flying at night, through firework displays, over hundreds of people, none of whom we part of the flight operations, all DJI drones. I'm unaware of ANY report of a large scale RC P51D interfering with fire operations, or any turbine RC jet hitting a full scale helicopter while a TFR was in effect, or any RC glider interfering with police SWAT responses. It can't be denied, that most of the rule breakers, are slow moving camera drone operators. - not the responsible ones, of course.
2018-9-29
Use props
Dog Flight
Second Officer
Flight distance : 3432156 ft
United States
Offline

I've said it before and I'll say it again, sorry. There is gold in them there skies, and hobbyist are just in the way. We will be restricted out of the air space one bill at a time. This is all been driven by commercial interests and their lobbyists. You can blame it on the idiots and all the negative press but it's just part of the game. Politicians are idiots and probably didn't even write this bill. DJI sells drones they don't care if you can't fly them anywhere. They know in the future the commercial market will be 10 times the size of hobbyists market. Step one: remove hobbyist from the airspace. Step two: open air space to commercial flight. New regulations for commercial flight, allowing  BLOS, night flights, automated flights, flight over people.
2018-9-29
Use props
Bioluminous
lvl.3
Flight distance : 73077 ft
  • >>>
United States
Offline

Jyunte Posted at 2018-9-29 16:47
You must remember, that those in the tower know that they cannot currently deny an RC pilot when he/she calls to inform the tower of their intent to fly. So what else is the tower going to say, other than "Have fun, fly safely". Under the new rules, they have discretion as to whether to let you fly, or not. If they give the RC pilot permission to fly, and an accidental occurs, the tower will be blamed. Tacit liability for any accidents that involve RC aircraft that were specifically given permission by the tower to fly near manned aircraft, close to the airport, would dictate that the tower routinely deny any and all requests.

The recent FAA report where drone-related incidents (near-hits, drone sightings etc) were reported by licensed full scale pilots was investigated by the AMA. The AMA found that of the 700 incidents, only a handful (going from memory, something like 5 incidents) actually involved a drone/UAS that was being flown irresponsibly. As for the majority of sightings that actually did involve a drone/UAS, it was found that the drone/UAS was flying legally and responsibly... For example, at an RC flying field, at less than 400 feet and in full compliance with AMA safety guidelines! The rest of the reports, were objects that were mistakenly reported as being drones/UAS but, in fact, were NOT drones/UAS. These included birds, other full scale aircraft, and even a UFO or two! There have been several recent instances of people flying drones/UAS near wildfires, such that firefighting aircraft could not operate safely. These have ALL been camera drone models, like DJI drones. The model aircraft that hit the helicopter in New York in 2017, was a DJI phantom. The model aircraft flying at night, through firework displays, over hundreds of people, none of whom we part of the flight operations, all DJI drones. I'm unaware of ANY report of a large scale RC P51D interfering with fire operations, or any turbine RC jet hitting a full scale helicopter while a TFR was in effect, or any RC glider interfering with police SWAT responses. It can't be denied, that most of the rule breakers, are slow moving camera drone operators. - not the responsible ones, of course.

I think if you were to visit a local control tower, you would feel differently. Many towers are happy to give you a tour of the facility. The goal for ATC is to coordinate air traffic. There may be certain situations in which they would restrict drones in certain areas, but it's not going to be a flat refusal to fly to avoid any issues. And this only applies to within 5 miles of an airport with an open control tower, right? You seem to be overblowing this issue. As far as reports of drone sightings...I think most RC pilots are flying in areas where other RC pilots fly. But the pilots who are breaking the rules are, by your reports, all flying DJI drones? I'm not really sure if that is accurate or even, wait, what is your point? Why are you seemingly against DJI drone pilots on this forum?
2018-9-29
Use props
Jyunte
First Officer
Flight distance : 2103150 ft
Offline

Dog Flight Posted at 2018-9-29 17:13
I've said it before and I'll say it again, sorry. There is gold in them there skies, and hobbyist are just in the way. We will be restricted out of the air space one bill at a time. This is all been driven by commercial interests and their lobbyists. You can blame it on the idiots and all the negative press but it's just part of the game. Politicians are idiots and probably didn't even write this bill. DJI sells drones they don't care if you can't fly them anywhere. They know in the future the commercial market will be 10 times the size of hobbyists market. Step one: remove hobbyist from the airspace. Step two: open air space to commercial flight. New regulations for commercial flight, allowing  BLOS, night flights, automated flights, flight over people.

Exactly. DJI has your money, as long as you buy their product, they don't care if you can legally fly it.
2018-9-29
Use props
Jyunte
First Officer
Flight distance : 2103150 ft
Offline

Bioluminous Posted at 2018-9-29 17:18
I think if you were to visit a local control tower, you would feel differently. Many towers are happy to give you a tour of the facility. The goal for ATC is to coordinate air traffic. There may be certain situations in which they would restrict drones in certain areas, but it's not going to be a flat refusal to fly to avoid any issues. And this only applies to within 5 miles of an airport with an open control tower, right? You seem to be overblowing this issue. As far as reports of drone sightings...I think most RC pilots are flying in areas where other RC pilots fly. But the pilots who are breaking the rules are, by your reports, all flying DJI drones? I'm not really sure if that is accurate or even, wait, what is your point? Why are you seemingly against DJI drone pilots on this forum?

Facts are facts. The validated reports of drones/UAS interfering with manned aircraft are DJI/DJI-like camera drones, not racing quads, not turbine jets, not foamie park flyers, not gas powered balsa 1/4 scale warbirds, not gliders going for speed and/or altitude records.

You may be lucky and live in an area with very few airports. Some of us are not so lucky. Most of us in southern California live within 5 miles of an airport, or active civilian helipad, or hospital with a helipad, or a police station with a helipad. Notifying an airport becomes very important to us, if we want to fly legally. When the tower has the CHOICE to deny our flight operations, they will. All you're seeing now, is what they're like when they don't have that choice.

And, yes, we agree, most RC pilots fly where other RC pilots fly. That was my point about the FAA report. Full scale pilots reported sightings and near misses with RC aircraft ("drones") when the RC aircraft were flying where they were supposed to be flying, and flying responsibly... Yet they were still reported to the FAA as if they were flying irresponsibly. It was this badly designed report that caused all the recent outage against drones because it falsely painted them in a bad light. The politicians heard about this report, and the false information contained in it became fact. I'm not over blowing the issue... the government is.

Finally, I'm not against the DJI pilots on this site. After all, I am one of them, as as of writing this, have 640,008 meters (397 miles) on my Mavic Pro. However, the facts show that the majority of the pilots who are flying irresponsibly, the ones interfering with airborne fire fighting operations, or interfering with police operations, or flying over people, or flying over sports stadiums, or flying over theme parks, are flying slow moving camera drones. DJI just happens to be the biggest manufacturer of (relatively) inexpensive slow moving camera drones.


Congested airspace

Congested airspace
2018-9-29
Use props
Easy Ed
Captain
Flight distance : 41414 ft
Offline

HedgeTrimmer Posted at 2018-9-29 13:24
Not quite.  Those to "thank" are those in business of MAKING News, not reporting news.

We got the bubble headed

2018-9-29
Use props
Bioluminous
lvl.3
Flight distance : 73077 ft
  • >>>
United States
Offline

Jyunte Posted at 2018-9-29 17:47
Facts are facts. The validated reports of drones/UAS interfering with manned aircraft are DJI/DJI-like camera drones, not racing quads, not turbine jets, not foamie park flyers, not gas powered balsa 1/4 scale warbirds, not gliders going for speed and/or altitude records.

You may be lucky and live in an area with very few airports. Some of us are not so lucky. Most of us in southern California live within 5 miles of an airport, or active civilian helipad, or hospital with a helipad, or a police station with a helipad. Notifying an airport becomes very important to us, if we want to fly legally. When the tower has the CHOICE to deny our flight operations, they will. All you're seeing now, is what they're like when they don't have that choice.

I live in Seattle. I have two large airports very close to me (KBFI and KSEA). My chart looks similar, with lots of circles. But those aren't "no-fly" zones. I think the rule is that you need to contact the tower at airports that have an open tower. This doesn't apply to airports with no control tower, heliports, seaplane ports or even airports with closed control towers at certain times (the big one like that close to me is KPAE, which only has a control tower open during the day). Turn off all those options on your map - there will be a lot less circles. I mean, obviously don't fly around a heliport when there's a helo coming in, same with the seaplane ports.

Again, you are assuming that the folks at the tower are going to say "no, and that's final". I don't know what you are basing that assumption on. Have you ever actually contacted a tower and spoken to a human? They're really nice people, usually. If they're stressed with lots of traffic, maybe you get someone who says no, but I just don't see that as being the norm just because "they can".
2018-9-29
Use props
Jyunte
First Officer
Flight distance : 2103150 ft
Offline

Bioluminous Posted at 2018-9-29 18:23
I live in Seattle. I have two large airports very close to me (KBFI and KSEA). My chart looks similar, with lots of circles. But those aren't "no-fly" zones. I think the rule is that you need to contact the tower at airports that have an open tower. This doesn't apply to airports with no control tower, heliports, seaplane ports or even airports with closed control towers at certain times (the big one like that close to me is KPAE, which only has a control tower open during the day). Turn off all those options on your map - there will be a lot less circles. I mean, obviously don't fly around a heliport when there's a helo coming in, same with the seaplane ports.

Again, you are assuming that the folks at the tower are going to say "no, and that's final". I don't know what you are basing that assumption on. Have you ever actually contacted a tower and spoken to a human? They're really nice people, usually. If they're stressed with lots of traffic, maybe you get someone who says no, but I just don't see that as being the norm just because "they can".

The problem is, DJI calls many of those areas no fly zones. So if you want to fly a DJI drone there, you're out of luck. I guess we'll have to disagree about the tower. I maintain that the folks in the tower today, know that they can't say no, and that there's no liability for them by saying to an RC pilot that they can fly, even if an accident occurs. But after this new rule is in effect, the tower assumes (some or all of the) liability, should an accident occur, by explicitly telling the RC pilot he can fly.  Again, I maintain that the tower will not want to assume that liability, and will therefore refuse to give RC pilots permission to fly. I'm ok with agreeing to disagree, because until the rule comes into effect, neither of us know how they will react. I will say this, the US government doesn't like accepting responsibility for anything.
2018-9-29
Use props
Jyunte
First Officer
Flight distance : 2103150 ft
Offline

Bioluminous Posted at 2018-9-29 18:23
I live in Seattle. I have two large airports very close to me (KBFI and KSEA). My chart looks similar, with lots of circles. But those aren't "no-fly" zones. I think the rule is that you need to contact the tower at airports that have an open tower. This doesn't apply to airports with no control tower, heliports, seaplane ports or even airports with closed control towers at certain times (the big one like that close to me is KPAE, which only has a control tower open during the day). Turn off all those options on your map - there will be a lot less circles. I mean, obviously don't fly around a heliport when there's a helo coming in, same with the seaplane ports.

Again, you are assuming that the folks at the tower are going to say "no, and that's final". I don't know what you are basing that assumption on. Have you ever actually contacted a tower and spoken to a human? They're really nice people, usually. If they're stressed with lots of traffic, maybe you get someone who says no, but I just don't see that as being the norm just because "they can".

Anyway, we're pretty far from the topic of this thread, which was that DJI supports these new rules... Rules that will effectively stop people from flying their drones. Of all the companies in the world, DJI should be fiercely against this Act.
2018-9-29
Use props
HereForTheBeer
Captain
Flight distance : 5381368 ft
  • >>>
United States
Offline

Jyunte Posted at 2018-9-29 19:22
Anyway, we're pretty far from the topic of this thread, which was that DJI supports these new rules... Rules that will effectively stop people from flying their drones. Of all the companies in the world, DJI should be fiercely against this Act.

the problem is, they arent against it.   they know their is more money in delivery and government stuff..  dji probably dying to be a direct partner of Amazon, Google and Facebook to extend their services.. right now DJi is busy trying to smother out compeition and using their money, clout and brand reconition to push this motive..   
i bet anything they are dying to get into the military industry and government stuff as well.. sell bunch of $3000 drones for $30,0000 each....  the US military is so happy to over spend on thing they have such an unlimited budget they dont mind spending $150 on something that probably on shelf at sporting store for $25
2018-9-29
Use props
A CW
Captain
Flight distance : 12408635 ft
  • >>>
United Kingdom
Offline

More worryingly I believe the proposals are also to permit officials to issue on the spot fines and confiscate your drone on the spot if deemed to be used in an illegal flight (I can see a number of cases or drones being stolen in the field by folk pretending to be officials). It is all getting a little messy TBH.
2018-10-4
Use props
Atmos_7
lvl.2
United States
Offline

Hello, I'm a brand new poster to the DJI forums. I also realize I'm 'necroing' an older post, but I'm concerned about these developments like everyone else.

My question is: If these changes are made will licensed and certified Part 107 commercial pilots will be affected in the same way? There are many individuals who have actual businesses solely based on the use of drones (real estate photography, etc). This would obviously have negative financial ramifications to those who rely on that income from their businesses.

Thanks.
2019-2-5
Use props
HereForTheBeer
Captain
Flight distance : 5381368 ft
  • >>>
United States
Offline

Atmos_7 Posted at 2-5 18:26
Hello, I'm a brand new poster to the DJI forums. I also realize I'm 'necroing' an older post, but I'm concerned about these developments like everyone else.

My question is: If these changes are made will licensed and certified Part 107 commercial pilots will be affected in the same way? There are many individuals who have actual businesses solely based on the use of drones (real estate photography, etc). This would obviously have negative financial ramifications to those who rely on that income from their businesses.

yes all... dji doesnt give special treatment to geofencing..   

most people annoyed with DJI eventually use something like NLD (no limit dronez) mods and jailbreak their stuff with things like DUMLdore..  
2019-2-5
Use props
HedgeTrimmer
Captain
United States
Offline

A CW Posted at 2018-10-4 23:46
More worryingly I believe the proposals are also to permit officials to issue on the spot fines and confiscate your drone on the spot if deemed to be used in an illegal flight (I can see a number of cases or drones being stolen in the field by folk pretending to be officials). It is all getting a little messy TBH.

(I can see a number of cases or drones being stolen in the field by folk pretending to be officials).

If they come onto my field, they better have a real badge and proof badge is their own.
2019-2-5
Use props
HedgeTrimmer
Captain
United States
Offline

HereForTheBeer Posted at 2018-9-29 19:34
the problem is, they arent against it.   they know their is more money in delivery and government stuff..  dji probably dying to be a direct partner of Amazon, Google and Facebook to extend their services.. right now DJi is busy trying to smother out compeition and using their money, clout and brand reconition to push this motive..   
i bet anything they are dying to get into the military industry and government stuff as well.. sell bunch of $3000 drones for $30,0000 each....  the US military is so happy to over spend on thing they have such an unlimited budget they dont mind spending $150 on something that probably on shelf at sporting store for $25

If Military business is what DJI is after, DJI is going to have to open it's entire business up to close and detailed inspections and auditing.  I know from work that Government will have a few insiders, besides standard inspectors and auditors - verifying security and compliance.
2019-2-5
Use props
12Next >
Advanced
You need to log in before you can reply Login | Register now

Credit Rules