I perfectly understand the limitation, I have already read all the articles and laws and previous posts. But there is only one doubt that would make me stay with my mini 4 pro and live with that, or go directly for an Air 3 or a Mavic Classic.
The law would indicate a limitation of 120 meters from the take-off point. Therefore my question is, if I took off from the top of a mountain, and flew away from it, my takeoff point would still be a maximum of 120 meters, when in reality it would be higher.

How is this going to be handled in terms of limitation, if only the take-off point would be taken into account?

I ask this, because if so I think I could live with that limitation, otherwise I should go for a C1 class drone like the Air 3 or the Mavic 3 Classic


I hope my question makes sense.

"when in reality it would be higher" incorrect, but that may be due to translation

The limitation would still limit you to 120m relative to the take off point i.e. if the mountain top was at 1000m above sea level (AMSL) the drone could fly at 1120m AMSL anywhere within range. So, if you flew the drone horizontally away from the mountain top, you could 'soon' break 120m above the ground directly beneath the drone (AGL).

That said, is the pending restriction going to apply to a drone flown in Israel?

Sean-bumble-bee Posted at 10-3 05:48
"when in reality it would be higher" incorrect, but that may be due to translation

The limitation would still limit you to 120m relative to the take off point i.e. if the mountain top was at 1000m above sea level (AMSL) the drone could fly at 1120m AMSL anywhere within range. So, if you flew the drone horizontally away from the mountain top, you could 'soon' break 120m above the ground directly beneath the drone (AGL).

I don't understand why it says I'm in Israel, it must be because of the VPN, which is strange. I am in Denmark.

But I don't understand, so flying at 1200m above the ground, but having a takeoff point within the 120 meter limitation (top of the mountain), would it be possible and shouldn't be a problem? If so, it's a bit strange implementation, but I understand.

"But I don't understand, so flying at 1120m above the ground, but having a takeoff point within the 120 meter limitation (top of the mountain), would it be possible and shouldn't be a problem? If so, it's a bit strange implementation, but I understand."
What do you mean by "problem"?
I think you understand incorrectly.

As far as I am aware the legal EU 'height' limit is, the drone must be within 120m of the ground, I think that will remain in effect under the new rule but the new rule introduces an additional permutation. In that, nowhere will the drone be permitted to be higher than 120m relative to the take off point.

I took your hypothetical flight to be,
1) set the max height ceiling to 120m ( the maximum possible when the law comes into force )
2) take off from a tall mountain top, let's say that is at 1000m AMSL and climb to 120m. The height limit you have set will limit the drone to 1120m AMSL (take off AMSL = set limit ) wherever the drone may be during that particular flight.
3) if you fly the drone away from the hill top to somewhere where the drone is more than 120m from the closest ground and the drone will be in ILLEGAL airspace but it will still be at or under 1120m AMSL i.e still at or under a height of 120m relative to the take off point and the new hardware limit will not stop you doing that since the drone has no knowledge of its 'AGL'.

For the above you can choose any height for the mountain top that you like, a 10m sand dune would suffice if you flew the drone far enough out over the sea. BTW, for the purposes of the legislation, the surface of any water ( lake, river, sea etc. ) is regarded as the surface of the earth. "Far enough" referred to the fact that the done would be more than 120m AGL and more than 120m from the dune.

To get back to the 1000m mountain, lets assume the base of the mountain is at 100m AMSL. Currently and providing the drone remains within 120m of the ground, you could take off from the base of the mountain and legally fly up its slope to the current firmware limit of 500m relative to the take off, which would be at 600m AMSL.  Under the pending rule and taking off from the base of the mountain, the drone could get no higher than 240m AMSL irrespective of how close it was to the ground.

Hi there. Thank you for reaching out. For the said law, the user must fly the drone and maintain a flight altitude below 120m above ground level. For more information about regulation, you may access the EASA website using the link below. Thank you for your valued support.

https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/do ... tegory-civil-drones

DJI Paladin Posted at 10-3 17:26
Hi there. Thank you for reaching out. For the said law, the user must fly the drone and maintain a flight altitude below 120m above ground level. For more information about regulation, you may access the EASA website using the link below. Thank you for your valued support.

https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/domains/civil-drones/drones-regulatory-framework-background/open-category-civil-drones

That's 100% correct, Paladin, yet your to-be implemented height limitation of 120m from the take-off point restricts this if one wants to fly up a hill or mountain or structure, so you know the law yet DJI will still be implementing the restriction.

This can only benefit DJI because that means that anyone flying a Mini drone, if they want to fly up a mountainside or structure etc will have to buy yet another more expensive drone.

Thank you for your answers, I have been familiarizing myself with the regulations both in Europe and here in Denmark, and now I understand better.

Bashy Posted at 10-3 18:58
That's 100% correct, Paladin, yet your to-be implemented height limitation of 120m from the take-off point restricts this if one wants to fly up a hill or mountain or structure, so you know the law yet DJI will still be implementing the restriction.

This can only benefit DJI because that means that anyone flying a Mini drone, if they want to fly up a mountainside or structure etc will have to buy yet another more expensive drone.

Thank you for your response, Bashy. This concern of yours will be forwarded to our relevant team for clarification. We appreciate your patience and understanding.

aqvdo Posted at 10-3 23:25
Thank you for your answers, I have been familiarizing myself with the regulations both in Europe and here in Denmark, and now I understand better.

You are most welcome. Should you have other inquiries, feel free to contact us. Thank you for your valued support.

Dirty Bird Posted at 10-5 04:48
I only see one of two possible solutions to enacting a "120 meter AGL" limit as opposed to the simple "120 meter above takeoff point" limit .  

1 - The drone maintains an internal database of ground level, constantly evaluating current location to the database.

I think it might be possible to handle the option 1 data base in the 'same way' as maps are handled but extend it to include storing the info on the drone as well as the controller.

Sean-bumble-bee Posted at 10-5 05:11
I think it might be possible to handle the option 1 data base in the 'same way' as maps are handled but extend it to include storing the info on the drone as well as the controller.

Even option 1 is hard.  So lets say you are near a cliff, and as you fly off the cliff you are now way above 120m AGL.  Will the drone descend to stay in the limit, or if you descend below the cliff, will it not allow the drone to climb to your homepoint?  How would that work if you want to land it at the homepoint?

Maybe that could be rectified where if you are 120m horizontally from a structure you are allowed to climb it, like part 107 rules allow.

This whole thing is a mess, which that is what govts are good at; creating messes lol.

A1C Posted at 10-5 06:10
Even option 1 is hard.  So lets say you are near a cliff, and as you fly off the cliff you are now way above 120m AGL.  Will the drone descend to stay in the limit, or if you descend below the cliff, will it not allow the drone to climb to your homepoint?  How would that work if you want to land it at the homepoint?

Maybe that could be rectified where if you are 120m horizontally from a structure you are allowed to climb it, like part 107 rules allow.

Agreed.
Which is why I think the current European rule of  'must be within 120m of the closest ground' makes more sense than a pure 120m AGL rule.

   "  This whole thing is a mess, which that is what govts are good at; creating messes lol."     

Norway drone rules from their Web site.

Clearly Norway states you have to be within 120 metres to the nearest point of the earth. DJI should not restrict altitude settings to 120M max.

Sean-bumble-bee Posted at 10-5 06:27
Agreed.
Which is why I think the current European rule of  'must be within 120m of the closest ground' makes more sense than a pure 120m AGL rule.

I agree with you.

See https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/faq/116465.



The DJI limitation that max flight height is 120 meter above starting point is WRONG and must be removed.
If DJI reads this - please remove the limitation ASAP and do not incorprate this rule for new Cx releases.

fans506bfe6c Posted at 11-3 03:19
See https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/faq/116465.

[view_image]

Again.

You are wrong.

Go read the law, then come back here.
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32019R0945

I looked a bit further....

Tee definition for C0 states explicitly an max height of 120 above the departure point. For other Cx the same is said, except when the UAS is equipped with a system to keep the distance to the nearest ground point to 120 meters - I am not aware of any system that can do that.

In practice it means that legacy drones (without Cx) can fly according to the figure, Cx certified drones are mostly limited to 120 meter above starting point.

fans506bfe6c Posted at 11-3 04:07
I looked a bit further....

Tee definition for C0 states explicitly an max height of 120 above the departure point. For other Cx the same is said, except when the UAS is equipped with a system to keep the distance to the nearest ground point to 120 meters - I am not aware of any system that can do that.

read the text again, you will succeed

fans506bfe6c Posted at 11-3 04:07
I looked a bit further....

Tee definition for C0 states explicitly an max height of 120 above the departure point. For other Cx the same is said, except when the UAS is equipped with a system to keep the distance to the nearest ground point to 120 meters - I am not aware of any system that can do that.

The EU seems in places to want to differentiate between C0 and C1+ by restricting max height to 120m above takeoff point for C0 and 120m above ground level for the others. C1+ can:

"have a maximum attainable height above the take-off point limited to 120 m or be equipped with a system that limits the height above the surface or above the take-off point to 120 m or to a value selectable by the remote pilot; if the value is selectable, clear information about the height of the UA above the surface or take-off point during flight shall be provided to the remote pilot."

But in other places on the EASA website they change the C0 height wording to 120m "above ground level" so either they don't know what they're doing or this only applies to drones made before 1/1/2024.

For sure, they will be restricting C0 pilots in other ways after 1/1/2024, not least by introducing a minimum pilot age of 16 for C0 drones bought from next year, removing the permission to fly over uninvolved people and requiring all C0 pilots to RTFM. But the wording about height limit is still "above ground level" in this document and it's not clear which document takes precedence:
https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/do ... egory-civil-drones#

I'm assuming that the EU has recorded unwanted numbers of pilot errors in children under 16 which is why they want tighter restrictions for C0. But it looks to me as though the reference elsewhere to restricting altitude to 120m above takeoff point may be an error unless thy do plan to introduce that restriction and change the document I've linked to.