Hello everyone,


I wanted to share my recent experience with DJI’s customer care team to see if anyone else has encountered similar issues.


I’ve been trying to unlock an area around Gading Wonosari Airfield (WI1G), which is no longer operational.
My home is right next to the airfield, and I simply want to fly my drone responsibly around my own property.
I provided official proof from the Indonesian Directorate General of Civil Aviation showing that the airfield is not active and hasn’t been used for more than 15 years.
The area is now used for jogging and public events, not aviation.
Despite this, DJI refuses to unlock the area.
Their latest response?

"We were told that they emailed the website manager of the Civil Aviation Administration to confirm that they told us that Gading Airport is still in the development consideration stage. Therefore, we are unable to unlock this area for any user."

Let that sink in.
They are keeping this area blocked because it’s in the "consideration stage" of possibly being developed.
Consideration stage?


The airfield hasn’t been used for more than 15 years, and they’ve been "talking about it" for just as long.
Should we open it again in another 15 years to check if the "consideration" is still ongoing?


Based on this logic:

• Should we evict everyone from their homes because a mall might be built there in five years?
  
• Should we put every 70-year-old in a coffin because they are in the "consideration stage" for passing away?
  
• Should Anna from DJI leave her home because it’s being "considered" for a space station?
  
  
  
  

It’s completely absurd and shows no respect for facts or logic.
This isn’t about safety; it’s about arbitrary control.


DJI claims their GEO System is a "voluntary measure," but there’s nothing voluntary about being blocked from using my legally owned hardware based on hypothetical scenarios.


I’m posting this to bring attention to how DJI handles these situations.
If you’ve experienced similar frustrations or have advice, please share your thoughts.


DJI, if you’re reading this:
It’s time to stop making excuses and start respecting your customers.
Unlock the hardware.

Hi Hérșîř Nâtó. We are sorry for the inconvenience. Could you please tell us your ticket number so that we can help you better? Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

DJI Tony Posted at 12-31 20:19
Hi Hérșîř Nâtó. We are sorry for the inconvenience. Could you please tell us your ticket number so that we can help you better? Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

Ticket number : [## 8680272 ##] DJI Customer Care Team CAS-19403031-H4Z1C7

Hi Tony,

Thanks for stepping in! Here’s the situation in a nutshell:

• The airfield I’m asking to unlock hasn’t been used for over 15 years.
• It’s now used for jogging and public events—definitely not aviation.
• Despite all this, DJI’s latest excuse is that the airfield is in the "consideration stage" for future development.
  

Does that reasoning make sense to you? Because it sure doesn’t to me.

If you’re curious, you can just take a quick look at Google Maps—it’s clear this is an abandoned airstrip, not even a functioning airport.
And even if they did decide to use it again, it would take years to rebuild it, both financially and technically. Blocking it now for something that might happen years down the line makes no sense.

I get that safety is important, but safety works best when it’s about cooperation, not control.
Blocking areas arbitrarily, especially when there’s verified proof that they’re not in use, doesn’t feel like cooperation—it feels like overreach.

Hopefully, you can help bring some clarity to this situation. Looking forward to hearing your thoughts!

What’s even more baffling is this:

How can a private company, owned by regular citizens with no legal authority, justify policing citizens of other countries?

They’re not a regulatory body. They’re not lawmakers. Yet they act as though they have the right to enforce restrictions globally—even in nations where they have zero legal jurisdiction.

This isn’t about safety—it’s about control.

Safety requires cooperation, not unaccountable policing by a company with no legal mandate to do so.

Hérșîř Nâtó Posted at 2024-12-31 22:08
What’s even more baffling is this:

How can a private company, owned by regular citizens with no legal authority, justify policing citizens of other countries?

Thank you for the information provided. Please rest assured that we will convey your request to the relevant departments.

However, the proof you provided only said that Gading Airport is not currently on the active list, but our colleagues have contacted the local Civil Aviation Administration. The Civil Aviation Administration stated that Gading Airport is still in the development consideration stage, so we cannot lift the ban for you.

If you need to lift the ban, we recommend that you go to the Civil Aviation Administration for formal approval. If there is a relevant authorization approval, we can give it to you. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

DJI Tony Posted at 1-1 00:12
Thank you for the information provided. Please rest assured that we will convey your request to the relevant departments.

However, the proof you provided only said that Gading Airport is not currently on the active list, but our colleagues have contacted the local Civil Aviation Administration. The Civil Aviation Administration stated that Gading Airport is still in the development consideration stage, so we cannot lift the ban for you.

Dear Tony,
Thank you for your response, but it seems we are back to the same nonsensical reasoning.
DJI claims that the Civil Aviation Administration stated Gading Airport is in the "development consideration stage." However:

• The airfield has been non-operational for over 15 years and is currently used for jogging and public events.
• I have provided official proof from the Indonesian Directorate General of Civil Aviation showing that it is not listed as an active airport. You can verify this yourself at the following URL:
  https://hubud.kemenhub.go.id/hubud/website/bandara
  

Simply search for "Gading" or "WI1G," and you will see that it is not included in the list of active airports.

• Even if development were to be considered, the airport would need to be built from scratch, requiring significant financial and technical resources—a process that would take years to complete.
  

Furthermore, DJI is asking me to obtain permission for an airport that doesn’t even exist. The airfield hasn’t been operational for over 15 years, and it’s not listed as active. How can anyone possibly get authorization for something that isn’t operational and hasn’t existed in practical terms for so long?
This reasoning feels completely circular—you know such approval doesn’t exist, yet you make it a requirement. It’s not just unreasonable; it’s impossible.
I hope this additional clarification helps, as the reasoning provided so far has been highly inconsistent and frustrating.

Hérșîř Nâtó Posted at 1-1 23:48
Dear Tony,

Hi there. If you still want to unlock the area, please contact the local Civil Aviation Administration to get an authorization letter, with that, we could be able to help you unlock the zone.

If you have any questions, please reply to our email. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

DJI Tony Posted at 1-2 00:11
Hi there. If you still want to unlock the area, please contact the local Civil Aviation Administration to get an authorization letter, with that, we could be able to help you unlock the zone.

If you have any questions, please reply to our email. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

DJI is asking me to obtain permission for an airport that doesn’t even exist. The airfield hasn’t been operational for over 15 years, and it’s not listed as active. How can anyone possibly get authorization for something that isn’t operational and hasn’t existed in practical terms for so long?
This reasoning feels completely circular—you know such approval doesn’t exist, yet you make it a requirement. It’s not just unreasonable; it’s impossible.

I would like to ask where DJI derives the authority to enforce airspace restrictions globally. DJI is a private company, not a regulatory body. What gives DJI the right to control users’ ability to operate their hardware in areas where there are no legal restrictions?

Looking forward to your clarification.

Hérșîř Nâtó Posted at 1-2 00:31
I would like to ask where DJI derives the authority to enforce airspace restrictions globally. DJI is a private company, not a regulatory body. What gives DJI the right to control users’ ability to operate their hardware in areas where there are no legal restrictions?

Looking forward to your clarification.

Hi there. We will convey your request to the relevant departments. Please pay attention to the email reply. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

DJI Tony Posted at 1-2 02:01
Hi there. We will convey your request to the relevant departments. Please pay attention to the email reply. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

It’s perfectly fine to continue discussing this matter here for everyone to see. Transparency is important, and I think it’s beneficial for other users to understand the kind of reasoning and responses I’ve been receiving from DJI regarding my request.

As I’ve mentioned before, the area in question is completely abandoned, has been non-operational for over 15 years, and is now used for public activities. Despite providing official evidence and pointing out the obvious state of the airfield, DJI has continued to rely on vague input from a website manager and speculative claims.

I look forward to seeing how DJI’s relevant departments respond, but until then, I think it’s fair for this conversation to remain visible so others can see what customers sometimes have to endure.

DJI keeps coming back with the most nonsensical responses regarding my request to unlock a no-fly zone. Their latest gem?

"The website manager of the Civil Aviation Administration confirmed that Gading Airport is still in the development consideration stage... Please contact the local Civil Aviation Administration to get an authorization letter, with that, we could be able to help you unlock the zone."

Let’s break this down:

If this were an active airport, it would already be listed as such in the official aviation registry. It’s not.
Blocking the area based on what a webmaster says about hypothetical future development is beyond absurd. DJI isn’t in charge of making speculative decisions about abandoned airfields—they’re a company, not airspace regulators.
This level of reasoning makes it impossible to take DJI’s process seriously. They claim to prioritize safety, but this has nothing to do with safety or regulations—this is arbitrary control.

If DJI keeps relying on absurd logic like this, it raises serious questions about how they treat their customers.

Hérșîř Nâtó Posted at 1-2 04:36
DJI keeps coming back with the most nonsensical responses regarding my request to unlock a no-fly zone. Their latest gem?

"The website manager of the Civil Aviation Administration confirmed that Gading Airport is still in the development consideration stage... Please contact the local Civil Aviation Administration to get an authorization letter, with that, we could be able to help you unlock the zone."

Hi there. We're sorry for not being able to provide you with a satisfactory response at this moment. We also understand your concern that the area you mentioned has actually been out of operation for the past 15 years. Please kindly notice that our dedicated team is currently looking into your latest email and will get back to you as soon as possible. Your understanding and cooperation throughout this process are truly appreciated. Thank you.

Dear Mindy,

Thank you for your response. Let me make this clear:

The airfield has been out of operation for over 15 years, and discussions about rebuilding it are not far from that timeline either.
It is not listed in the official registry of active airports.
These are facts, not speculation.
While DJI may claim to implement restrictions for safety, the reality is that DJI is a private company, not a regulatory authority. Blocking an area like this—without legal standing and based on irrelevant "hypotheticals"—is not acceptable.

If DJI insists on acting as airspace police, the least you can do is ensure you are enforcing restrictions in the right places. In this case, the area is clearly abandoned. There is no justification for restricting drone use here.

In the rare event that the airfield is rebuilt and becomes active again, restrictions can be applied at that time. Until then, this is simply unnecessary overreach.

I hope this issue can be resolved logically and fairly.

Hérșîř Nâtó Posted at 1-2 07:51
Dear Mindy,

Thank you for your response. Let me make this clear:

Hi John, as we said in the email all unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) operators must abide by all regulations from organizations such as the ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) and any other applicable airspace regulations in their area. In order to increase flight safety and prevent accidental flights in restricted areas, DJI has introduced a No Fly Zones feature to help everyone use their DJI products safely and legally.

The website manager of the Civil Aviation Administration confirmed that Gading Airport is still in the development consideration stage, they have confirmed that the airport has not been abandoned permanently. Therefore, we are unable to unlock the area in this situation. Please contact the local Civil Aviation Administration to get an authorization letter, with that, we could be able to help you unlock the zone.

However, we will ask our email colleagues to respond to your message as soon as possible. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

DJI Tony Posted at 1-2 19:07
Hi John, as we said in the email all unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) operators must abide by all regulations from organizations such as the ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) and any other applicable airspace regulations in their area. In order to increase flight safety and prevent accidental flights in restricted areas, DJI has introduced a No Fly Zones feature to help everyone use their DJI products safely and legally.

The website manager of the Civil Aviation Administration confirmed that Gading Airport is still in the development consideration stage, they have confirmed that the airport has not been abandoned permanently. Therefore, we are unable to unlock the area in this situation. Please contact the local Civil Aviation Administration to get an authorization letter, with that, we could be able to help you unlock the zone.

Tony

There are so many things wrong with your response that I don’t even know where to start.

• There is no airport—the airfield has been abandoned for over 15 years.
• DJI is not "helping" with anything—you’re dictating what users can and cannot do based on vague, speculative reasons.
• The official aviation registry has listed it as a non-active airport. It should be treated as such, not based on what some webmaster—who could very well be an uninformed student—claims. A webmaster has no authority to make determinations about aviation matters. Why is DJI relying on such an irrelevant source?
• There is nothing "understanding" about this process. You’re asking me to get permission to fly in an abandoned area based on a scenario that may never happen.
  

Drone operators are responsible for following local laws, but what you’re enforcing here has no basis in actual regulations—only speculation and vague "consideration stage" claims that have been talked about for years without action.
If this were ever rebuilt into a real airport, it could be added as a no-fly zone at that point. Until then, please stop blocking responsible users based on non-existent facts and irrelevant input.

Hérșîř Nâtó Posted at 1-2 19:46
Tony

There are so many things wrong with your response that I don’t even know where to start.

Hi there. We will convey your request to the relevant departments and ask them to reply to your email as soon as possible. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

DJI Tony Posted at 1-3 00:54
Hi there. We will convey your request to the relevant departments and ask them to reply to your email as soon as possible. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

Hi Tony,

Thank you for your response, but it’s clear that passing my request from department to department isn’t helping. I’ve already provided all the proof needed to show that the airfield is inactive, including official registry data. Meanwhile, DJI has brought nothing to the table except an unverified claim from a webmaster—someone with no authority to make aviation-related decisions.

At this point, I don’t need another deferral—I need a clear and reasonable resolution. Since DJI has made it impossible to fly legally on my own property despite there being no valid reason for the restriction, I have no choice but to bypass the GEO restrictions entirely.

Ironically, by forcing me to do this, DJI has done the opposite of improving safety. Now, I won’t be able to see any legitimately restricted areas on the map. Instead of promoting safety, DJI’s arbitrary restrictions have created more risk for responsible drone operators like me.

I had hoped DJI would handle this fairly, but if this can’t be resolved, I’ll make this issue public so others can see how DJI treats its customers.

Hérșîř Nâtó Posted at 1-5 03:10
Hi Tony,

Thank you for your response, but it’s clear that passing my request from department to department isn’t helping. I’ve already provided all the proof needed to show that the airfield is inactive, including official registry data. Meanwhile, DJI has brought nothing to the table except an unverified claim from a webmaster—someone with no authority to make aviation-related decisions.

Hi John. I feel sorry that we are unable to meet your request. If you want to unlock this area, please contact the local Civil Aviation Administration and obtain authorization or provide a confirmation email from the local Civil Aviation Administration that this airport has been abandoned, then we can assist you in unlocking it. Sorry for the inconvenience caused.

DJI Tony Posted at 1-5 03:37
Hi John. I feel sorry that we are unable to meet your request. If you want to unlock this area, please contact the local Civil Aviation Administration and obtain authorization or provide a confirmation email from the local Civil Aviation Administration that this airport has been abandoned, then we can assist you in unlocking it. Sorry for the inconvenience caused.

Hi Tony,

Thank you for your response—again. It’s impressive how you manage to keep repeating the same request word for word. I’m starting to wonder if we’re both caught in some kind of infinite loop!

Let me be clear:

The airfield is not active, as confirmed by the official aviation registry.
There is no "abandonment certificate" for a place that has been unused for 15 years.
Asking for permission to fly over an abandoned site based on a webmaster’s unverified claim sounds more like a scene from a comedy than a safety procedure.
I’d really appreciate it if this could be escalated to someone who can break the cycle and provide a response based on facts, not scripts.

Hérșîř Nâtó Posted at 1-5 05:02
Hi Tony,

Thank you for your response—again. It’s impressive how you manage to keep repeating the same request word for word. I’m starting to wonder if we’re both caught in some kind of infinite loop!

Hi John.

We understand your frustration, but it's important for us to prioritize safety. Our Geo Zone system is designed to prevent drone operations in sensitive areas like airfields. While we aim to keep our data up-to-date, it's challenging to monitor every change worldwide.

We tried to help you, but our FlySafe team contacted the local Civil Aviation Administration, and the Civil Aviation Administration said that Gading Airport is still under development consideration. We also offered to lift the ban in some areas, but you did not accept it.

Regarding your flight application, we recommend that you provide formal documents or official statements to prove that the airport is no longer in use.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

DJI Tony Posted at 1-5 19:34
Hi John.

We understand your frustration, but it's important for us to prioritize safety. Our Geo Zone system is designed to prevent drone operations in sensitive areas like airfields. While we aim to keep our data up-to-date, it's challenging to monitor every change worldwide.

Let me clarify this again—"development consideration" means the airfield is not active right now. Speculating about possible future use doesn’t justify blocking the area in the present.

Also, let’s be honest—contacting a webmaster rather than someone with real aviation authority is not credible evidence. You keep asking me for formal proof, but DJI hasn’t provided a single verifiable document to support your claims.

At this point, your approach is not about safety—it’s arbitrary control based on vague assumptions. Please escalate this to someone who can handle it logically, or I’ll have no choice but to bypass the restriction altogether and share my experience publicly.

Hi Tony,

One quick question—where exactly does DJI assume it has the legal right to block hardware that I legally own? Whether you frame it as safety or not, I’ve yet to see any regulatory basis that gives DJI the authority to enforce no-fly zones beyond those set by official aviation regulators.

Looking forward to your clarification.

DJI Tony Posted at 1-5 19:34
Hi John.

We understand your frustration, but it's important for us to prioritize safety. Our Geo Zone system is designed to prevent drone operations in sensitive areas like airfields. While we aim to keep our data up-to-date, it's challenging to monitor every change worldwide.

the ban should be liften at my home , not 1km from it

Hérșîř Nâtó Posted at 1-6 01:25
the ban should be liften at my home , not 1km from it

Please kindly know that all unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) operators must abide by all regulations from organizations such as the ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) and any other applicable airspace regulations in their area. In order to increase flight safety and prevent accidental flights in restricted areas, DJI has introduced a No Fly Zones feature to help everyone use their DJI products safely and legally.

If you would like to unlock the zone, please contact the local Civil Aviation Administration to get an authorization letter。

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

DJI Tony Posted at 1-6 03:01
Please kindly know that all unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) operators must abide by all regulations from organizations such as the ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) and any other applicable airspace regulations in their area. In order to increase flight safety and prevent accidental flights in restricted areas, DJI has introduced a No Fly Zones feature to help everyone use their DJI products safely and legally.

If you would like to unlock the zone, please contact the local Civil Aviation Administration to get an authorization letter。

Hi Tony,

Thank you for your response, but you didn’t answer my question. I’m fully aware that UAV operators must follow ICAO guidelines and local airspace regulations. However, my question was not about regulations—it was about DJI’s assumption that it has the legal authority to block my hardware.

No regulatory body has given DJI the right to enforce restrictions beyond what is officially mandated. So, again: where does DJI assume it has the legal right to restrict how I use my legally owned hardware?

I’d appreciate a direct answer rather than a repeated explanation of general regulations.

Hérșîř Nâtó Posted at 1-6 03:11
Hi Tony,

Thank you for your response, but you didn’t answer my question. I’m fully aware that UAV operators must follow ICAO guidelines and local airspace regulations. However, my question was not about regulations—it was about DJI’s assumption that it has the legal authority to block my hardware.

Hi there. This is for your flight safety considerations, and we hope you can understand. We have also carefully checked the email and found no relevant written proof. If you can provide a valid written proof reference, we will also try our best to assist in this matter. Please rest assured.

DJI Tony Posted at 1-7 03:14
Hi there. This is for your flight safety considerations, and we hope you can understand. We have also carefully checked the email and found no relevant written proof. If you can provide a valid written proof reference, we will also try our best to assist in this matter. Please rest assured.

Tony,

I am definitely not okay with someone sitting behind a desk, like yourself, deciding how to manage my safety. That responsibility belongs to me as a drone operator, following the regulations set by my local aviation authority—not by a private company assigning itself the role of airspace enforcer. DJI’s role should be to provide tools for responsible flying, not to impose arbitrary restrictions.

You mentioned "flight safety considerations" and hoped I would understand. But honestly, nobody can understand a self-appointed, wannabe cop imposing restrictions without legal authority. The airspace above this area is empty—what exactly am I at risk of hitting? A fly? A passing cloud?

The airfield in question is not managed by the Civil Aviation Administration and shows no aviation activity. This is confirmed by official records and public flight tracking systems. If DJI truly believes there is aviation activity at this site, you need to provide verifiable proof—such as flight logs, tracking data, or official documentation—to support your claim. The burden of proof is on DJI, not me.

Additionally, I have to question whether the email you mentioned from the Civil Aviation Administration even exists. You haven’t provided any quotes, screenshots, or attachments—just vague references. If that email is real, I expect you to provide proof of its contents.

If you cannot provide a meaningful, fact-based response, please escalate this to someone with the capability to address this logically and professionally.

Additionally, I’ve already provided proof by referencing the official public registry of active airports. Every active airport is listed there, and the absence of Gading Wonosari Airfield from this registry is definitive proof that it’s not active.

If DJI claims otherwise, the burden of proof is on you. Provide concrete evidence—such as flight logs or responder data—that supports your claim.

Hérșîř Nâtó Posted at 1-8 21:54
Additionally, I’ve already provided proof by referencing the official public registry of active airports. Every active airport is listed there, and the absence of Gading Wonosari Airfield from this registry is definitive proof that it’s not active.

If DJI claims otherwise, the burden of proof is on you. Provide concrete evidence—such as flight logs or responder data—that supports your claim.

Hi there. We are sorry that we have not been able to give you a satisfactory answer.

As said in the email, please believe that we have no reason to prevent any user from flying. Instead, our sincere aspiration is that all users can immerse themselves in the wonderful pleasure of flying. However, we must pay attention to flight safety and must comply with relevant policies. According to the current situation and the airport's response, we cannot lift the ban on this area for any user.

We have reported your feedback to the relevant team who will continue to reply to you via email, please kindly check it. Thank you for your understanding.

Tony,

You’ve once again avoided addressing the key points of this issue. The Ministry of Transportation has already confirmed that the Gading Wonosari Airfield is not under their management and that they have no authority over its future plans.

I’ve provided clear proof from an official government body that this location is not an active airfield. Yet, you continue to reference vague “safety concerns” without presenting any verifiable data or quoting the actual email you claim to have received.

This approach contradicts everything DJI claims about the GEO system being a voluntary safety tool that helps users make informed decisions. Instead of empowering users, DJI is enforcing arbitrary restrictions without transparency or valid evidence.

If DJI is serious about flight safety, the process should be based on facts, not speculation. I expect DJI to provide concrete proof of aviation activity at this site or acknowledge the official information I’ve shared and lift the restriction.

Please escalate this issue to someone who can respond with facts rather than repeated generalities.

Heacuterșicircř Nacirctoacute Posted at 1-11 20:43
Tony,

You’ve once again avoided addressing the key points of this issue. The Ministry of Transportation has already confirmed that the Gading Wonosari Airfield is not under their management and that they have no authority over its future plans.

Hi there. Regarding your statement about "clear proof from an official government body that this location is not an active airfield", could you provide us with relevant proof and send it to us via email? Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

DJI Tony Posted at 1-12 02:59
Hi there. Regarding your statement about "clear proof from an official government body that this location is not an active airfield", could you provide us with relevant proof and send it to us via email? Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

Tony,
The proof you’re asking for is publicly available and can be accessed by anyone, including DJI. The official aviation registry, which lists all active airports, is available online at:

DJI Tony Posted at 1-12 02:59
Hi there. Regarding your statement about "clear proof from an official government body that this location is not an active airfield", could you provide us with relevant proof and send it to us via email? Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

Tony,
The proof you’re asking for is publicly available and can be accessed by anyone, including DJI. The official aviation registry, which lists all active airports, is available online at:
https://hubud.kemenhub.go.id/hubud/website/bandara
Gading Wonosari Airfield is not listed there, confirming that it’s not an active airfield. I strongly suggest that you or your team check this resource directly rather than continuing to request information that you can verify yourselves.
Additionally, any "development consideration" mentioned by an institution that doesn’t own or manage the airfield is irrelevant to its current status. The only thing that matters is the current operational status, which has been officially confirmed as inactive.
Once again, I ask that DJI acknowledge this official information and lift the restriction.

Heacuterșicircř Nacirctoacute Posted at 1-13 02:46
Tony,
The proof you’re asking for is publicly available and can be accessed by anyone, including DJI. The official aviation registry, which lists all active airports, is available online at:
https://hubud.kemenhub.go.id/hubud/website/bandara

Hi there. Thanks for keeping in touch. Please send the specific screenshots showing "clear proof from an official government body that this location is not an active airfield" to our relevant team via email. Thank you for your cooperation.

DJI Paladin Posted at 1-13 02:57
Hi there. Thanks for keeping in touch. Please send the specific screenshots showing "clear proof from an official government body that this location is not an active airfield" to our relevant team via email. Thank you for your cooperation.

Paladin,

It’s genuinely exasperating to receive yet another request to provide proof that is publicly available online. The official aviation registry is accessible to everyone, and I’ve already shared the link:

Ironically, I can’t even share a normal clickable link directly in this forum, which makes this process even more inefficient. Despite this, I’ve done my part by providing all relevant information, and yet DJI keeps placing the burden on me instead of verifying publicly available data.
I’m struggling to understand how DJI expects users to trust its system when your team won’t even check basic public records. This process is beyond unreasonable.
Instead of repeating the same request, I suggest your team checks the registry yourselves and confirms what I’ve already stated.

Heacuterșicircř Nacirctoacute Posted at 1-14 19:07
Paladin,

It’s genuinely exasperating to receive yet another request to provide proof that is publicly available online. The official aviation registry is accessible to everyone, and I’ve already shared the link:

Hello John,

Thank you for reaching out and sharing your concerns. We regret any frustration this process may have caused. As per our team's email communication with you, specific evidence from the local Civil Aviation Administration is required.

We appreciate your understanding and cooperation in this matter, thank you.