JAgraphics Posted at 11-17 02:01
It's not quite that simple.

These are technically aircraft. It DJI want to import and sell aircraft in a country they have to do so with the agreement of the Government in that country. DJI, in fact any  UAV manufacturer will want to play safe.

Sorry but so simple is it actually. It's your country's laws you must follow and not those of DJI rules. Indeed, each country has different rules about where to fly and how to do it. Please respect that and you are safe for everyone !!!

Dear human being, of course we all have to follow our country's laws for everyone's safety. It does not matter if you go by bike, drive by car or fly a drone.

Fly safe, greetings Leif.

Landbo Posted at 11-18 13:41
Sorry but so simple is it actually. It's your country's laws you must follow and not those of DJI rules. Indeed, each country has different rules about where to fly and how to do it. Please respect that and you are safe for everyone !!!

Dear human being, of course we all have to follow our country's laws for everyone's safety. It does not matter if you go by bike, drive by car or fly a drone.

You miss the point.

If DJI want to sell their drones in country X they have to comply with the laws in country X.

That means DJI will implement ALL the no fly zones in country X that the authorities in Country X tell them to.

It's quite simple: So do you want DJI implement the no fly zones your countries authorities tell them to or not sell DJI drones in your country?

The new CAPTCHA crap is the last straw.
Im tired of DJIs crap and am removing my posts and will be on my way.

JAgraphics Posted at 11-18 14:10
You miss the point.

If DJI want to sell their drones in country X they have to comply with the laws in country X.

Dear human being, so it's the wrong person you quots. At no time I have give sound that a manufacturer should violate a country's laws to sell their items. The problem with DJI is actually that at this moment they prevent people from flying with their ridiculous amateurish NFZ system where my government says I may fly. By doing so, DJI actually also violates MY rights as a consumer in my own country !!!

There is no nature act that says I have to agree with your considerations !!!

Fly safe, greetings Leif.

Landbo Posted at 11-19 01:02
Dear human being, so it's the wrong person you quots. At no time I have give sound that a manufacturer should violate a country's laws to sell their items. The problem with DJI is actually that at this moment they prevent people from flying with their ridiculous amateurish NFZ system where my government says I may fly. By doing so, DJI actually also violates MY rights as a consumer in my own country !!!

There is no nature act that says I have to agree with your considerations !!!

Then the problem is either:-
1  correct implementation by DJI of  incorrect data supplied by YOUR government
2  incorrect implementation by DJI of correct data supplied by your government

Question:- Is your government perfect and makes no mistakes?
Answer:- No. I can say this quite safely as no government made up of thousands of humans can be,

Therefore you are blaming DJI without knowing the full facts.

DJI, and for that matter any responsible UAV/aircraft company, will always err on the side of safety.  

Your rights as an individual will always be less than the the rights of society as a whole in a civilised country.  Therefore if there is any doubt I think DJI will add a no fly zone until it is shown to be an error by a recognised authority.  I doubt you are that recognised authority.

However if you find that DJI have marked NFZ that should not be there tell them.  I am sure that if it is an error they will fix it.  
BTW I saw a YT  video of a UAV flight  where there was an "incorrect NFZ"  the Drone ran into  and it was not until they landed the Drone operator discovered that not only was it a valid NFZ the "nice men with guns" explained, not why it was a NFZ, just that is was a NFZ!!!   You don't always know why they are marked as NFZ.

That said I am sure DJI have go some wrong. So tell them but better  individuals "rights" over society and safety come second.

The alternative is governments wil start clamping down with MORE regulations, compulsory registrations, insurance and testing of pilots.

Finally: IF you don't like DJI don't use their drones.


PS you assume I am a human being.... :-)

JAgraphics Posted at 11-19 03:11
Then the problem is either:-
1  correct implementation by DJI of  incorrect data supplied by YOUR government
2  incorrect implementation by DJI of correct data supplied by your government

Sorry but you are a strange confused person who does not know what you are talking about. So persuasive people like you I do not want to discuss with because you are far far away from reality and beyond any kind of normal range. You are actually an real pickture of DJI NFZ and the communication that always is with DJI if something wrong with their products. If you still not believe me, you can just let yourself read posts here on forum without your DJI glasses on the nose.   ;-)

And if you still have guessed it yet, the conversation ovre from my part.

Regards Leif.

JAgraphics Posted at 11-19 03:11
Then the problem is either:-
1  correct implementation by DJI of  incorrect data supplied by YOUR government
2  incorrect implementation by DJI of correct data supplied by your government

Your rights as an individual will always be less than the the rights of society as a whole in a civilised country.

Great thing about United States, Constitution with Bill of Rights & Amendments.  Individual's Rights do not get tread upon by whole.  Common mistake is United States is a Democracy based on majority rules.  Whereas, United States is a Republic where upon Laws rule.  Even if 99.9999% of U.S. populace says you can not speak freely, until 1st Amendment is repealed, 0.0001% still can.

JAgraphics Posted at 11-19 03:11
Then the problem is either:-
1  correct implementation by DJI of  incorrect data supplied by YOUR government
2  incorrect implementation by DJI of correct data supplied by your government

You are correct in what you are trying to get across, but you are just not going to get it across to this individual, what you say makes perfect sense, but will never make sense to this guy.

He says what dji is doing in his country is wrong, he would rather fly under his countries rules and NFZ, but the great government he has actually allow dji drones to be purchased in his country with NFZ attached, yet the great government stand idly by and do nothing about it, so maybe spending more time with his politicians and get them to remove illegal dji drones from the shelves.

Almost everyone on this forum  here knows NFZ is ongoing and continues to change and improve with more exchanging of information, all dji NFZ are no longer just circles as we have seen with latest updates, and I believe there is a high percentage of users flying dji drones happy for dji to manage their NFZ.

HedgeTrimmer Posted at 11-20 19:58
Your rights as an individual will always be less than the the rights of society as a whole in a civilised country.

Great thing about United States, Constitution with Bill of Rights & Amendments.  Individual's Rights do not get tread upon by whole.  Common mistake is United States is a Democracy based on majority rules.  Whereas, United States is a Republic where upon Laws rule.  Even if 99.9999% of U.S. populace says you can not speak freely, until 1st Amendment is repealed, 0.0001% still can.

Good points mate

A CW Posted at 11-22 09:35
Good points mate

Thanks.

My position comes from working with real aircraft for years before UAVs and finally the small DJI Drones.
The governments are realising the lines between "toy" drones and commercial UAV/aircraft is closing and getting blurred so they are catching up on the "drone" space.  They are likely to make mistakes and it will take time for the systems (each country will be a little different) ti settle down.

HedgeTrimmer Posted at 11-20 19:58
Your rights as an individual will always be less than the the rights of society as a whole in a civilised country.

Great thing about United States, Constitution with Bill of Rights & Amendments.  Individual's Rights do not get tread upon by whole.  Common mistake is United States is a Democracy based on majority rules.  Whereas, United States is a Republic where upon Laws rule.  Even if 99.9999% of U.S. populace says you can not speak freely, until 1st Amendment is repealed, 0.0001% still can.

then we agree!  I said: Your rights as an individual will always be less than the the rights of society as a whole in a civilised country.

JAgraphics Posted at 11-25 08:20
Thanks.

My position comes from working with real aircraft for years before UAVs and finally the small DJI Drones.

Yes, usually driven by weight limitations. Registration and on line tests are next in the UK then probably transponders followed by designated public fields and ultimately licensing.

A CW Posted at 11-25 10:46
Yes, usually driven by weight limitations. Registration and on line tests are next in the UK then probably transponders followed by designated public fields and ultimately licensing.

That all sounds likely.  Mandatory registration in the UK by this time next year. Once registered they will start to tighten things up.   Mandatory tests, insurance etc.  Not sure about Transponders as it will be difficult to retrofit to many drones.

It's a good idea as it will tend to top the idiots.  I expect there will be a lot of 2nd hand drones on the market  in early 2020 :-)   

They are tightening up by (back to the original topic)  Governments (or their designated Aviation Authorities)  giving DJI the no fly data.  DJI implement it so they are permitted to sell the UAV's in that country.   As noted it is early days and it will improve the rough edges (no pun intended).     

The point is if you want to pilot an aircraft (maned or un-maned) you are going to have to work to the countries Civil Aviation Rules or not fly.

JAgraphics Posted at 11-25 08:22
then we agree!  I said: Your rights as an individual will always be less than the the rights of society as a whole in a civilised country.

Take it you are claiming we agree, under premise that U.S. is not a civilized country?

JAgraphics Posted at 11-25 12:08
That all sounds likely.  Mandatory registration in the UK by this time next year. Once registered they will start to tighten things up.   Mandatory tests, insurance etc.  Not sure about Transponders as it will be difficult to retrofit to many drones.

It's a good idea as it will tend to top the idiots.  I expect there will be a lot of 2nd hand drones on the market  in early 2020 :-)   

I can very well see piloting drones evolving into commercial use only by the next decade except in model flying clubs whereby most RC users hate drones. Will be interesting to see how they evolve. That said, there have been ridiculous amounts of consultations, laws, rules and regulatory revisions over the past 2-3 years that I have been flying but I still fly exactly the same way I always have.

A CW Posted at 11-25 23:46
I can very well see piloting drones evolving into commercial use only by the next decade except in model flying clubs whereby most RC users hate drones. Will be interesting to see how they evolve. That said, there have been ridiculous amounts of consultations, laws, rules and regulatory revisions over the past 2-3 years that I have been flying but I still fly exactly the same way I always have.

Yes much the same thing happened for air-soft (BB) guns that look and feel like real modern firearms.  Now you can only have ones that are not bright blue/orange if you are a club member  or theatre.

So with Drones only if you are commercial or RC club member. In both cases it will be registration, training, licenses and insurance. It will take a decade or so for the unlicensed ones to disappear, mainly as their batteries die and  replacements are hard to come by.

HedgeTrimmer Posted at 11-25 16:46
Take it you are claiming we agree, under premise that U.S. is not a civilized country?

I don't think anyone from outside the USA would disagree and  many within would also agree.
BTW I have lived and worked in the US.However the main point is that laws in society are there for the good of the society as a whole whilst protecting, as much as possible the minorities.

In the case of laws for aircraft they are there for safety and the lives of others rather than the preferneces and intrests of a few.
Drones, or rather UAV's, are operating in  controlled airspace which depending on country is anything over 300/500 feet and in areas where aircraft take off and land it is down to ground level.  That has been in place a LONG time and RC model aircraft have long been govenred by those rules.

What has changed is a large number of people with no training or club to tell them what the rules are and they compmlain when tey don't get what they want.    Couple that with cheap consumer drones that are now as capable or sohisticated flight as the expensive commercial UAV's of a decade ago and there is a problem that needs laws to regulate it.  Or rahter the averave owner of a drone needs to understand civil aviation regulation the same as any other pilot.

JAgraphics Posted at 11-26 05:24
I don't think anyone from outside the USA would disagree and  many within would also agree.
BTW I have lived and worked in the US.However the main point is that laws in society are there for the good of the society as a whole whilst protecting, as much as possible the minorities.

Being U.S. is ruled by Laws and not Mobs; that would make a U.S Civilized country, despite your belief and few others.

HedgeTrimmer Posted at 11-26 08:44
Being U.S. is ruled by Laws and not Mobs; that would make a U.S Civilized country, despite your belief and few others.

You are wrong on both counts and very much so on the second.

However let's leave it there and get back to NFZ

One point is not all NFZ are going to be obvious. There are many for places that are not publicly advertised.  EG Some government buildings or areas where tests are carried out.   

Just because you can't see signs  does not mean they are not there.     

JAgraphics Posted at 11-26 12:53
You are wrong on both counts and very much so on the second.

However let's leave it there and get back to NFZ

Read and learn the difference.


Many people think that the system of government in America is a  "democracy," however it is actually a "Republic" and knowing the  difference between these two types of governments is essential in  understanding American politics.


The key difference between a democracy and a republic lies  in the limits placed on government by the law, which has implications  for minority rights. Both forms of government tend to use a representational system — i.e., citizens vote to elect politicians to represent  their interests and form the government. In a republic, a constitution  or charter of rights protects certain inalienable rights that cannot be  taken away by the government, even if it has been elected by a majority  of voters. In a "pure democracy," the majority is not restrained in this  way and can impose its will on the minority.


A Democracy - The chief characteristic and distinguishing feature of a Democracy is: Rule by Omnipotent Majority. In a Democracy, The Individual, and any group of Individuals composing any Minority, have no protection against the unlimited power of The Majority. It is a case of Majority-over-Man.
A Republic, on the other hand, has a very different purpose and an entirely different form, or system, of government. Its purpose is to control The Majority strictly, as well as all others among the people, primarily to protect The Individual’s God-given, unalienable rights and therefore for the protection of the rights of The Minority, of all minorities, and the liberties of people in general. The definition of a Republic is: a constitutionally limited government of the representative type, created by a written Constitution--adopted by the people and changeable (from its original meaning) by them only by its amendment--with its powers divided between three separate Branches: Executive, Legislative and Judicial. Here the term "the people" means, of course, the electorate.

JAgraphics Posted at 11-26 12:53
You are wrong on both counts and very much so on the second.

However let's leave it there and get back to NFZ

You can disagree with me and rest of America about our country not being Civilized, but Facts and History are very much against you.  

Betting a lot of people of Civilized U.K. would also disagree with you too.  

JAgraphics Posted at 11-18 14:10
You miss the point.

If DJI want to sell their drones in country X they have to comply with the laws in country X.

My (US) country's "authorities"  have no laws that specify DJI must put in no fly zones if they want to sell drones.  They have laws that the pilot must obey the no fly zones, but there are other manufacturers who sell drones here legally without the no fly zones implemented.

DJI could get rid of them all together and still sell drones in the US, so the entire premise of the discussion doesn't seem to make sense.  Just like I can purchase a vehicle that goes 200 MPH (that's 320 KPH) even though the law says I can't drive that fast on public roadways.  It's not up to the car manufacturer to ensure I obey the law.  On the other hand, I can take my car to a private race track and be legally allowed to drive 200 MPH and likewise I am also legally allowed to turn my drone on and fly inside my house, even if my house is within a No Fly Zone.  The car manufacturer lets me do that, but DJI misses the mark and says -- it doesn't matter what the law is, I can't fly indoors in a no fly zone(as long as it is getting a GPS signal), because DJI has implemented their own rules, that do not match the rules of my country. And DJI has done so voluntarily, and not as legally required.  

With all of that said, first, I am mostly glad DJI is doing this (if they did it correctly) because too many just buy these things and don't know the laws and just go flying anywhere.  DjI is at least helping people fly legally and safely.

Secondly, I understand why DJI is doing it.  They need to protect the hobby.  If there are too many laws and restrictions, people stop buying, and DJI stops making money.  Working to ensure people fly legally can help DJI lobby for the hobby when laws are passed, so that drones aren't just outlawed all together.  It's self-preservation for them, and most companies in their position (market leader of a regulated industry) would do the same.  

It just needs to be done better.  

HedgeTrimmer Posted at 11-26 13:38
You can disagree with me and rest of America about our country not being Civilized, but Facts and History are very much against you.  

Betting a lot of people of Civilized U.K. would also disagree with you too.

Once again you are wrong on all points.

How does the PM system work on this forum?

JEZ2 Posted at 11-26 14:42
My (US) country's "authorities"  have no laws that specify DJI must put in no fly zones if they want to sell drones.  They have laws that the pilot must obey the no fly zones, but there are other manufacturers who sell drones here legally without the no fly zones implemented.

DJI could get rid of them all together and still sell drones in the US, so the entire premise of the discussion doesn't seem to make sense.  Just like I can purchase a vehicle that goes 200 MPH (that's 320 KPH) even though the law says I can't drive that fast on public roadways.  It's not up to the car manufacturer to ensure I obey the law.  On the other hand, I can take my car to a private race track and be legally allowed to drive 200 MPH and likewise I am also legally allowed to turn my drone on and fly inside my house, even if my house is within a No Fly Zone.  The car manufacturer lets me do that, but DJI misses the mark and says -- it doesn't matter what the law is, I can't fly indoors in a no fly zone(as long as it is getting a GPS signal), because DJI has implemented their own rules, that do not match the rules of my country. And DJI has done so voluntarily, and not as legally required.  

Very good points.

It is a case of the Manufacturer "being responsible" to protect it's investment. Otherwise The Government tends to go overboard on the laws and rules.
As you say it just needs to be done better which is what they are working on but erring on the side of safety which is the right thing to do in aircraft circles.