Regarding my earlier post https://forum.dji.com/forum.php? ... 6&page=1#pid1670762
I believe I have found the solution to removing the NFZ restriction and therefore the DJI permission tickbox fiasco that prevents me flying.
First, let me declare my needs.
Where I live has an area where no permission is required to fly by ATC and the other areas, they are happy to grant permission. The DJI APP is flawed and I can no longer tick the declaration and fly. It just wont fly, even after the process has been completed and I have the green Go Fly message in the app. In addition, 3 countries overlap my flying area. Yes, that is right, countries... according to DJI, but not the law.
I just take scenery shots and videos of old ruins around my home. The drone is always very close and I have no need for a height more than 50 metres. The airport is at least 100 metres above that, because it is at one end of the island and the highest point.
I mention this, because unless there was a flyaway, something that has never happened to me, I am unlikely to cause a hazard. Obviously, if the DJI app worked, then I would be flying in these areas anyway.
I found (Link removed as advised) and can see no good reason for not using their product. I see no downside. $40 alows me to fly, pay nothing and I am grounded. What would you do?
Of course, the product unlocks so many parts of the aircraft that I am certain most of you would want the facility.
I suggest you take a look at the site and make up your own minds, if you want drone freedom.
A typical photo.

You are singing the same song I did. NLD ended my frustration with DJI NFZ bs. I was ready to sell the drone and NLD saved the day. DJI should be thanking NLD because they are the only reason I and many others have not moved on to another product. On another note I am not buying the latest DJI model until NLD unlocks that as well... I paid $25 for NLD back when it first came out; worth every penny. (I would pay $99 if I had to!)

Aside from that I spent another $5 and silenced the controller... look up "Silencio" ~ No more RTH beep beep beep beep... or low battery beeping. OMG the best best best 5 bucks I have ever spent! (This is a firmware mod and can easily be undone / does not void warranty that I am aware of unless you of coarse send it in moded. *derp*)


Note:  Sorry I am trying to avoid linking the sites and files because this can get your post deleted and account banned from the forums. I recommend you also remove your url to NLD. People know what it is and how to get there.

Bob Brown Posted at 12-6 06:20
You are singing the same song I did. NLD ended my frustration with DJI NFZ bs. I was ready to sell the drone and NLD saved the day. DJI should be thanking NLD because they are the only reason I and many others have not moved on to another product. On another note I am not buying the latest DJI model until NLD unlocks that as well... I paid $25 for NLD back when it first came out; worth every penny. (I would pay $99 if I had to!)

Aside from that I spent another $5 and silenced the controller... look up "Silencio" ~ No more RTH beep beep beep beep... or low battery beeping. OMG the best best best 5 bucks I have ever spent! (This is a firmware mod and can easily be undone / does not void warranty that I am aware of unless you of coarse send it in moded. *derp*)

Thanks Bob. I am pleased to hear you have had a good experience with the NDL software.. What firmware did you settle on? I assume you have a Mavic Pro as well?

AlansDronePics Posted at 12-6 06:52
Thanks Bob. I am pleased to hear you have had a good experience with the NDL software.. What firmware did you settle on? I assume you have a Mavic Pro as well?

If you look at the NLD Bird Map chart it is pretty clear what version is the best to use... I will let you decide depending on your drone flying needs.  The cool thing is that the mod is 100% drone side... and the firmware you load has the NLD editing / feature freedoms that coorespond to the Bird Map chart.

Hello another Bob here and i use NLD also on one of my Mavic Pro's as i have 2. Works great for me too like the other Bob. Back when i obtained NLD it was $24.99 plus $3 fee so was $27.99 i believe at that time. Good luck on your decision

Bob Brown Posted at 12-6 08:19
If you look at the NLD Bird Map chart it is pretty clear what version is the best to use... I will let you decide depending on your drone flying needs.  The cool thing is that the mod is 100% drone side... and the firmware you load has the NLD editing / feature freedoms that coorespond to the Bird Map chart.

I think this is most encouraging news, Bob. I am glad you have first hand experience of the software. I saw your unfortunate dip in the water with the Mavic. Did it autoland and why, or was it that you dropped to low? Not the fault of the software, I hope.

AlansDronePics Posted at 12-6 08:34
I think this is most encouraging news, Bob. I am glad you have first hand experience of the software. I saw your unfortunate dip in the water with the Mavic. Did it autoland and why, or was it that you dropped to low? Not the fault of the software, I hope.

I think you are mistaken. My drone is perfectly safe in it's bag... I did comment on another thread about wanting the flight log to see what happened is all.  I would be the guy diving in the water if my drone was trying to be a submarine instead.

If anything NLD might prevent such a horrible thing.  (I have nothing to back this up but logic.)

PS: your link in the OP is still working.. have to remove the url.

rolling56 Posted at 12-6 08:29
Hello another Bob here and i use NLD also on one of my Mavic Pro's as i have 2. Works great for me too like the other Bob. Back when i obtained NLD it was $24.99 plus $3 fee so was $27.99 i believe at that time. Good luck on your decision

Hello my drone friend! I hope things are well with you and yours. Thanks for your input.
Appears it is $34.99 now. Inflation and the devs relised the value... I would pay more.

Bob Brown Posted at 12-6 08:57
Hello my drone friend! I hope things are well with you and yours. Thanks for your input.
Appears it is $34.99 now. Inflation and the devs relised the value... I would pay more.

Yes, I see that. I just rounded it up to cover currency exchange costs on the CCard. Still well worth the money.

I find it astonishing that people so openly wish to support an app, who’s basic sole purpose is to allow pilots to operate their UAV’s illegally by removing the legally-mandated air space restrictions, under the guise of “freedom” and “it’s my drone and I want to use it how I see fit”...

I hope aviation organizations around the world like the CAA and FAA shut this crap down.

So I take it the NFZ is clearly incorrect, in this case you should first report , complete NFZ GEO are in place for restricted airspace.
If your NFZ is not restricted then you should be able to get clearance without to much problem, but it seems in your case that you are having to wait for incorrect NFZ to be changed.

Well I think in this case you were right to do what you done, you leave no one person or property at risk, you obviously have both the law (police) and CAA on your side, so I don’t imagine for now you had any choice. I hope the flawed NFZ gets fixed in your area soon.

What you have done is no different than using third party widgets on your RC that will give you extra signal .
Good Luck.

Thanks for the information.
Your photo was very nice. Beautiful scenery.

Dirty Bird Posted at 12-6 10:37
Maybe you would understand if Ford dictated when & where you could drive the car you purchased?

It’s kind of funny you make that analogy, as no Ford doesn’t mandate where you can or cannot drive, however motor vehicle branches and other government agencies impose restrictions on certain vehicle types, and locations like secure airport fields are definitely off-limits to drivers not associated with said locations.

The same holds true for DJI, they are not the ones preventing you from flying, but rather aeronautical agencies like the FAA determine where you can and cannot fly, and as such implement similar NFZ’s, which DJI simply assists with enforcing.

Having seen all the issues with intrusions into NFZ’s, and sometimes with disasterous consequences, I don’t see why you would have a problem with DJI trying to keep illegal flight attempts at bay?

Yes, data may be incorrect sometimes, but that can be rectified, and not by hacking your drone to do whatever you want!

EdisonW1979 Posted at 12-6 09:46
I find it astonishing that people so openly wish to support an app, who’s basic sole purpose is to allow pilots to operate their UAV’s illegally by removing the legally-mandated air space restrictions, under the guise of “freedom” and “it’s my drone and I want to use it how I see fit”...

I hope aviation organizations around the world like the CAA and FAA shut this crap down.

I didn't buy my drones after DJI came up with their NFZ software add on. I have accepted it until now because the process was functional and accurate, but now it isn't and there is nothing practical I can do about it. I personally will not be breaking any local laws. If DJIs system worked for me, i would be flying and doing the same things as I propose to do with the hacked DJI product. Please re-read my OP and understand what I am saying. Look at the photo. See the low altitude, see me in the red, on the cliff edge, how close to the drone I am. The airport is much higher and it needs no permission to legally fly here. What others do with the software is for their conscience. I intend to fly the product I payed for, withing the law, not DJIs psudo law.

hallmark007 Posted at 12-6 11:17
So I take it the NFZ is clearly incorrect, in this case you should first report , complete NFZ GEO are in place for restricted airspace.
If your NFZ is not restricted then you should be able to get clearance without to much problem, but it seems in your case that you are having to wait for incorrect NFZ to be changed.

Correct Hallmark. I have no interest in how high i can fly or how far or how fast. All these things are configurable though. It is just the curse of a flawed system. Realistically, if the tickbox self certification worked, if i was without scruples, i could tick away and then break the law. My point being, this DJI abomination is no deterrent. Many users here are breaking many rules by flying beyond their vision. That is their choice and responsibility. Their judgement should be sufficient.

EdisonW1979 Posted at 12-6 11:33
It’s kind of funny you make that analogy, as no Ford doesn’t mandate where you can or cannot drive, however motor vehicle branches and other government agencies impose restrictions on certain vehicle types, and locations like secure airport fields are definitely off-limits to drivers not associated with said locations.

The same holds true for DJI, they are not the ones preventing you from flying, but rather aeronautical agencies like the FAA determine where you can and cannot fly, and as such implement similar NFZ’s, which DJI simply assists with enforcing.

Let the real law enforcement apply, not a flawed and unenforceable software fudge. The Mavic pro has an out of date depiction of the NFZs compared with the mavic 2... If DJI were so righteous, the would make the old circles into the new shapes that relate to runway layout and perimeters. Not that i have any interest in going that close, under any circumstances. I also thought the car analogy originally mentioned by another, was good. Yours is not so good, is it.

B1houdini Posted at 12-6 11:30
Thanks for the information.
Your photo was very nice. Beautiful scenery.

Thanks b1houdini. I thought your car analogy was a good one.

AlansDronePics Posted at 12-6 11:44
I didn't buy my drones after DJI came up with their NFZ software add on. I have accepted it until now because the process was functional and accurate, but now it isn't and there is nothing practical I can do about it. I personally will not be breaking any local laws. If DJIs system worked for me, i would be flying and doing the same things as I propose to do with the hacked DJI product. Please re-read my OP and understand what I am saying. Look at the photo. See the low altitude, see me in the red, on the cliff edge, how close to the drone I am. The airport is much higher and it needs no permission to legally fly here. What others do with the software is for their conscience. I intend to fly the product I payed for, withing the law, not DJIs psudo law.

I’m happy to hear you won’t be breaking any rules, and I understand your reason for wanting this to be available, but just like the encryption debate taking place around the world about letting governments have backdoors into devices and operating systems, if a “backdoor” such as this is allowed to exist, it will be exploited by those who have no morals, ethics, or “good judgement”, so I stand by my original statements.

Your statement “What others do with the software is for their own conscience” I find somewhat insulting, as it’s an empowerment for those who will abuse this, and you’re taking the “not my problem, only care about myself” stance. I cannot stand for this, as it’s allowed too many transgressions and disasters to take place.

Study aircraft and airspace history, and you’ll find any accident or disaster was always preceded with many “close calls”, until finally one day something happened.

A good recent example is the drone / helicopter incident in Hawaii:



Both parties here were at fault, with the drone operator flying in contravention of a TFR (temporary flight restriction) and several FAA regulations, and the helicopter pilot flying EVEN MORE recklessly and also in contravention of multiple FAA regulations.

These are the types of pilots who not only should be punished, but would use NLD towards ill purposes.

The aircraft / airspace community is bigger than just one pilot, and pilots who are self-centered and don’t care about the larger picture shouldn’t be given an opportunity to fly.

EdisonW1979 Posted at 12-6 12:19
I’m happy to hear you won’t be breaking any rules, and I understand your reason for wanting this to be available, but just like the encryption debate taking place around the world about letting governments have backdoors into devices and operating systems, if a “backdoor” such as this is allowed to exist, it will be exploited by those who have no morals, ethics, or “good judgement”, so I stand by my original statements.

Your statement “What others do with the software is for their own conscience” I find somewhat insulting, as it’s an empowerment for those who will abuse this, and you’re taking the “not my problem, only care about myself” stance. I cannot stand for this, as it’s allowed too many transgressions and disasters to take place.

Whilst I understand your argument and do not wish to argue with your opinion, it being as valid as anyone else's ,  the NFZ by DJI can be easily over ridden and abused. Sadly, I cant over ride it, because even though I have completed all the ticks etc and have a green to go, it still wont fly.
The reality is, anyone (but not me) can tick away and fly as they like. So, the scheme is pointless. The law is the law and they should be the people to enforce it. Not DJI or any other manufacturer. And certainly not after someone has bought the product before the scheme was introduced by DJI. I can't think of a single product where another manufacturer has imposed such a restriction themselves. I get hot under the collar, myself when I see some idiot has willfully or ignorantly damaged the droners hobby. All the real, responsible droners probably feel the same. I can't for the life of me see why you should feel insulted for the reason you say. Certainly I had no such intention. You also went on to mention encryption... In principle, I believe law enforcement and other necessary services should have access to the information they require. However, the real world is not as honest and clear cut as that. Some people feel that stealing their employers paper clips is innocent enough. I dare say some brain washed terrorist feels equally justified with his atrocity. Whatever stand you or I take, none of us will prevail. Fortunately I will be dead and gone by the time humanity faces the final challenge, Global warming. So, in the meantime, I will do what needs to be done, within the law, to enjoy my hobby.

EdisonW1979 Posted at 12-6 12:19
I’m happy to hear you won’t be breaking any rules, and I understand your reason for wanting this to be available, but just like the encryption debate taking place around the world about letting governments have backdoors into devices and operating systems, if a “backdoor” such as this is allowed to exist, it will be exploited by those who have no morals, ethics, or “good judgement”, so I stand by my original statements.

Your statement “What others do with the software is for their own conscience” I find somewhat insulting, as it’s an empowerment for those who will abuse this, and you’re taking the “not my problem, only care about myself” stance. I cannot stand for this, as it’s allowed too many transgressions and disasters to take place.

Regarding your video. I see the rafters as a hazard to the surfers. I don't see the mavic being as large a threat. The chances of the drone hitting anyone is far less than the surfer hitting a rafter. The helicopter intervention was idiotic. You would think someone on board would have realised that bringing the drone down was more likely to injure someone than leaving it there and following it back to the operator. If the operator was arrested, justice would have been better served. He or she probably left the scene and will do it again with a new drone. So, where is the win on that one?

I bought my 2 Mavic Pro's close to 2 years ago and there was no NFZ software on it so i don't want that crap on my flying devices. As far as i know there is no law that say i cannot right?

rolling56 Posted at 12-6 13:59
I bought my 2 Mavic Pro's close to 2 years ago and there was no NFZ software on it so i don't want that crap on my flying devices. As far as i know there is no law that say i cannot right?

Quite right Rolling...

Holysnappingducksh*t Dirty Bird  that's the whole town locked down by minority groups. Every freaking bunch of nutbags seem to be keen to hide, so what are they hiding?
Sad to say but our local nutbags here in Australia pick up on these trends so its only a matter of time for us downunder

EdisonW1979 Posted at 12-6 09:46
I find it astonishing that people so openly wish to support an app, who’s basic sole purpose is to allow pilots to operate their UAV’s illegally by removing the legally-mandated air space restrictions, under the guise of “freedom” and “it’s my drone and I want to use it how I see fit”...

I hope aviation organizations around the world like the CAA and FAA shut this crap down.

WOW you really got folks riled up. lol ~ You troll here often?

Bob Brown Posted at 12-7 03:33
WOW you really got folks riled up. lol ~ You troll here often?

That wasn’t trolling, but rather stating my opinion, and yes it’s a strong opinion on this topic. I just didn’t expect the massive response. Well, ok maybe I did expect it a little...

I have a vested personal interest in this because I have encountered people who are the “anti-Drone” hater group, and I feel bad because I get verbally abused for flying a quad, even though I’m flying completely legal. They are usually like this not only because of skewed media coverage, but also because of pilots who fly illegally or dangerously.

Whenever I encounter people like this, if they are open to a discussion, I always try and educate them about what’s actually legal and not, even keeping all the regulation docs and mapping data on me at all times on my devices so I can quickly prove what I am saying is true.

So when I encounter pilots who are flying over densely populated urban areas, or violating NFZ’s, no matter whether they agree with them or not, and trying to deliberately hack the safety systems to enforce NFZ’s, I get really ticked off...

EdisonW1979 Posted at 12-7 10:32
That wasn’t trolling, but rather stating my opinion, and yes it’s a strong opinion on this topic. I just didn’t expect the massive response. Well, ok maybe I did expect it a little...

I have a vested personal interest in this because I have encountered people who are the “anti-Drone” hater group, and I feel bad because I get verbally abused for flying a quad, even though I’m flying completely legal. They are usually like this not only because of skewed media coverage, but also because of pilots who fly illegally or dangerously.

Thanks for the explanation. Living in a "drone hostile" community is unfortunate.
DJI's methods for keeping people safe have simply failed. The "active track attacks" and the buggy as hell firmware releases that cause forced landings, GO app crashes and more bugs from each update... I can honestly say that since NLD was applied and I started using older firmware, I have had ZERO issues. none. zilch. perfect flights and I love my Mavic Pro once again. I feel confident flying knowing that DJI's software is not going to be able to land my drone in the middle of a corn field or worse yet the middle of a lake. DJI is not allowed to track my drone, force updates or download it's NFZ database to MY property without my consent. I have complete control and take full responsibility for my drone and it's actions. Do you feel confident enough in DJI that you trust the software to not crash your drone into your child's face? I have that level of confidence with NLD installed.

Sorry for the ramble... thanks again for the explanation.

Dirty Bird Posted at 12-6 21:19
"Disastrous consequences"?   When?  Name one disastrous consequence?  Most of these claimed incidents can't even be verified.  To my knowledge there has not been a single death caused by a civilian drone.

Here's what you seem to be missing:  Each year there are THOUSANDS of vehicular deaths, yet auto manufacturers did not create a system where operators are forced to log in for permission to operate their vehicle.  They don't limit one's ability to speed.  Auto manufacturers do not aid police by reporting speeders & reckless drivers to authorities.  They don't transmit tracking data to aid police in catching violators.  Enforcing traffic laws is up to local authorities, NOT manufacturers.  DJI has made a decision & taken it upon itself to act as the Drone Police/Snitches.  

I was debating whether to respond to this, and decided to give my long 2 cents to it...

""Disastrous consequences"?   When?  Name one disastrous consequence?  Most of these claimed incidents can't even be verified.  To my knowledge there has not been a single death caused by a civilian drone."

When I was referring to "disasterous consequences", it wasn't referring to UAV air travel, but to aviation history as a whole, so I just want to clear that up right now. If you study flight accident history, whether it be mechanical issues missed during maintenance due to human errors, near mid-air collisions, direct mid-air collisions, aircraft crashes, in many of those instances, there was sufficient evidence to determine those incidents were preventable, since many were caused in contravention of FAA and ATC regulations governing the airspaces around the world, in other words, pilots not following the rules.

You constantly use automotive analogies, comparing laws and regulations of land roads, to try and defend your position of why you think it is within your right to hack an aircraft's control system to allow NFZ intrusions, but this is a flawed analogy, as the two are VERY different from each other.

There is no denying your point that FAR MORE people die in car crashes per DAY, let alone per year, than in air accidents. The one large difference though, is when stuff goes wrong in the air, it usually involves HUNDREDS of fatalities at once, not just a few in a car crash, thus the magnitude of air incidents is quite a bit more substantial.

You also seem to be very hostile to the notion that DJI has implemented tracking systems in your drones that may aid in law enforcement efforts to track down pilots who flaunt laws. You do realize that ALL aircraft now have transponders and TCAS systems on board, which allow tracking by a variety of agencies, such as ATC's, FAA, law enforcement, etc. You have to realize, your drone is an AIRCRAFT, and as such, becomes bound by the rules of the air, not the ground.

"I did not lease my drone(s) from DJI & I did not grant them permission to decide where & when I can fly.  I own 9 DJI drones.  8 of them I love.  My Mavic 2 Pro is a fantastic piece of hardware, but DJI has rendered it into a worthless piece of junk.  I can't stand the Mavic 2 because of this & would return it if I could.  It is essentially useless for my needs.  Why?  Check out the map of my flying area (Baltimore).  You'll see the entire downtown is a self-authorize zone so each & every time I want to fly my Mavic 2, I have to self-authorize.  But I fly Litchi missions so first I have to power up the bird, load Go, fiddle around authorizing the flight, quit Go, launch Litchi, load the mission, etc..  If all goes well I blow 10-15% of my battery just getting ready to fly.  The last 10% of the battery is already useless.  That's 20-25% of the battery lost.  If something goes wrong I have to power off the bird & repeat, losing still more battery."

You are correct, you didn't lease your drone, it's yours, lock, stock and barrel. However, that doesn't give you carte blanc rights to do with it as you please, same as anything else in this world. You bought a device that is bound to be operated within, in the US, the FAA guidelines of controlled airspace in that country, into which this device will be flying into. This also applies to pilots of small aircraft, such as a Sesna or a helicopter; they may own that aircraft, but that does NOT give them the right to do with it as they please, or break the rules on a whim, because the consequences are severe in some cases.

To that end, you pasted a BUNCH of GO 4 screenshots depicting the NFZ's, and you say you fly in Baltimore... Let's have a better look at that area:

AirMap data for Baltimore, MA

This is just one area of Baltimore, but relevant since you posted screenshots of this area. It doesn't utilize the FAA's new airport zones, but it's close enough to illustrate my point.

Let's see, 162 advisories, including 9 prisons, 8 emergency areas, 2 power plants, 3 special use airpsace zones, an AMA field, Controlled Airspace for an airport, and then the various warning areas for schools, hospitals and such. Notice I was using the Fly for Fun setting, and not Part 107; Part 107 gives even more restrictions.

Bottom line, Baltimore is mostly UNFLYABLE, and attempting to do so by violating the NFZ's is a HUGE no no, and this isn't coming from a "drone cop / snitch", this is bluntly based on the rules of the FAA, WHICH YOU MUST ABIDE BY.

The fact you are trying to work around this with Litchi missions and trying to bypass these NFZ's in such crowded and restricted airspace is detestable behaviour from a pilot. You want to fly that drone? Go out side the confines of these zones, as there is a lot of open airspace just outside the city in which you can fly to your heart's content, and legally, without endangering anyone or anything else with your reckless flaunting of these rules.

I also find it amusing that you call the Mavic 2 a worthless piece of junk, since it's one of the best drones ever made, and I get such an amazing joy out of flying mine. You all of a sudden think it's crap because it doesn't let you break the rules, and forces you to abide by them. Cry me a river. As far as I'm concern, this is a safety benefit to those you put in danger with your reckless flying. You might be ignorant of the consequences in the event of a malfunction of your drone, but that doesn't mean other's have to pay the price for that ignorance or refusal to play by the rules.

Even for me in Canada where I am, I live in Vancouver, which is a densely populated urban area, so I cannot fly my drone almost anywhere due to airspace restrictions. Does it make me sad I can't? Sure, as there's many places I'd love to fly my bird. But I also have a conscience and don't want to fly knowing I am putting others in harms way in the event of an issue. If I want to fly, I drive out to areas that are OK, and enjoy it there. If I want to fly in restricted zones, I obtain a SFOC permit and have at it.

I'm assuming I'll get a response from you denouncing everything I said, and probably calling me a drone cop / snitch again, fine. If I was a ground spectator and saw you flying the way you are implying, I would be the one reporting you, as a fellow concern pilot.

EdisonW1979 Posted at 12-7 11:32
I was debating whether to respond to this, and decided to give my long 2 cents to it...

""Disastrous consequences"?   When?  Name one disastrous consequence?  Most of these claimed incidents can't even be verified.  To my knowledge there has not been a single death caused by a civilian drone."

honestly I can name sever incidents where, because people were flying DJI products thinking that the product would tell them and protect them from flying in restricted airspace.. but DIDNT

There should be no built in restrictions.. the database will never, and can never be 100% correct

the only safe way flying is through education of drone pilots

clear regulations on where, when and how drones integrate into airspace

and enforcement, just like real pilots in real planes, meaningful and fairly applied penalties, fines and jail time for not following the law

the pilot in command is the pilot in command, fully responsible for their actions, ignorance of the law is no excuse

EdisonW1979 Posted at 12-6 12:19
I’m happy to hear you won’t be breaking any rules, and I understand your reason for wanting this to be available, but just like the encryption debate taking place around the world about letting governments have backdoors into devices and operating systems, if a “backdoor” such as this is allowed to exist, it will be exploited by those who have no morals, ethics, or “good judgement”, so I stand by my original statements.

Your statement “What others do with the software is for their own conscience” I find somewhat insulting, as it’s an empowerment for those who will abuse this, and you’re taking the “not my problem, only care about myself” stance. I cannot stand for this, as it’s allowed too many transgressions and disasters to take place.

All the arguments are great and I don't want to take either side. All of this only applies to DJI. There are thousands of other drones out there with no restrictions. None of my FPV racers have any restriction on them. No height, No speed and No NFZ other that the physical limits of the drone itself and my sense of responsibility when I pilot them.. How many UAV pilots are even aware of NFZ other than DJI product owners. ???? People will do what they want till they get caught or cause a problem and and just run away to do it again.

This is certainly the highest quality discussion I've ever read on this forum. Totally agree that owning a drone doesn't entitle the owner the freedom to break the laws. But also agree what the helicopter pilot did could be even more dangerous than flying a small drone there in the first place

I'm not sure how all this will play out all over this earth but it sure hasn't started out very well.

DeuceDriv3r Posted at 12-7 11:58
honestly I can name sever incidents where, because people were flying DJI products thinking that the product would tell them and protect them from flying in restricted airspace.. but DIDNT

There should be no built in restrictions.. the database will never, and can never be 100% correct

Agreed,

I would characterize DJI's software implementation on NFZ's and general airspace maps as poor... I had a pitched argument with hallmark007 (go figure) once about how using DJI GO 4 maps is sufficient, and how I told him he was full of it.

I use AirMap before even going out to fly to begin determining if it's safe to do so, along with checking weather, and other factors, but also use an airspace viewer to examine airspace situations before going out:

http://www3.telus.net/cschwab/viewer/canadian_airspace.html

Anytime I show these tools to most UAV pilots I encounter in the field, they never knew of these things, and most of them jumped on board and started using them. Others, that don't care, scoffed at them and kept flying illegally and unsafely.

As far as I'm concerned, just like with motor vehicles and manned aircraft, there should be a minimum level of mandatory training provided before the UAV is allowed into the air, like a competence test and basic knowledge, and also a review of the available tools to UAV pilots they can use to check airspace.

Monkey007 Posted at 12-7 13:17
This is certainly the highest quality discussion I've ever read on this forum. Totally agree that owning a drone doesn't entitle the owner the freedom to break the laws. But also agree what the helicopter pilot did could be even more dangerous than flying a small drone there in the first place

That heli pilot should have their license revoked for that little stunt! Like XJET was ranting about, a 900 gram drone flying over some rafters was FAR LESS of a threat than a 1 ton helicopter being brought in to down the drone! I still can't believe I saw that!

For anyone who is wondering what XJET was ranting about, I've posted his video below:

LIVNXXL Posted at 12-7 11:59
All the arguments are great and I don't want to take either side. All of this only applies to DJI. There are thousands of other drones out there with no restrictions. None of my FPV racers have any restriction on them. No height, No speed and No NFZ other that the physical limits of the drone itself and my sense of responsibility when I pilot them.. How many UAV pilots are even aware of NFZ other than DJI product owners. ???? People will do what they want till they get caught or cause a problem and and just run away to do it again.

And that's sadly part of the problem... With some pilots, they rely on faulty tools like the maps in GO 4, whilst others are willfully thumbing their noses at the rules and taking unnecessary risks in the skies with their quads.

This will be a never-ending saga, but that doesn't mean those of us who wish to fly legally and responsibly should just roll over and give up the fight of trying to make things better by promoting pilot knowledge and education for those willing to learn and grow, and helping with enforcement against those who refuse to play by the rules.

Dirty Bird Posted at 12-7 17:08
I feel as though I am having a discussion with HAL...

We are not talking about hundreds dying in an airliner crash.  We are talking about small UAVs where there have been ZERO fatalities.  ZERO.  This is a solution in search of a problem.

I feel as though I am having a discussion with a gun-loving American Redneck...

My statements have obviously fallen onto some very deaf ears here. You're obviously missing the point of my previous posts, in which I was trying to convey that instead of waiting for an incident to occur with, or due to, a UAV, that could cause injury, damage, or even death, that we instead, as UAV pilots, smarten up, and stop taking illegal actions in a PREVENTATIVE measure to ensure an incident doesn't occur. But I guess with people like you foresight is not possible, and you don't give a hoot until you've actually contributed to an incident after the fact.

What I will agree with you on is some of the NFZ's being a bit unusual, such as churches. Baltimore City Public Works is a civic government installation, and is within their purview to request a NFZ around their facility, so I see no problem with that.

Same thing goes with a children's home... Although this is obviously something you cannot fathom, but put yourselves in the position of that home; they requested an NFZ to ensure the safely and privacy of the children under their care, and to prevent possible eavesdropping by camera-equipped drones like ours.

Insight, and looking at the larger picture, and not just your selfish wants to fly and unwilling to see the other side of the coin, is a valuable talent to cultivate...

You think Canadians like being controlled, or that we're snitches? I expect nothing less from someone who obviously thumbs their nose at the law. Most of the rest of the world have started adopting the same UAV rules, some with harsher restrictions than others. With your FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, and your section 336 getting repealed, the US is poised to get the same UAV regulations as the rest of us. At first I looked at it went OK, maybe too much government overreach. However, after speaking with someone like yourself, and doing a few quick searches on YouTube to see some of the insane crap people do with their UAV's, I say, throw the book at UAV pilots who go out of their way to break the rules. Skies will be safer without them, and the UAV community will finally stop getting vilified by the general public.

Dirty Bird Posted at 12-7 19:38
Here we agree.  I don't see where the Mavic pilot was doing anything wrong.  Personally I would have pulled back once they started throwing things, but I still don't see where he was doing anything wrong.  The helicopter pilot though should have his license revoked & be held criminally & financially liable for the loss of the drone.  This should include the organizers of the event if they called in the helicopter to take out the drone.  As the video points out, this really exposes the farce about the great threat posed by small UAVs to manned aircraft.

You don't see where the Mavic pilot was doing anything wrong??? Are you listening to yourself?

Obviously not...

He violated a TFR, invaded a private function, flew his drone overhead of a large crowd of people, causing a disturbance, which lead to the incident with another idiot pilot in the helicopter taking that 1-ton aircraft right above the heads of many people, all in an effort to down the drone. Had the drone hit someone on the head during the forced downing and knocked them unconscious, being rafters, there was a chance that person could've drowned! Or worse, the idiot helicopter pilot could've lost control and plunged into the water and people below! All because some idiot drone pilot decided to thumb his nose at all the regulations to go for a joy flight with his UAV.

Remember what I said in a previous post, insight...

Had that pilot been responsible, insightful, and intelligent, they'd have NEVER launched in an area with an active TFR, with obvious signs a function in-progress, and seeing a MANNED HELICOPTER in close proximity to their intended flight area!!!

Actually, if anything, this video EXEMPLIFIES the threat posed by UAV's, if indirectly, due to lack of UAV pilot training and adherence to aircraft / airspace safety regulations.

If the UAV pilot adhered to regulations and never taken off, this whole scenario would've never taken place, thus they were the catalyst for this event!

It boggles my mind when people display such inept ignorance to something staring them right in the face...

A few things I would like to clarify.
1/ I did not decide to remove the NFZ because I wished to fly into restricted areas. I have now successfully removed it so I can fly where I am allowed by law or with permission from Air Traffic Control. Vary rarely, certain land owners have asked me for photos, like our church. No gains to me in any way, I might add. I was able to fly in those places until the recent firmware and database updates by DJI. Nothing has changed with the real law though.
2/ DJIs NFZ implementation is flawed and is just an irritant. After a lot of flapdoodle, you can tick some boxes and fly in the non-central zone, anyway, (Not for me though, suddenly it no longer works). If I was the sort who wanted to fly irresponsibly and illegally, all I need to do is tick the boxes. So what deterrent is this abomination of an addon? I wouldn’t have stopped the Drone amongst the surfers incident  (Video), or the flights over cities or people. Would it?
3/ Flying a hobby drone always carries a risk of injuring someone or property. If there are such things as flyaways then even if the takeoff was in a safe area, it could end up in an unsafe location and do damage. Most things have a risk attached. People who smoke, driving a vehicle, drinkers, surfers, a girl wearing revealing clothes. All legal, but far more risky than flying a well made drone. The safety issue has been regulated to death, just recently. Though I have no argument with that, just the DJI NFZ pseudo safety feature.
4/ The real problem is because some droners buy the kit thinking it is as easy to fly and control under all circumstances as any consumer gadget. Their smart phone won't fly out of control in a crowded shopping precinct as they take their selfie. They expect the drone to be equally safe. None of this is the drone's fault, but the user of it. We have read posts here where we know the user is lacking in smarts. This is where the problem is. If it was a requirement for me to take a proper training and competency test before I could buy a drone, I might have thought twice about buying. That is the approach the Governments should have taken, not adopt some ineffectual, half-baked scheme like the UK are introducing. It is far to late. Or a PR joke of a NFZ add on like DJI have rolled out.
5/ The idiots have ruined the hobby and moved on, leaving a bad feeling in the public mind. I think we droners would love the imagined capability of our drones these misinformed people have. Seriously, even with triple glazing and living in a central London flat, you would have to be blind and deaf not to know a Mavic was spying on you, outside your window. The public have won their shallow victory, droners are paying the price. Wait till the Amazon drone deliveries fly in. The idiot droners who moved on will love shooting them down with their legal to buy (I think) air guns, or not legal EMP pulses or radio jammers.
6/ DJI have forced the flawed NFZ system on people who bought before it was introduced. To make matters worse, they have not offered any compensating features. I understand that the MP2s have a better depiction of NFZs than us Phantom or Mavic Pro/Platinum users can have. Why is this? it is software and doable, but having paid our bucks, we are no longer worth supporting.

Dirty Bird Posted at 12-8 08:49
Where is it documented a TFR was in effect?  The video you posted makes no mention of a TFR.   This isn't reckless flying over some massive crowd.  There are a few surfers & observers in the water.  Had the drone hit someone in the head it would have been the fault of the helicopter pilot who forced it down.  Would the drone have crashed had the helicopter not caused it to crash?

This is a question I forgot to raise. Good one. Well said.

Dirty Bird Posted at 12-8 08:31
I am not surprised you would be fine with unwarranted NFZ designations.  Sheep don't complain when being led to the slaughter.  Yes I believe many Canadians enjoy being controlled.  That's why they elected a Socialist government that imprisons subjects for thought crimes or non-PC (yet 100% accurate) speech violations.  Here in this thread you have repeatedly lauded DJI for controlling when & where one may fly.  In another post you freely admitted to snitching on fellow drone pilots.  If the shoe fits...  Do you pull up alongside speeders & chastise them before reporting them to the authorities?  What about underage smokers?  It's for their own good, eh?  Don't forget to snitch on rascals who remove pillow tags!

Wow, just wow.

It amazes me you've managed to turn a discussion about NFZ's and pilot behaviours into a political mud slinging match, and that you have the audacity to make the comments you have given the idiot you Americans have in the drivers seat in the White House right now.

I'm done debating this with you, as I have made valid points in my last few posts to you, putting up valid information, and you have blatantly ignored all of it, demonstrated you cannot be insightful or have forward-facing thought about anything discussed, and have de-evolved this discussion to the lowest common denominator. I'm going to let this thread stand as-is, since as another member pointed out, there has been good information posted about NFZ's, so I'll end it on that.

Dirty Bird Posted at 12-8 08:49
Where is it documented a TFR was in effect?  The video you posted makes no mention of a TFR.   This isn't reckless flying over some massive crowd.  There are a few surfers & observers in the water.  Had the drone hit someone in the head it would have been the fault of the helicopter pilot who forced it down.  Would the drone have crashed had the helicopter not caused it to crash?

The event was hosted by the World Surfer League (WSL), and if you look at any news articles about them and their events, they always request TFR's or NOTAM's for their events, as they vigorously defend their copyrights for filming and event broadcasting. The Mavic pilot was in clear violation of not just FAA regulations, but of the standing TFR for this event.

A quick search for this incident yields multiple articles giving more substance to it; below is just one example found:

https://petapixel.com/2018/12/04 ... one-out-of-the-sky/

And yes, despite your constant ignorant denials, this IS a perfect example of reckless flying, as the WSL always puts up vast amounts of the proper NFZ and No-Drone-Zone signage during these events, so the Mavic pilot wilfully violated TFR cordon, ignored the warning signs, and flew in an area known to instigate a response from the WSL.

Deal with it.