I get that DJI holds an estimated 70% of the consumer drone market, and needs to maintain their PR, but the 30 mile no-fly zone around Washington, D.C. in response to an idiot flying his drone onto White House grounds seems to be complete overkill.

There are a ton of commercial UAV opportunities in that area that are nowhere near DC or the two local airports. As much as I'm a big fan of DJI and especially the new Inspire 1 Pro, it's tough to shell out that kind of cash for a drone that can't be used in an incredibly profitable area, in complete safety, due to a thoughtless, knee-jerk overreaction.

[/rant]

I'm sue DJI wouldn't do it just like this, i'm pretty sure that is  governments  strict requerement

DJI-Tim Posted at 2015-9-11 14:54
I'm sue DJI wouldn't do it just like this, i'm pretty sure that is  governments  strict requerement

It's not a government requirement. DJI is under no obligation by federal law to place these no-fly requirements in their firmware. In the case of large airports, they do so as a safety courtesy. The no-fly zone DJI has chosen to needlessly implement stretching 30 miles across the Washington, D.C. region, affects thousands of drone operators who have purchased your products. Washington, D.C. is home to the largest Drone User Group in the country, with over 1,100 members, all of whom have to travel far outside the city to take flight with their Phantom or Inspire drones.

A no fly zone in the immediate DC area is understandable, but the 30-mile diameter zone implemented by DJI is overkill.

C4talyst Posted at 2015-9-16 10:28
It's not a government requirement. DJI is under no obligation by federal law to place these no-fly  ...

Unfortunately it is a government requirement for the FAA no fly zone.

The NFZ is actually 31.5 miles at it's broad portion.  http://tfr.faa.gov/tfr_map_ims/html/ew/scale7/tile_56_29.html

The map provided by the FAA is rather crappy, but the restriction is there.

What your beef is, why is DJI using firmware to restrict flight in NFZ's . DJI is being proactive in implementing the restrictions unlike some other manufacturers. If you fly in a restricted area and get caught, your name falls off the news in a day or two. The stock picture of the DJI Phantom or Inspire stays around a long time as that DRONE.

I also don't like being told I can't fly in an area, when I have a valid exemption for flight. There are other ways to fly. Just like the NPS not allowing for flight from the parks. Get caught, pay the consequences. Learn to fly in ATTI mode or purchase another craft.

gregg1r Posted at 2015-9-16 22:53
Unfortunately it is a government requirement for the FAA no fly zone.

The NFZ is actually 31.5 m ...

The FRZ is backed by federal law and aviators must abide. However, there is no law stating DJI must implement this restriction within their firmware. The FRZ was implemented over a decade ago, long before the commercial/civilian UAV industry emerged, and it was never intended to restrict such flights by crafts that weigh a few pounds.

DJI did not implement the Washington, D.C. restrictions within their firmware until those two idiots landed on the White House lawn. It was a knee-jerk move with PR motivations. Restricting DJI flights 15 miles from the city, where an operator can't even reach the federal district if they wanted to, makes it practically impossible to perform commercial work in areas that are perfectly safe, and not near any airports.

The overreach is leaving consumers who recognize and appreciate DJI's top technology, with no choice but to abandon their platforms. ATTI mode has no effect; the flight restrictions are still in place. I could put aluminum foil around the top of the craft and accomplish what I want in complete safety, but that's not the point.

C4talyst Posted at 2015-9-16 11:13
The FRZ is backed by federal law and aviators must abide. However, there is no law stating DJI mus ...

Like I stated previously, if you get caught flying in the area, your name is in the media for a day or two, DJI's, stays out there almost forever. DJI took the position that if they limited where YOU could fly that their name wouldn't be drug thru the mud. How many news reports refer to a quad as a Drone? Just about all of them. The same reason they use a stock photo of a DJI product.

DJI is protecting their business and their name.

Well aware of the flight restricted area as I used to take aerial photos from Great Falls. Now between the NPS and the FAA, I can't shoot the kayak racers going down over the falls or the scenery for fall leaf change. Now I'm limited to having to pay for help running a zip line across the river to suspend the camera for the Kayaks, or get the same shot from the river bank walls.

Some people are just more special that others. Our elected officials have more value than we do.

C4, if it is a federally mandated no fly zone why would it matter the DJI has it in their software unless you plan to violate the law?  Not sure if there is legitimate - legal ways to still fly within that 30 mile range. If there is then I am wrong and I apologize. If there isn't then what is the problem?

C4talyst Posted at 2015-9-16 11:13
The FRZ is backed by federal law and aviators must abide. However, there is no law stating DJI mus ...

The minute the FAA won the ruling that a UAS is indeed an AIRCRAFT (2014 the ruling came in the US, the FAA has jurisdiction on any think that is airborne, manned or unmanned), therefore they have stated all AIRCRAFT must adhere to TFR's (Temporary Flight Restrictions), so this list (http://tfr.faa.gov) must be followed.

With that said, DJI does not have to implement the lockout, but weather you agree with the BUSINESS decision or not is your choice.  Shop a different vendor.

My personally believe is that in the US, the current "negative tone" to drones in general is going to push the FAA to actually require all manufactures to do some enforcement of TFR's.  This may be proven wrong, but get back to me in 2 years and we shall see.

gregg1r Posted at 2015-9-16 22:53
Unfortunately it is a government requirement for the FAA no fly zone.

The NFZ is actually 31.5 m ...

motors wont arm in NFZ

Actually, the restriction isn't the FRZ, but the SFRA and the FAA does mandate no UAS operations inside of a circle 15 miles in diameter from DC. It is possible to fly outside of the 15 ring and within 30 miles, but additional restrictions apply. See NOTAM 160210 FDC 6/2062.
As for DJI and overkill, I would have to say that they are protecting you (and me and all the other 'drone' users out there). There are plenty of idiots who buy these machines and fly them without recourse to training or airspace rules. All the restrictions that are creeping in to regulate UAS operations are knee-jerk reactions that can be directly attributed to incidents these aforementioned 'idiots' have caused. I personally am happy that DJI pre-emptively curtail their ability to cause the UAS community more problems.
How many high profile rc aircraft crashes have you heard about? I can't think of any. Do you see their hobby as heavily regulated as the UAS community has been of late? The answer is no. That tells me that we should be educating, abiding and sympathetically operating our machines, not trying to bypass or bend the rules to get the footage we want.
Personally I can't understand why anyone would want to go head to head with the Big Man's protection team. That's not a skirmish you or your machine will come out of well!

I live in DC. Want to use my Mavic in the Tripod Mode, IN MY OWN HOUSE. but can't due to the software. Not fair.

Lawmakers continue to write laws as that's their job.  Plus, they need to protect themselves from you.  Unfortunately, their actions will lead to more policing and likely less ability to fly your drone as well.

I'm also annoyed that you cannot fly a drone in a National Park due to someone flying into some geyser back in 2014 and then the nationwide N.P. ban for all drones goes up in a knee-jerk reaction.  If it were "Sure, you can fly in a N.P. but just do not annoy anyone or fly within hearing range or within 400 feet of someone or some animal," I could understand.  But in acres of nothingness and no one around, what's the harm and need for a total ban?  And yes, you can circumvent most any ban if you shell out a few thousand dollars to pay off the bureaucrats and get all the permits and paperwork dotted.

The privacy thing is another matter.  Once outside your house you should have no expectation of not being photographed.  Neighbor has security cameras all over his house under the eaves and some are aimed into my yard over the fence.  So I cannot run to the trashcan without getting all dressed up else they make leak a photo of some guy running to his trash in his PJ's or underwear.  Is it illegal for him to do so?  Probably not, so should I complain about my privacy rights being photographed 24/7 in my fenced yard verses his security?   Easiest is to accept that you will be photographed outside your house somewhere so get over it.  Satellites have eyes too.

Just wait and see if that WA State politician gets his way with his proposed anti-drone laws and bans them from flying anyplace but over your own property without getting approval from any landowner you fly over, and maybe in writing like some Hollywood property release.  May as well call WA State the new Sweden if enacted and red-zone the entire state.

The privacy thing is LAUGHABLE.  Have you people heard of Snowden?  We all know the government has been invading your privacy for YEARS.  

I would move out of DC.