Autonomous Flight Possible With Mini 3 Pro

[Droning on and on...]

Has been a while I have read the official documents, but as far as I remember there was no mentioning of anything automated at all. I could be wrong about that though.

If so, IMO that's an unintended hole that will eventually be filled with "not allowed".

In the US, I agree with this standard. I really don't want anyone with simply TRUST certificate training "monitoring" a waypoint flight over me and my family. I don't consider people with TRUST level training to be pilots by the most scant, generous definition.

Pun not intended, I don't trust these troglodytes with flying toys competent to immediately stop the automation, take immediate control, and safely fly the drone away from risk (to people). Rather, when something goes wrong I expect them to panic, screw everything up, and increase the likelihood someone gets hurt.

I do trust part 107 cert holders.

The FAA needs to establish a higher level certification for recreational pilots that demonstrates competence for more complex flight scenarios (and concomitant allowance).

 

[codex22]

If so, IMO that's an unintended hole that will eventually be filled with "not allowed".

Unfortunately, I'm afraid that you're right about that. Then again, some exceptions need to be made, probably if you fly for commercial purposes (such a distinction is in effect in Germany right now for uncertified drones).

 

[RogerDH]

In the US, there is no distinction between "autonomous" and "automated". The distinction is whether an aircraft is under direct pilot control or not.

Automated flight over people is not allowed for recreational use. For what I hope are obvious reasons.

I'm surprised EU regulations are less careful about this, and am skeptical.

Again, do you have a reference?

According to the FAA, the primary responsibility of a drone pilot is to see and avoid other aircraft, and I have never seen anything from the FAA about a waypoint mission being different in any way from flying manually: The human pilot still has that responsibility, and all others. That's why it's illegal to fly a waypoint mission beyond VLOS or to continue a mission after losing control. A truly "autonomous" pilot would be required to make all decisions, which is a rather different animal, and I do believe the FAA has indeed published regulations about that.

 

[Droning on and on...]

Unfortunately, I'm afraid that you're right about that. Then again, some exceptions need to be made, probably if you fly for commercial purposes (such a distinction is in effect in Germany right now for uncertified drones).

I agree with the FAA accommodating the public's need for this. As I mentioned above, we need a more advanced certification in the US for recreational that can provide assurance regarding the skills, knowledge, and training that a pilot flying over me knows what to do, and has practiced it when their hyperlapse mission over the County Fair bails.

Until then no can flyo.

 

[Droning on and on...]

Again, do you have a reference?

According to the FAA, the primary responsibility of a drone pilot is to see and avoid other aircraft, and I have never seen anything from the FAA about a waypoint mission being different in any way from flying manually:

The FAA website is extensive and well designed. I'm sure you can find it if you spend some time looking. It's there.

 

[RogerDH]

The FAA website is extensive and well designed. I'm sure you can find it if you spend some time looking. It's there.

I have looked there, and I see one specific page titled Operations Over People General Overview. There's absolutely nothing there, or anywhere else I've seen from the FAA, about flying waypoint missions or stuff like QuickShots that's any different from the regulations for flying manually. It's rather disingenuous of you to send me looking for something that doesn't exit, so I don't care to continue this.

 

[Droning on and on...]

Okay.

EDIT: I read the section you referenced on the FAA website. I seriously wonder if @RogerDH did.

In short, those of you flying under recreational rules, most of us, flying over people is still prohibited automated or not.

The FAA section @RogerDH referenced gives an overview of the "Operation of Unmanned Aircraft Systems Over People final rule", issued in April 2021, which addresses ONLY commercial operations under part 107. Prior to this rule, operating over people even under part 107 was prohibited without a waiver from the FAA.

Further, operations over people under p107 is anything but simple. Simply having a p107 cert and a 249g M3P won't cut it. Read the page Roger referenced.

I'm not surprised at all that page didn't confuse people by discussing autonomous operations or waypoints. It's irrelevant to what the FAA was communicating with that page.

 

[RogerDH]

Okay.

EDIT: I read the section you referenced on the FAA website. I seriously wonder if @RogerDH did.

In short, those of you flying under recreational rules, most of us, flying over people is still prohibited automated or not.

*snip*

You've completely lost the plot, and you're completely misrepresenting what I've said.

My original contention was that in the EU, there would be pros who would want a Mini 3 "enterprise" because its weight puts it in a less restricted class than a Mavic 3; one important advantage being able to fly over uninvolved people. Hopefully, everyone learned something from that discussion, and I believe my point still stands for what I would think is a fairly large market. But who knows; you may be correct that DJI will ignore them.

But then you claimed that in the US, drone pilots cannot legally fly an "automated" waypoint mission over people anyway. I believe that is misinformation, so now I'm simply contending that whatever that page (or any other FAA page I've seen) says about flying over people (or anything else), whether you're a recreational pilot or Part 107, it applies whether you're flying a Litchi mission or just cruising around. Waypoint missions have been ubiquitous for many years, so if the FAA intended anything different, it's incumbent on them to clearly say so in the regulations.

And you're still contending that buried somewhere on the FAA site it says otherwise? If you can substantiate your claim, people currently flying waypoint missions (myself included) would appreciate knowing that. I'll wait here...

 

[Droning on and on...]

For recreational hobbyists still paying attention: Flying over people is against the rules. The FAA rule issued April 2021 only applies to part 107 certified pilots, and then for aircraft under 0.55lb, only if there are no exposed parts capable of causing lacerations and other serious injury to bystanders.

No DJI drone meets these specifications as shipped. Further (OPINION ALERT @RogerDH!), I don't think the prop cages for the Minis would qualify, being too flimsy and weakly attached/mounted.

In fact, I doubt there is a consumer-class drone <0.55lb on the market that would satisfy the FAAs requirement. While I don't know, I'd be very surprised that with such a specific requirement the FAA doesn't have, and require, a process for certification of safety specifically w.r.t. laceration risk.

And, of course, no manufacturer has attempted this certification. Yet.

Roger, please address the subject matter and leave the personal narrative out of it. No one here is required to talk about what you want to talk about. Flying over people came up, reasonably connected to the discussion about waypoints. If you can't fly over people, you can't fly waypoints over them either.

 

[solidhouse]

I believe that another issue with giving a small drone like the Mini 3 Pro autonomous waypoints is wind. I believe that many people would send the drone on a long waypoint mission beyond signal range and it simply could no return on its own if the wind picked up.

 

[RogerDH]

I believe that another issue with giving a small drone like the Mini 3 Pro autonomous waypoints is wind. I believe that many people would send the drone on a long waypoint mission beyond signal range and it simply could no return on its own if the wind picked up.

Why would that be any different from manual flying? If that was a concern, I have to wonder why they put Ocusync 3 in the Mini 3, and why they did include the Mini 1 and 2 in the SDK.

 

[solidhouse]

Why would that be any different from manual flying? If that was a concern, I have to wonder why they put Ocusync 3 in the Mini 3, and why they did include the Mini 1 and 2 in the SDK.

If you are flying manually and hit some strong wind, you may be able to put it in sport mode, lower altitude, and get out of trouble.

 

[RogerDH]

If you are flying manually and hit some strong wind, you may be able to put it in sport mode, lower altitude, and get out of trouble.

Which you can also do if you're flying a waypoint mission and monitoring it, ready to take control for any reason. If you're not doing that, just "fire and forget" and wait for it to return, you're creating a dangerous situation, but DJI doesn't seem to mind if you do that with a heavier drone. (They even make it a default behavior to continue missions if connectivity is lost.) Why should they worry about you doing it with a Mini 3?

Edit: I keep forgetting that the Mini 3 actually does support waypoints, but only in hyperlapse mode. That pretty much shoots down all the excuses offered.

 

[pyrolator]

In my Opinion, are the "Quickshots" ain't equal to an autonomous Mode ?
So the M3P can do such Mode as DJI implemented them in the Quickshots.

 

[Droning on and on...]

I have to wonder why they put Ocusync 3 in the Mini 3, and why they did include the Mini 1 and 2 in the SDK.

How about for the reasons stated by DJI? Not the spec for the maximum range – that's a spec, not the reasons behind ever improving transmission technology. Rather, the answer to your question "why" has nothing at all to do with a 7 mile range.

They've been pretty clear as to "why", and they're quite aware of VLOS limitations in their major EU, American, and Asian markets. It's not about range.

 

[Droning on and on...]

Edit: I keep forgetting that the Mini 3 actually does support waypoints, but only in hyperlapse mode. That pretty much shoots down all the excuses offered.

Nope.

Market segmentation is an excuse as old as the existence of markets. And a very reasonable one. DJI has every right to maximize their profitability, and there's nothing nefarious about it.

Waypoint functionality is available. The price of entry is the Mavic 3 Classic. Thank you DJI for lowering the price of entry from the M3E

 

[RogerDH]

Nope.

Market segmentation is an excuse as old as the existence of markets. And a very reasonable one. DJI has every right to maximize their profitability, and there's nothing nefarious about it.

Waypoint functionality is available. The price of entry is the Mavic 3 Classic. Thank you DJI for lowering the price of entry from the M3E

One definition of "excuse" is: "a reason or explanation put forward to defend or justify a fault or offense." If you take greed as their reason but don't take that as an offense, then why would you call it an "excuse?"

 

[solidhouse]

Which you can also do if you're flying a waypoint mission and monitoring it, ready to take control for any reason. If you're not doing that, just "fire and forget" and wait for it to return, you're creating a dangerous situation, but DJI doesn't seem to mind if you do that with a heavier drone. (They even make it a default behavior to continue missions if connectivity is lost.) Why should they worry about you doing it with a Mini 3?

Edit: I keep forgetting that the Mini 3 actually does support waypoints, but only in hyperlapse mode. That pretty much shoots down all the excuses offered.

Yes, I was talking about fire and forget missions. Way beyond the signal range. I wouldn’t send my Mini 3 Pro on the same long waypoint missions as my Mavic 3.

 

[Flashheart]

I wouldn’t send my Mini 3 Pro on the same long waypoint missions as my Mavic 3.

Why not?

 

[Droning on and on...]

One definition of "excuse" is: "a reason or explanation put forward to defend or justify a fault or offense." If you take greed as their reason but don't take that as an offense, then why would you call it an "excuse?"

What's your "excuse" for demanding the highest pay from an employer that you can get? Is simply that you're greedy? You're not worth it?

I guarantee there are people who don't think you're worth it, and are greedy. What admirable people, eh? Defining your value for you, and on that basis, your character.

You seem to live in a world of absolute value, where that value for everyone is defined by you. It boils down to you expecting someone else to invest millions in developing a very sophisticated product, then sell it to you at the price you want. Otherwise, they're "greedy".

DJI charges what the market will bear, maximizing their revenue for the product. That's what sets the price. It's no more greedy than you job searching and looking for the highest pay. It's not that you're greedy, your worth it, and you're simply seeking a job and employer that recognize it.

DJI is doing nothing different, nor any less honorable.

My point's been made. You can have the last word. Won't change the pricing