Clean a dusty Mavic?

[Gmgfarrand]

canned air, lint free towel, and swabs?
Got a little dusty...

 

[Former Member]

lint free towel, and swabs?

That will work. I dont like to use compressed air on the exterior for fear of blowing that dust inside.

 

[Prospero]

Soft brush first to remove all the visible dust, then some brief bursts with compressed air for any inside.

Similar to when using canned air to clean a camera or computer, only use very short blasts, to avoid freezing delicate parts.

 

[Air Or]

My preference with the MP is same as a computer, vacuum instead of compressed air.

With vacuum and a small brush attachment, you are removing dirt from the thing, and compressed air is probably blowing dirt deeper into the mechanisms, making things actually worse.

 

[Prospero]

My preference with the MP is same as a computer, vacuum instead of compressed air.

With vacuum and a small brush attachment, you are removing dirt from the thing, and compressed air is probably blowing dirt deeper into the mechanisms, making things actually worse.

If there are any oils or other attractants in the mechanism, then neither vacuum nor compressed air will dislodge them. Similarly, if the there are none, compressed air or vacuum will remove particles with no issue. The problem with vacuum is it usually lacks sufficient force compare with that of a compressed air flow.

Anecdotal, agreed, but I've used compressed air without issue on countless computers and cameras without ever causing an issue.

As always, YMMV

 

[Drone Master]

Compressed air works well, however as you mentioned, the compressed air can with straw will freeze curtain components such as the main board, gimbal, and can thermally damage other components. Be very careful when using this method!

 

[Former Member]

compressed air is probably blowing dirt deeper into the mechanisms, making things actually worse.

I agree.

 

[charlas]

Remember as well, the top is trivial to pop off to clean out the fan area, just be careful and sensible.

 

[Former Member]

Remember as well, the top is trivial to pop off to clean out the fan area, just be careful and sensible.

It's trivial but it might void your warranty.

 

[charlas]

It's trivial but it might void your warranty.

Fair enough from videos etc I've not seen any warranty seals on it, but yeah worth remembering.

 

[Former Member]

Fair enough from videos etc I've not seen any warranty seals on it, but yeah worth remembering.

Sometimes if you don't pry up that cover very evenly, it can bend and create a crease in it. That's how DJI might know.

 

[lisadoc]

It's trivial but it might void your warranty.

Not in the US. See this post:

How to rollback Mavic firmware

 

[Former Member]

Not in the US. See this post:

How to rollback Mavic firmware

In that post, you said it yourself.

"They could still deny a claim and then you'd have to fight to have them honor it."

Despite what the federal law is, DJI assumes the role of judge, jury and executioner about warranty claims. If they determine that you have opened the drone, or crashed it, as evidenced by the crease in the body that might result while attempting to remove the top cover from the Air, they will stick to their guns and deny the claim. Not worth removing the cover and take that risk with a company like this. I have dealt with them dozens of times, on behalf of myself and others, and they can pretend to be omnipotent.

 

[lisadoc]

Despite what the federal law is, DJI assumes the role of judge, jury and executioner about warranty claims.

You're right. That's why I put that whole statement in my original post.

But my original point is still the same - opening your electronic items, modifying them, upgrading them, etc. will not void your warranty in the US, as that is against federal law. What it can do, is give the manufacturer a simpler "excuse" to deny your warranty claim. Anything, in fact, can give a manufacturer an excuse to deny a warranty claim, and just because they do, doesn't make it legal or acceptable. Knowledge of the actual law, instead of the universal misunderstanding of what people believe to be the law, is what allows companies like DJI to continue to get away with denying warranty claims under bogus pretenses.

However, if consumers learn the actual truth against such common misconceptions related to warranties, armed with such information they can push back against those companies and we might ultimately make a difference in preventing such abuses. One individual might think they have no chance going up against DJI. In theory, that may be true. In practice however, you'll find DJI and similar companies much more amenable to placating you as an individual consumer if you're aware of the law and reinforce your warranty claim, just to keep the misconception alive.

If you threaten legal action against DJI or other such firms for refusing to abide by federal law, or threaten to take them to the state attorney's office, or other such legal entities, they are going to be much more willing to allow/pay your warranty claim than to fight it in any public manner. If they lose (which they will) to someone who is willing to take legal action against them (especially if they are aware of and back their position with federal law), and it becomes public record, they then risk all the other false claims that they could get away with for claiming such false pretenses of denying warranty claims. It's far better for them to pay you your $500 for a new drone to keep you quiet than it is to risk their continued denial of thousands of valid warranty claims with other consumers.

So the first step in the fight back against these companies denying valid warranty claims is education of the facts and knowledge of a consumer's legal rights - which is why more people should spread the word against such a public misconception such as opening up a device might invalidate its warranty.

Think of it this way - if DJI, for example, decided to start denying warranty claims against customers who decided to put a "skin" on their drone or paint/mark something on the outer shell of their aircraft body, people would immediately know that it would be bogus reasoning and the push-back and outrage would quickly result in them reversing course and honoring those warranty claims. If consumers knew the same excuse for not honoring valid warranty claims due to opening an item (stickers/seals or not) were equally bogus (instead of maintaining the status quo of misinformation of the law), manufacturers like DJI would change their tune. Manufacturers rely on such misinformation being widely spread and when other consumers reinforce their "message", it only helps them in efforts to spread such propaganda and obfuscation of the law.

 

[Former Member]

You're right. That's why I put that whole statement in my original post.

But my original point is still the same - opening your electronic items, modifying them, upgrading them, etc. will not void your warranty in the US, as that is against federal law. What it can do, is give the manufacturer a simpler "excuse" to deny your warranty claim. Anything, in fact, can give a manufacturer an excuse to deny a warranty claim, and just because they do, doesn't make it legal or acceptable. Knowledge of the actual law, instead of the universal misunderstanding of what people believe to be the law, is what allows companies like DJI to continue to get away with denying warranty claims under bogus pretenses.

However, if consumers learn the actual truth against such common misconceptions related to warranties, armed with such information they can push back against those companies and we might ultimately make a difference in preventing such abuses. One individual might think they have no chance going up against DJI. In theory, that may be true. In practice however, you'll find DJI and similar companies much more amenable to placating you as an individual consumer if you're aware of the law and reinforce your warranty claim, just to keep the misconception alive.

If you threaten legal action against DJI or other such firms for refusing to abide by federal law, or threaten to take them to the state attorney's office, or other such legal entities, they are going to be much more willing to allow/pay your warranty claim than to fight it in any public manner. If they lose (which they will) to someone who is willing to take legal action against them (especially if they are aware of and back their position with federal law), and it becomes public record, they then risk all the other false claims that they could get away with for claiming such false pretenses of denying warranty claims. It's far better for them to pay you your $500 for a new drone to keep you quiet than it is to risk their continued denial of thousands of valid warranty claims with other consumers.

So the first step in the fight back against these companies denying valid warranty claims is education of the facts and knowledge of a consumer's legal rights - which is why more people should spread the word against such a public misconception such as opening up a device might invalidate its warranty.

Think of it this way - if DJI, for example, decided to start denying warranty claims against customers who decided to put a "skin" on their drone or paint/mark something on the outer shell of their aircraft body, people would immediately know that it would be a bogus reasoning and the push-back and outrage would quickly result in them reversing course and honoring those warranty claims. If consumers knew the same excuse for not honoring valid warranty claims due to opening an item (stickers/seals or not) were equally bogus (instead of maintaining the status quo of misinformation of the law), manufacturers like DJI would change their tune. Manufacturers rely on such misinformation being widely spread and when other consumers reinforce their "message", it only helps them in efforts to spread such propaganda and obfuscation of the law.

Have you dealt much with DJI? If not, DJI will teach you what the acronym GITNIP means.

 

[lisadoc]

Have you dealt much with DJI? If not, DJI will teach you what the acronym GITNIP means.

No. Not with DJI specifically. (Honestly, if I have repair work that is needed, I would likely approach you to accomplish those repairs over DJI, since all my aircraft are out of warranty). But I have had equivalent experience with numerous other monolithic companies with similar, if not more onerous processing of warranty claims. DJI may be a Chinese company, but they have plenty of assets and company presence in the US, and I can guarantee that as a multi-billion dollar company, they have attorneys that understand the legal ramifications involved with going up against a consumer or consumers armed with a clear understanding of US federal law.

Some serious questions - How many valid warranty claims have you or your customers had against DJI that were denied due to an "opened" device? Of those claims, how many of them did you or your customers approach DJI management with and countered their warranty denial with a clear demonstration of the legal basis of DJI's requirement to honor their warranty, despite the device being opened? Of those, how many times did you or your customers have an attorney draft a letter stating their intention to proceed with appropriate legal action if they continue such denials?

Companies such as DJI rely on the fact that the time, money, and effort in fighting a "No" far outweighs a customer just sucking it up and giving in. However, that's not actually the case as the federal law is even more on your side as a consumer and everyone needs to know that.

One of the most important parts of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act is its fee shifting provision. This provision provides that you may recover the attorney fees incurred in the prosecution of your case if you are successful – independent of how much you actually win. That rational behind this fee-shifting provision is to twofold: (1) to ensure you will be able to vindicate your rights without having to expend large sums on attorney’s fees and (2) because manufacturers are able to write off all expenses of defense as a legitimate business expense, whereas you, the average consumer, obviously does not have that kind of economic staying power.

So anyone with a valid warranty claim that is denied by DJI should be pushing back - not giving in. It's easy to feel frustration when faced with such a denial, but a small bit of perseverance and effort can go a long way.

Here's a few resources on how to avoid the "shrugged shoulders" syndrome and get your warranty claim honored:

Enforcing Your Product Warranty — The Warranty Game
The Desk: When to fight warranty issues
What You Need to Know about Warranty Laws - Consumer Reports
Breach of Warranty

 

[Former Member]

@lisadoc The first thing I want to say is that I am on your side and the consumers side. Trust me on that one. I have read all of your postings over time, and you are usually right-on and direct when it comes to the truth. Im not KYA, Im just telling what I think. If you read many of my posts, I suggest members send their drone into DJI for warranty repairs instead of sending it to me. If they want it back asap, or for a bunch of other reasons, I am happy to oblige.

But I have had equivalent experience with numerous other monolithic companies with similar, if not more onerous processing of warranty claims.

Are you an attorney? If so, Im sure you would find a vast audience of people here and on other forums to join a class action suit against DJI for a myriad of torts.

as a multi-billion dollar company, they have attorneys that understand the legal ramifications involved with going up against a consumer or consumers armed with a clear understanding of US federal law.

You can not get in contact with their in house counsel. Only by filing a lawsuit. They dont answer the phone or emails.

Some serious questions - How many valid warranty claims have you or your customers had against DJI that were denied due to an "opened" device?

Dozens due to a DJI claimed "crash," "opened device" or "operator error."

Of those claims, how many of them did you or your customers approach DJI management with and countered their warranty denial with a clear demonstration of the legal basis of DJI's requirement to honor their warranty, despite the device being opened?

Most of them.

Of those, how many times did you or your customers have an attorney draft a letter stating their intention to proceed with appropriate legal action if they continue such denials?

Unfortunately, in many states and local jurisdictions, it comes down to a case of throwing good money after bad. In many , you wont get reimbursed for legal fees, despite federal law, and if you do, it might take months before the case comes to trial, and you are risking not getting repaid for the fees.

Companies such as DJI rely on the fact that the time, money, and effort in fighting a "No" far outweighs a customer just sucking it up and giving in. However, that's not actually the case as the federal law is even more on your side as a consumer and everyone needs to know that.

DJI JUST DOESNT CARE. They dont scare easily, and trying to force them to honor a warranty claim when they have already judged against you could take months to resolve. Paypal is your friend as well as Refresh in cases like this. Filing a claim with Paypal sometimes works as long as their "buyers insurance" policy remains active.

One of the most important parts of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act is its fee shifting provision. This provision provides that you may recover the attorney fees incurred in the prosecution of your case if you are successful – independent of how much you actually win. That rational behind this fee-shifting provision is to twofold: (1) to ensure you will be able to vindicate your rights without having to expend large sums on attorney’s fees and (2) because manufacturers are able to write off all expenses of defense as a legitimate business expense, whereas you, the average consumer, obviously does not have that kind of economic staying power.

Do you have experience or statistics in what percentage of plaintiffs are reimbursed for their legal fees? If it were determinant by the malfeasance of the defendant, every plaintiff would win every time against DJI.

So anyone with a valid warranty claim that is denied by DJI should be pushing back - not giving in. It's easy to feel frustration when faced with such a denial.

And back, and back, and back.

a small bit of perseverance and effort can go a long way.

But alot of effort against a tyrannical, obstinate company, can give you a heart attack.

 

[lisadoc]

Perhaps then a class-action lawsuit would be the way to proceed. I am a licensed attorney but I don't practice law for clients other than the businesses I manage directly and I am by no means an expert on class-action litigation. But if things are as bad as your perception of things with DJI is, I know there are plenty of attorneys/firms that make their living going up against major manufacturers, especially ones with as deep of pockets as DJI, and would be happy to take on cases that are in such clear violation of US federal law.

 

[Former Member]

Perhaps then a class-action lawsuit would be the way to proceed. I am a licensed attorney but I don't practice law for clients other than the businesses I manage directly and I am by no means an expert on class-action litigation. But if things are as bad as your perception of things with DJI is, I know there are plenty of attorneys/firms that make their living going up against major manufacturers, especially ones with as deep of pockets as DJI, and would be happy to take on cases that are in such clear violation of US federal law.

I cant find a record of a class action suit ever being initiated against DJI. The time back when people like me were waiting for a few months to get their preordered and prepaid Mavics would have been a perfect time to file one, or just simply getting an injuction against DJI from taking any further money/orders and forcing them to fill the old ones, would have been a win for customers. But now, the idea of gathering an army of customers to file a complaint, only to probably end up getting back a credit voucher of $50 or so from DJI towards a future purchase, seems like a waste of time. When DJI started to fill orders, it seems like they had a random way of shipping, not your normal first come, first served. That made even more people angry. Why did someone else get his/hers before mine?

If it were not for the stellar products that DJI produces, there would be alot more unhappy customers and lawsuits.