You might find this interesting as well as helpful. Why do you have to get DJI permission when you already have FAA permission?
The DJI system may have predated LAANC but did it predate the FFA restrictions for altitude and distance around an airport? It would be far better and less confusing if the DJI GEO fencing system more closely matched the FAA restrictions. As they are now they are often significantly different. The bigger pain as a part 107 pilot, once you have FAA approval you still have to get DJI approval. The LAANC system has been in place roughly two years now around major airports yet we do not see DJI acquiescing to FAA or the LAANC system. DJI will not comment on the topic when asked directly. In fact DJI has not even implemented LAANC accessibility on their smart controller, at least I have not found a way to do it nor has anyone been able to tell me how to do it. DJI will not respond to any questions regarding LAANC and their smart controller.
I think he does a great job of explaining it. WHY they are in place is not relevant to the conversation. The questions he is addressing is not the history of why DJI did it, but how to get the proper authorizations. The easiest way honestly is to buy any other drone then DJI if you think you're ever going to fly in DJI GEO zones.I like the attempt to explain these (superficially) conflicting systems, but he does a really poor job of it in my opinion, primarily because he misses the purpose of the two systems.
The FAA LAANC system is a formal mechanism to obtain legal authorization to fly in certain airspace. The DJI Geo system, which predated LAANC by years, was their proactive attempt to put into place a mechanism to make it increasingly difficult to fly in airspace that could be hazardous to manned traffic. They implemented it to try to get ahead of what seemed likely to be increasingly onerous legislation on the use of sUAS, both recreational and non-recreational.
The FAA restrictions are legally binding, while the DJI system is a mixture of advisory and proprietary restrictions on the use of their aircraft. Ideally, now that LAANC exists, the DJI system will at some point be replaced by LAANC, but DJI is not yet a LAANC partner, hence the need for third-party apps to use it.
I think he does a great job of explaining it. WHY they are in place is not relevant to the conversation. The questions he is addressing is not the history of why DJI did it, but how to get the proper authorizations. The easiest way honestly is to buy any other drone then DJI if you think you're ever going to fly in DJI GEO zones.
I understand the DJI predated LAANC but did it predate FAA restrictions of altitude and distance around an airport? I don't think so.Yes - DJI Geo predates the LAANC grids - those did not exist when it was implemented.
Hmmm, I thought he answered his own questions pretty well. I was satisfied with his answers.I agree that the "how to" explanation is useful, but he starts the video by asking exactly those questions - why they are different and why you need to authorize through both systems, and says he is going to answer them. Then he doesn't answer them.
I understand the DJI predated LAANC but did it predate FAA restrictions of altitude and distance around an airport? I don't think so.
Yep, watching what is being introduced to the market by other companies. My Mavic Pro will probably be good for a couple more years yet.Yeah I really hope DJI does away with this nonsense or at least adds a way to opt out with proof of a Part 107, because this just adds unnecessary steps to the whole process.
I shouldn't have to send proof of authorization to a foreign company when I already have authorization from a federal agency, that's absurd. This really salted my nuts when I first encountered it, so much so the next drone probably won't be a DJI.
That is understood with all software but why is the FAA/Federal Govern't allowing this to happen since they have control of the airspace and there are such safety issues involved? The DJI software should be conforming to standards and regulations of the FAA not just do whatever a commercial entity thinks is best/cool/or profitable for the company.read DJI's terms of service agreement sometime, like all the rest you are buying a software license to operate a machine you buy.
You are at the mercy of their software unless you find a third party app that works with the hardware, until then they can control the software as they see fit.
A good thing to a degree but it is backwards. The FAA/Federal Govern't should be policing this and making the manufactures adapt to Federal regulations instead of allowing the manufactures implement whatever they think is best. If that were being done then there would not be a two step process of FAA/DJI authorization. Addiotnally LAANC does not work with a Smart Controller and DJI will not even talk with customers about when or if they plan to incorporate LAANC into their Smart Controller or why not just incorporate the LAANC system into the Go4 app?So I see this as a good thing, it was DJI trying to be proactive, and it is in use in more than just the US, so I don't think it is going away anytime soon. Not to mention, I've never had issues with getting DJI to approve anything, once they see you have LAANC approval, it is just a rubber stamp to them, and it helps ensure their drones aren't used illegally in a manner that would put human lives at risk.
because the FAA has no jurisdiction, DJI is not allowing the sUAV's to break any FAR, DJI is actually running a tighter ship.That is understood with all software but why is the FAA/Federal Govern't allowing this to happen since they have control of the airspace and there are such safety issues involved? The DJI software should be conforming to standards and regulations of the FAA not just do whatever a commercial entity thinks is best/cool/or profitable for the company.
Doesn't the FAA have regulation over what flies, how it flies and where it flies in US airspace?because the FAA has no jurisdiction, DJI is not allowing the sUAV's to break any FAR, DJI is actually running a tighter ship.
The FAA says I can land on a grass strip when I fly GA, the people I rent the plane from say I can't.
You are using the same argument people use when someone on broadcast radio or TV says or does something that offends them..... as long as what was said does not violate the Pacifica Decision, or a few other things that are too long to get into here, the FCC does not act upon complaints regarding programming.
I don't like that car manufacturers force me to buckle my seat belt... I spend lots of time in the only state without a seat belt law, it is legal for me to drive without one on, but I don't see the Feds stepping in on my behalf.
Lets not bring government into our life more than they are already, if you don't like DJI's product, there are others out there
Yes, but now you have a US agency saying they want to regulate a foreign company, and saying that it is about profit, how much did DJI spend to implement and incorporate their Geofencing, plus cost of keeping it updated every month, plus the cost of hosting it online, minus the fee they charge for unlocking (free) and how can you even think they were motivated by profit?A good thing to a degree but it is backwards. The FAA/Federal Govern't should be policing this and making the manufactures adapt to Federal regulations instead of allowing the manufactures implement whatever they think is best. If that were being done then there would not be a two step process of FAA/DJI authorization. Addiotnally LAANC does not work with a Smart Controller and DJI will not even talk with customers about when or if they plan to incorporate LAANC into their Smart Controller or why not just incorporate the LAANC system into the Go4 app?
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.