High Wind Velocity

[BlokusPokus]

1. There's no such thing as a fly-away, you are thinking of lost drone incidents.

Please, elaborate because if you think that there are no issues of SW/FW glitches that can cause completely unpredictable behavior, then I would certainly like to hear about that.

2. DJI don't replace lost drones. They replace drones where the loss can be shown to have been caused by a DJI fault.
The recorded flight data is very useful in identifying the cause of an incident
3. Without that evidence, you have no claim against them.

That is precisely my point! No, DJI does not replace lost drones. However, they SHOULD if it is caused by a glitch in their FW or SW and IF operator error can be ruled out. Ruling out operator error is very much harder when you have logs littered with High Wind warnings that DJI can point to, even though wind conditions may not have been as dramatic.

4. Whether the data includes strong wind warnings is irrelevant as DJI are not looking for user errors to invalidate warranty cover.
All they are looking for is evidence of a DJI fault - no DJI fault = no replacement.

What do you base that completely unfounded assumption on? The way you defend the interestes of a multi-million dollar company and believe that they only have the customer's best interest in mind makes one wonder. It would be detrimental for DJI to admit to a SW/FW glitch that causes a drone to behave unpredictably. If you think for a second that they would not barricade behind a "You should have not flown in windy conditions" argument based on flight logs, then you really see the world through rose color glasses....

What you've imagined doesn't make any difference.
All that's relevant is: If you can prove the loss was a DJI issue, they will replace the drone.

See above. You will never be able to do that if you have logs containning info that you ignored high wind warnings. Logs are certainly highly useful, but they unfortunately are as double-sided a sword as in-car dash cams and black boxes- unless you can prove beyond a shred of doubt that you did nothing wrong they are not always the blessing you think they may be.

 

[sar104]

I am really not trying to argue the specific details of the case at hand. My single point is that many people do not have access to Forums like this (for various reasons ranging from being unaware of their existence to being completely non technical) and therefore have no access to any background info. Many poeple do not even know how detailed the flight logs are. There are also many people who will take the first response from customer service of a large company as gospel and not push back. All I am saying here is that in these instances DJI has an easy way to squash any kind of inquery by customers. DJI can also keep potentially lengthy customer service investigations that cost lots of actual $$ short by using the "you were flying in windy conditions" as a first response. That is whaty they apparently did in this case and is my only point of contention. Whatever follows/could follow is inconsequential for customers that just accept the L1 reposnse thinking they were at fault.

Agreed. I think the point of contention, however, is your assertion that DJI is deliberately employing this level of logging to wriggle out of responsibility for equipment failure. In fact that makes no sense, because it would be much easier for them to deny responsibility if the logs did not include such detailed data - they would simply be able to say that there was no evidence of equipment failure.

I have examined and provided analysis of enough logs to know that the problem is often the cursory initial investigation that DJI performs. They miss stuff. Presented with detailed evidence they almost always end up agreeing. And while that's not the ideal situation, it is not evidence of deliberate evasion.

 

[BlokusPokus]

Agreed. I think the point of contention, however, is your assertion that DJI is deliberately employing this level of logging to wriggle out of responsibility for equipment failure. In fact that makes no sense, because it would be much easier for them to deny responsibility if the logs did not include such detailed data - they would simply be able to say that there was no evidence of equipment failure.

I have examined and provided analysis of enough logs to know that the problem is often the cursory initial investigation that DJI performs. They miss stuff. Presented with detailed evidence they almost always end up agreeing. And while that's not the ideal situation, it is not evidence of deliberate evasion.

My point was not that DJI is deliberatly doing this, but rather that the log data is a double-edge sword that can certainly work against the customer. I did find it curious that the wind warnings are very sensitive and trigger at the slightest change of conditions. This is paired by an on-screen warning to land at a safe place immediately. So, yes, this is what piqued my interest and resulted in me looking for information- hence ending up in this forum. And, no, I am not implying that DJI has instructed their L1 support to look for this type of log entry and use it as a first reply. However, I would not at all be surprised if they did. In the end, I do believe that it will always be a contentious item once the finger-pointing starts

 

[sar104]

My point was not that DJI is deliberatly doing this, but rather that the log data is a double-edge sword that can certainly work against the customer. I did find it curious that the wind warnings are very sensitive and trigger at the slightest change of conditions. This is paired by an on-screen warning to land at a safe place immediately. So, yes, this is what piqued my interest and resulted in me looking for information- hence ending up in this forum. And, no, I am not implying that DJI has instructed their L1 support to look for this type of log entry and use it as a first reply. However, I would not at all be surprised if they did. In the end, I do believe that it will always be a contentious item once the finger-pointing starts

Well again - it may be a double-edged sword but, from the customer point of view, it's definitely much better than no sword at all, which would be the case if there were no detailed logs.

 

[BlokusPokus]

Well again - it may be a double-edged sword but, from the customer point of view, it's definitely much better than no sword at all, which would be the case if there were no detailed logs.

Well, it becomes more interesting when other log data points at possible equipment failure or malfunction. At that point it would be convenient for DJI to be able to point to log data that indicates that the customer was ignoring warnings and was operating out of spec, rather than publically admitting that something went wrong that potentially impacts all customers. This is certainly speculative, but is a built in fail-safe. I just found it curious that this was the first response from DJI. Again, not saying it is their MO. It is more like Tesla flashing up a warning saying that Ludicrous Mode will cause accelerated wear and tear on the motor, gearbox and battery. They are not prohibiting it or state flat out that it will void your warranty. However, I guarantee you that they keep a log on how often you do this and will use it against you if you come to the 2Y service interval with a worn-out car....I guess I am a bit more suspicious of Big Business intentions than ya'll here....

 

[sar104]

Well, it becomes more interesting when other log data points at possible equipment failure or malfunction. At that point it would be convenient for DJI to be able to point to log data that indicates that the customer was ignoring warnings and was operating out of spec, rather than publically admitting that something went wrong that potentially impacts all customers. This is certainly speculative, but is a built in fail-safe. I just found it curious that this was the first response from DJI. Again, not saying it is their MO. It is more like Tesla flashing up a warning saying that Ludicrous Mode will cause accelerated wear and tear on the motor, gearbox and battery. They are not prohibiting it or state flat out that it will void your warranty. However, I guarantee you that they keep a log on how often you do this and will use it against you if you come to the 2Y service interval with a worn-out car....I guess I am a bit more suspicious of Big Business intentions than ya'll here....

So do you think it would be better if the FC didn't provide any wind warnings?

 

[Meta4]

Please, elaborate because if you think that there are no issues of SW/FW glitches that can cause completely unpredictable behavior, then I would certainly like to hear about that.

When someone says their drone flew away, what they mean is that they last their drone and don't know the reason.
Yes, the reason might have been a DJI issue and DJI will replace the drone if that is shown to be the case.
But the overwhelming cause of the majority of last drones is poor piloting.

What do you base that completely unfounded assumption on? The way you defend the interestes of a multi-million dollar company and believe that they only have the customer's best interest in mind makes one wonder. It would be detrimental for DJI to admit to a SW/FW glitch that causes a drone to behave unpredictably. If you think for a second that they would not barricade behind a "You should have not flown in windy conditions" argument based on flight logs, then you really see the world through rose color glasses....

See above. You will never be able to do that if you have logs containning info that you ignored high wind warnings. Logs are certainly highly useful, but they unfortunately are as double-sided a sword as in-car dash cams and black boxes- unless you can prove beyond a shred of doubt that you did nothing wrong they are not always the blessing you think they may be.

I see the world through reality glasses and what I'm unsuccessfully trying to explain to you is how things actually work.

If the flight data shows a DJI fault caused the loss of the drone, you get a replacement.
If it can't be shown that a DJI fault was the problem, no replacement.
Wind warnings don't enter into the process.

Whether the data shows operator error or not, does not matter.
DJI do not have to show operator error to deny a warranty claim.
They may (or may not point out the cause in their sketchy reporting.
But if they deny warranty replacement, it's because there is no evidence of a DJI fault. - not because there is evidence of operator error.

 

[BlokusPokus]

So do you think it would be better if the FC didn't provide any wind warnings?

No, I do think it is very useful. I also think it would be beneficial to have more transparancy for the customers as far as flight data is concDamage caused by operation in bad weather (i.e. strong winds, rain, sand/dust storms, etc.)erned, how to access it and how it is used. In addition, I would like to see more definition on the After-Sales Service Policy exclusion on Quote from DJI's website: "Damage caused by operation in bad weather (i.e. strong winds, rain, sand/dust storms, etc.)" How do they define strong winds? I hope not by looking in the log files for a strong wind warning

 

[BlokusPokus]

When someone says their drone flew away, what they mean is that they last their drone and don't know the reason.
Yes, the reason might have been a DJI issue and DJI will replace the drone if that is shown to be the case.
But the overwhelming cause of the majority of last drones is poor piloting.

OK, not arguing with that as long as we are in agreement that a fly-away can be caused by a DJI/Autel/Skydio/etc. software or firmware error and is certainly not limited to operator error.

I see the world through reality glasses and what I'm unsuccessfully trying to explain to you is how things actually work.

Unless you are working for DJI or can show actual data, I think your info is guesswork at best...so I don't think I will put too much weight into those "explanations".

If the flight data shows a DJI fault caused the loss of the drone, you get a replacement.
If it can't be shown that a DJI fault was the problem, no replacement.

And the final decision on this is made by.......DJI?

Wind warnings don't enter into the process.

How do you know what enters into DJI's decision process? Their Website clearly has an exclusion statement for operation in strong winds. How would they know if you flew during strong winds if not through log data?

Whether the data shows operator error or not, does not matter.

I think DJI will absolutely deny any warranty claims if they can prove operator error or reckless operator behavior. Where do you get your info from? The DJI Website states the following in their After-Sales policy section: "Damage caused by improper installation, incorrect use, or operation not in accordance with official instructions or manuals. "

DJI do not have to show operator error to deny a warranty claim.
They may (or may not point out the cause in their sketchy reporting.

That is probably true. How is that helpful for a customer if the drone falls out of the sky because of a manufacturing issue (HW/SW/FW)?

But if they deny warranty replacement, it's because there is no evidence of a DJI fault. - not because there is evidence of operator error.

Again, see above for "incorrect use" statement on their Website. Also, as far as DJI's reason for denying warranty replacement are concerned, I think only DJI knows. I do not know of any denied claims or accepted claims for that matter. However, as a guide for what DJI may consider a reason to deny replacement, you may want to look at the "What This After-Sales Policy Does NOT Cover" on this Website: After-Sales Service Policies - DJI

 

[sar104]

No, I do think it is very useful. I also think it would be beneficial to have more transparancy for the customers as far as flight data is concDamage caused by operation in bad weather (i.e. strong winds, rain, sand/dust storms, etc.)erned, how to access it and how it is used. In addition, I would like to see more definition on the After-Sales Service Policy exclusion on Quote from DJI's website: "Damage caused by operation in bad weather (i.e. strong winds, rain, sand/dust storms, etc.)" How do they define strong winds? I hope not by looking in the log files for a strong wind warning

I think it's pretty obvious, at least to those of us familiar with the subject, that they mean if you fly in winds strong enough to blow the aircraft away and/or cause it to crash, then they won't cover it. Plenty of flights generate wind warnings - those (as you would expect) occur at wind speeds lower than the maximum airspeed of the aircraft. Wind warnings would not be much use if they didn't show until your aircraft was already being blown away. I think that you are really overcomplicating this topic with pure speculation.

 

[BlokusPokus]

I think it's pretty obvious, at least to those of us familiar with the subject, that they mean if you fly in winds strong enough to blow the aircraft away and/or cause it to crash, then they won't cover it.

Is that ya'lls interpretation and speculation, or is this defined somewhere by DJI, cause I think their interpretation is all that matters in this regard? Their Website just states operation in strong winds.

Plenty of flights generate wind warnings - those (as you would expect) occur at wind speeds lower than the maximum airspeed of the aircraft. Wind warnings would not be much use if they didn't show until your aircraft was already being blown away. I think that you are really overcomplicating this topic with pure speculation.

I am not arguing with the usefulness of the warnings.

 

[Meta4]

Is that ya'lls interpretation and speculation, or is this defined somewhere by DJI, cause I think their interpretation is all that matters in this regard? Their Website just states operation in strong winds.

A few of us here are much more experienced in this topic than you imagine.
We're speaking from experience, having seen the flight data from hundreds of flight incidents, followed the progress of claims and even helped to correct things when DJI investigation misses important details.

And what's your level of expertise to be so sure of what you are suggesting?

 

[sar104]

Is that ya'lls interpretation and speculation, or is this defined somewhere by DJI, cause I think their interpretation is all that matters in this regard? Their Website just states operation in strong winds.

I am not arguing with the usefulness of the warnings.

OK - at this point it's pretty clear that you are here just to assert your opinion rather than have a discussion. I'm not going to waste any more time on this.

 

[BlokusPokus]

A few of us here are much more experienced in this topic than you imagine.
We're speaking from experience, having seen the flight data from hundreds of flight incidents, followed the progress of claims and even helped to correct things when DJI investigation misses important details.

I am glad you are all doing that. On a side-note, had I known that ya'll in this forum have been exposed to hundreds of support responses from DJI related to flight incidents I may have opted for another manufacturer But I digress.....The only issue I have is that ya'll are claiming to know what the decision tree looks like in DJIs support organization. DJI, as any manufacturer will have guidelines for their support organization on how to handle claims. There will be guidance on what data to retrieve from logs and what to respond to customers based on fixed input criteria (i.e.: the "did the customer plug in the power-cord?" or potentially "did the customer fly in strong winds?"). What you all see as DJI not being diligent in L1 may be instructions for support to first respond with a push back if there is a wind warning in the logs. Unless you work for DJI, there is really no telling. I am not claiming they do that, I am just saying that there is potential for them to leverage these very sensitively calibrated wind warnings in their responses to the customer in order to cut down on potentially expensive support cases. Y'all on the other hand claim to exactly know what DJI is and is not doing behind closed doors and how they handle customer claims. I am sure that DJI support can be persuaded with good arguments to accept a support claim, but potentially getting 25/100 customers to back down after you tell them they ignored wind warnings has huge monetary value. Again, my concern came from the wind warnings being calibrated extremely sensitive, the fact that they state to immediately land and the fact that DJI has strong wind exclusion claims on their Website. I for one do not want to be in a position where I have to prove to DJI that it was actually not as windy as the log files may indicate.....

And what's your level of expertise to be so sure of what you are suggesting?

I work in product management for an electronics manufacturer.

 

[BlokusPokus]

OK - at this point it's pretty clear that you are here just to assert your opinion rather than have a discussion. I'm not going to waste any more time on this.

I would say that you are doing the same when it comes to claiming that you know how DJI handles L1 responses to customer claims. But I agree, the horse is beat to death.

 

[sar104]

I would say that you are doing the same when it comes to claiming that you know how DJI handles L1 responses to customer claims. But I agree, the horse is beat to death.

Right - now you have progressed to pure straw man arguments. This pattern of new forum members presenting initially as reasonable and then transitioning to borderline trolling is very disappointing.

 

[BlokusPokus]

I am trolling because I say that I see a risk in a company like DJI abusing the "wind" argument to push back on customer claims, which they clearly did in the illustrated case? And, you are the voice of reason for laying on the tracks for DJI as if you are on their payroll? I think you may need to rethink your logic.....But since you are resorting to personally attacking me now, this certainly concludes my participation in this thread, which I am sure you will welcome! Have a woderful day!