How many 107 Licensed Users are prevented from taking off

[brettbrandon]

It only takes one not being able to take off to lose a customer. A backup plan with a DJI bird is a must. Thats why I went NLD... Fifty bucks is alot cheaper than another bird!

 

[pdegenkolb]

I appreciate the response, and certainly agree about the learning experience. The Custom Unlock would probably be a good way of doing the indoor flights, but for the outdoor flights, I am usually doing waypoint flights which DJI says are incompatible with Custom Unlock. Also, in the case of the flight in Hawaii, there was no warning that I needed an authorization. The ceiling (75 feet) simply applied itself with no warning. I think this is what bothers me the most. As 107 pilots, we are supposed to know where we can and cannot fly. I take my planning responsibilities seriously, but the "no fly zones" from DJI are not well documented.
Honestly, this has not been a major problem, but it would be nice if DJI would simply let us acknowledge that we are in a "restricted" area and let us get on with the flights, rather than closing us down.

 

[pdegenkolb]

Also, while flying an alternate bird may be an option is some circumstances, the mapping package I use only works with DJI birds. This makes life difficult. Then there is the aircraft insurance we have to carry. (Insurance is way more expensive than the bird.)

 

[BigAl07]

Also, while flying an alternate bird may be an option is some circumstances, the mapping package I use only works with DJI birds. This makes life difficult. Then there is the aircraft insurance we have to carry. (Insurance is way more expensive than the bird.)

You could move to an Enterprise level bird and request a much larger Unlock per DJI but now that I open that can of worms I think that's only available for Public Safety level of use. You'd have to look into the QEP with DJI and see if your circumstances might fit into the program.

 

[Drone on]

The question had nothing at all to do with your honesty, but now I'm really puzzled by the total lack of an answer. Did you not understand the question? Aside from which, how do you expect anyone to assist you with such a completely vague description of the issue. You haven't given any locations, haven't described the messages associated with the inability to take off, the class of airspace, the Geo zone category, how you obtained authorizations, what you did with those authorizations, or posted any flight logs. You have given us absolutely nothing to work with. Are these locations that required LAANC authorizations or not? If you are saying that you cannot take off anywhere, restrictions or not, in any class of airspace, then there is clearly a deeper problem that definitely doesn't afflict all Part 107 pilots.

And if your question is solely can you get rid of DJI Geo restrictions then the realistic answer is no, and that is not the appropriate or necessary solution for legal flights.

May be I can help.
I am confronted with a situation that seems similar to the OP' issue.
I fly at a local lake that does not require LAANC authorization.
DJI's geo fencing shows the spot to be outside of it's blue shaded Authorization Zone, but the app still displays "Cannot take-off"
Kittyhawk also shows it to be, as I interpret it, class G airspace...green grid as far as the eye can see to the east.
But, Ok, I'll play along.
Four weeks ago, I applied for and received a verification code to self unlock at the very site in question. Two weeks ago, I was again able to self unlock at the same site.
Today, I received a verification code for the self unlock, but after entering the code, I received a site cannot be unlocked message error code 3002...WTF?

I think the M2Zoom is a better drone than the MP1, but the constant error messages, beeping noises (I have obstacle avoidance turned off), popups, etc... are ruining the experience.

My MP1 does not have 1/10th the restrictions the M2Zoom has. I suspect it's because I have not updated the fly safe zones. I still have Art as a color profile.

I would think that the FAA through LAANC should be the bottom line, and that DJI' geo zones should co-ordinate by the GPS co-ordinates exactly.

Is DJI over doing the safety play? I can certainly understand that they would want to, but going too far with safety is as likely to hurt sales (if sales are still breathing), as much as the risk of news grabbing accidents, which from my perspective, are on the decline, maybe it's the election season.

I still enjoy flying; especially with the goggles. But, if this continues, I will 86 the Zoom and stick with the older models.

I would say, I'll just keep pursuing Class G airspace, and not worry about all of this, but I am in class G, albeit near the edge.

WTF?

 

[DanMan32]

When flying indoors where GPS is unavailable, you're likely to be in VPS/OPTI mode which does have a height limit of about 15ft. I've encountered that in Florida State fairgrounds Expo hall recording shots of our model train layout. It was quite stable in Opti mode.
You might be able to turn off VPS, but then you're effectively in ATTI mode if you don't have an adequate GPS signal. It might not let you take off in that situation.

 

[DanMan32]

By the way, FAA approved DJI as an ATC, and DJI did announce in their latest app update that they will be incorporating LAANC into the Go app. That should minimize or eliminate the disconnect between their geofence mapping and what FAA clears us for.
That may be why they got rid of the simulator from the app, to make room for LAANC.

 

[sar104]

May be I can help.
I am confronted with a situation that seems similar to the OP' issue.
I fly at a local lake that does not require LAANC authorization.
DJI's geo fencing shows the spot to be outside of it's blue shaded Authorization Zone, but the app still displays "Cannot take-off"
Kittyhawk also shows it to be, as I interpret it, class G airspace...green grid as far as the eye can see to the east.
But, Ok, I'll play along.
Four weeks ago, I applied for and received a verification code to self unlock at the very site in question. Two weeks ago, I was again able to self unlock at the same site.
Today, I received a verification code for the self unlock, but after entering the code, I received a site cannot be unlocked message error code 3002...WTF?

I think the M2Zoom is a better drone than the MP1, but the constant error messages, beeping noises (I have obstacle avoidance turned off), popups, etc... are ruining the experience.

My MP1 does not have 1/10th the restrictions the M2Zoom has. I suspect it's because I have not updated the fly safe zones. I still have Art as a color profile.

I would think that the FAA through LAANC should be the bottom line, and that DJI' geo zones should co-ordinate by the GPS co-ordinates exactly.

Is DJI over doing the safety play? I can certainly understand that they would want to, but going too far with safety is as likely to hurt sales (if sales are still breathing), as much as the risk of news grabbing accidents, which from my perspective, are on the decline, maybe it's the election season.

I still enjoy flying; especially with the goggles. But, if this continues, I will 86 the Zoom and stick with the older models.

I would say, I'll just keep pursuing Class G airspace, and not worry about all of this, but I am in class G, albeit near the edge.

WTF?

No - that doesn't help at all because it's yet another anecdote with no pertinent information. If the aircraft says "cannot take off" then there is a reason. If the reason is airspace then it must be in one of the DJI Geo zones. If it isn't in a Geo zone then something else entirely is going on. Without the location and a flight log this is another pointless guessing game.

 

[Bigbird48]

I agree with Sar and it seems the op has vanished

 

[rangemaster728]

I agree...he could have just posted a screen shot of the map view in DJI GO...along with another showing the same location on a sectional chart and the assembled brain trust here could have started to address his questions in a logical fashion...

He could have had an IMU, VPS or battery problem for all we know.

 

[GadgetGuy]

I'm guessing that the PM sent in Post #10 completely solved his problem.

 

[jspil]

It's difficult when the OP won't give any information to identify his problem.

I think I have experienced what he is talking about. There have been a handful of cases when in front of my home when after receiving LAANC authorization and checking all the boxes in Go4. The app says "unlock successful " yet the red "can not take off" still appears in the upper left. Usually when that happens I shut everything down and start again. Sometimes this works but there have been times that no matter what I do the restricted area will not unlock. For reference I an flying a Mavic Air and I use Airmap to submit flight plans and receive authorization. I can see how this would be frustrating if it happened all the time. Luckily it only happens to me occasionally.

 

[globetrotterdrone]

Well you would however expect a pilot and a 107 in particular he's capable of expressing the necessary details that leads to the problem. Also that he/she keeps a cool head and act responsibly. Just having the money to buy drones will get you (but hopefully not others) sooner or later in trouble if not thinking of all the necessary safety precautions.

 

[Deleted member 93449]

What is the short coming of the Anafi that's holding you back?

 

[Drone on]

No - that doesn't help at all because it's yet another anecdote with no pertinent information. If the aircraft says "cannot take off" then there is a reason. If the reason is airspace then it must be in one of the DJI Geo zones. If it isn't in a Geo zone then something else entirely is going on. Without the location and a flight log this is another pointless guessing game.

Ok...here's some of the facts

Apple Maps shows the spot in question as lat/long 36.357348, and -94.072594
Kitty hawk shows the spot as 36.35721, and -94.07262...close enough, as I recorded the Kittyhawk measurement from the road, and the Apple measurement is from the 'beach' area of the lake finger albeit by dragging the pin to the area as I am very familiar with it.

This lat/long is clearly in the middle of a Kittyhawk/LAANC green grid area. It is not on the edge. My intended direction of flight is over the lake moving further and further away from the geo zone.

I was mistaken when I first replied, though, DJI does show this spot as being within the DJI geo zone. It's my home they show outside of the zone.

But, what is wrong is that there are these inconsistencies between the Kittyhawk/LAANC, and DJI. In my opinion, being that Kittyhawk is authorized by the FAA to be a LAANC facilitator, and DJI is not, Kittyhawk should prevail, when in doubt. In this case/spot, Kittyhawk/LAANCE recognize this as safe to fly.

It may be too much to ask of DJI being that they are in China, but I think they should make more of an effort to align with LAANC. We are referring to Lat/Long numbers. This should be doable.

If that cannot be done, then, if the phone number previously used to request self-unlock is used at the same Lat/Long at another date/time, then be consistent in the unlock approval process. Twice approved, once rejected makes no sense, and is frustrating.

For me the solution is simple, bring my MP Alpine White...no fencing; currently.

 

[sar104]

Ok...here's some of the facts

Apple Maps shows the spot in question as lat/long 36.357348, and -94.072594
Kitty hawk shows the spot as 36.35721, and -94.07262...close enough, as I recorded the Kittyhawk measurement from the road, and the Apple measurement is from the 'beach' area of the lake finger albeit by dragging the pin to the area as I am very familiar with it.

This lat/long is clearly in the middle of a Kittyhawk/LAANC green grid area. It is not on the edge. My intended direction of flight is over the lake moving further and further away from the geo zone.

I was mistaken when I first replied, though, DJI does show this spot as being within the DJI geo zone. It's my home they show outside of the zone.

But, what is wrong is that there are these inconsistencies between the Kittyhawk/LAANC, and DJI. In my opinion, being that Kittyhawk is authorized by the FAA to be a LAANC facilitator, and DJI is not, Kittyhawk should prevail, when in doubt. In this case/spot, Kittyhawk/LAANCE recognize this as safe to fly.

It may be too much to ask of DJI being that they are in China, but I think they should make more of an effort to align with LAANC. We are referring to Lat/Long numbers. This should be doable.

If that cannot be done, then, if the phone number previously used to request self-unlock is used at the same Lat/Long at another date/time, then be consistent in the unlock approval process. Twice approved, once rejected makes no sense, and is frustrating.

For me the solution is simple, bring my MP Alpine White...no fencing; currently.

It has nothing to do with who prevails. The DJI Fly Safe Geo system is entirely a DJI initiative to try to both educate and prevent flight in unsafe areas. It's more conservative than the LAANC restrictions in some areas.

That's in a self-unlockable authorization zone (Rogers Exec - Carter Fld):

 

[dawgpilot]

Ok...here's some of the facts

Apple Maps shows the spot in question as lat/long 36.357348, and -94.072594
Kitty hawk shows the spot as 36.35721, and -94.07262...close enough, as I recorded the Kittyhawk measurement from the road, and the Apple measurement is from the 'beach' area of the lake finger albeit by dragging the pin to the area as I am very familiar with it.

This lat/long is clearly in the middle of a Kittyhawk/LAANC green grid area. It is not on the edge. My intended direction of flight is over the lake moving further and further away from the geo zone.

I was mistaken when I first replied, though, DJI does show this spot as being within the DJI geo zone. It's my home they show outside of the zone.

But, what is wrong is that there are these inconsistencies between the Kittyhawk/LAANC, and DJI. In my opinion, being that Kittyhawk is authorized by the FAA to be a LAANC facilitator, and DJI is not, Kittyhawk should prevail, when in doubt. In this case/spot, Kittyhawk/LAANCE recognize this as safe to fly.

It may be too much to ask of DJI being that they are in China, but I think they should make more of an effort to align with LAANC. We are referring to Lat/Long numbers. This should be doable.

If that cannot be done, then, if the phone number previously used to request self-unlock is used at the same Lat/Long at another date/time, then be consistent in the unlock approval process. Twice approved, once rejected makes no sense, and is frustrating.

For me the solution is simple, bring my MP Alpine White...no fencing; currently.

As sar104 mentioned, that spot is in the Rodgers Class D airspace. You need to seek a LAANC authorization to legally fly there (up to 400 feet at that spot), and then go through DJI's dialog box where you confirm you have authorization.

"Green" in KittyHawk doesn't mean you can fly there without going through proper procedures. It means LAANC is available there up to 400 feet.

 

[sar104]

As sar104 mentioned, that spot is in the Rodgers Class D airspace. You need to seek a LAANC authorization to legally fly there (up to 400 feet at that spot), and then go through DJI's dialog box where you confirm you have authorization.

"Green" in KittyHawk doesn't mean you can fly there without going through proper procedures. It means LAANC is available there up to 400 feet.

I hadn't even looked at the sectional - I took his post to mean that it was Class G. In that case LAANC and DJI Geo align quite well.

 

[dawgpilot]

By prevail, I mean that DJI should not have the control to be more conservative than the LAANC restriction. Is that exercise of control any different than a municipality, or other governance restricting the flight because they are inserting their preference above the governance of the FAA?

Yes, it's different because DJI's decisions don't have the force of law and can't result in you getting a ticket or going to jail. If you disagree with DJI, you can purchase a product from a different manufacturer that doesn't try to impose their own set of restrictions.

 

[Drone on]

As sar104 mentioned, that spot is in the Rodgers Class D airspace. You need to seek a LAANC authorization to legally fly there (up to 400 feet at that spot), and then go through DJI's dialog box where you confirm you have authorization.

"Green" in KittyHawk doesn't mean you can fly there without going through proper procedures. It means LAANC is available there up to 400 feet.

Does this mean that the self-unlock is tied to the LAANC authorization database? I did not think it was, and would be surprised to learn it is, but would prefer that it be exactly tied, which is the crux of my argument of the inconsistency.

I have used the LAANC authorization just in case someone comes by to challenge my authorization to fly there not to unlock the motors.

When previously successful with self-unlock, the GO app has a Cancel/Yes pop up to which I check the three boxes, and submit for self-unlock. The first time doing so, I received a verification code to enter. Thereafter, no code, but unlock anyway. The third time rejected, though I admit I didn't request authorization from LAANC. It was 6:30 AM on a Thursday. Not likely to be challenged by a passerby, or other.

If authorization is available up to 400 feet, why would DJI lock it down? At best, it should be a Warning Zone, and not an Authorization Zone. Less than 1/4 mile away; approximately, the airspace is class G.

To me, these are the inconsistencies, I'm speaking of.

At another location, I cannot get LAANC authorization, but DJI says go for it. WTF?