Mavic 3 in the UK

[old man mavic]

it would appear that as far as we in the UK ,and probably the EU as well ,will not be a large consumer of the new Mavic 3
not because of price ,but because it seems that it will not have the upcoming C class classification
this will severely limit its appeal, to hobby consumers in the UK ,simply because it will be severely restricted ,to where it can fly after 2022
of course this will not be an issue for professional flyers ,who have the necessary certification to allow them to fly in the specific category ,but the expense of undergoing such training ,will probably be too great for the average person ,who flies in the open category
so unless you fly for a living ,or really need the advanced optics that the Mavic three has ,then i think many mavic fans ,me included will be giving this one a miss

 

[wco81]

What happens to all existing drones?

They won't have the C class certification either.

So they will be prevented from flying in as many places then?

You'd think there would be a revolt from current drone owners.

 

[Corsair415]

What happens to all existing drones?

They won't have the C class certification either.

So they will be prevented from flying in as many places then?

You'd think there would be a revolt from current drone owners.

Doubt they have the numbers to get the politicians to care.

 

[wco81]

Hmm, so will the police be looking for these CE Mark labels on drones?

If you're already flying, are they going to force you to land so they can inspect for the label or whether you are indeed 150 meters from the nearest buildings?

Typically a place that set apart from any kind of structure or parks or whatever might be part of some regional or national park so you wouldn't be able to fly there either.

 

[zocalo]

What happens to all existing drones?

They won't have the C class certification either.

So they will be prevented from flying in as many places then?

You'd think there would be a revolt from current drone owners.

Legally? All existing drones get reclassified, which then places additional and more restrictive restrictions on how and where you can fly them (unless you have the relevent paid-for certifications) compared to an identical spec. aircraft that doesn't have the marking. Yes, the regulation really is that arbitrary.

In practice? I suspect a lot of people simply won't know/care and will continue to operate their legacy drones as they always have, almost certainly without incident. The police and other officials are highly unlikely to be doing spot checks if you are flying legally, and probably won't know what to look for if they did. Ignorance (willful or otherwise) is not a defence however, so if something does go wrong and it can be shown that you were operating a legacy aircraft outside the permitted operational limits then you can expect much less leniency from the legal system.

Drone owners that are aware of this have every right to be annoyed, but I think the numbers and ability to apply pressure are going to be very limited, even if bodies like the BMFA get involved. My guess is that more pressure for a compromise is going to come from vendors who will almost certainly want some kind of retrospective classification for drones that have been designed and built with the C-mark in mind (as the M3 almost certainly was) to avoid losing sales. The CAA is reluctant to do this however, presumably because of fake Ebay stickers/replacement panels, so we might have to settle for the end of 2022 date being pushed back another year or two and markings to apply from next round of model updates.

Government make a complete farce of introducing its own legislation again? You don't say!

 

[Mazdaman323lx]

The EU has never granted retrospective licensing to any product in its history , not even life saving medicines , so there is no hope that they will buck this trend for a Chinese drone manufacturer .

 

[zocalo]

The EU has never granted retrospective licensing to any product in its history , not even life saving medicines , so there is no hope that they will buck this trend for a Chinese drone manufacturer .

Perhaps not, but OP was talking specifically about the UK (although that's not to say the EU might not be in the same boat). Due to the post Post-Brexit arrangements and UK-specific regulatory tweaks we need to arrange our own certification and verification, and that is entirely down to the DfT failing to arrange it in time. The actual standard and mark is done and dusted, the Mavic 3 almost certainly complies with it, but due to government incompetence in appointing someone capable of ensuring products comply with the spec in time, DJI can't get it certified. That gives DJI (and Autel, et al), a pretty strong case for some form of relief, IMHO.

Personally, I agree with you - there's next to no hope this will be done retrospectively - but it's a starting point in negotiations that I expect will end up with the compromise of the 2022 date getting pushed back to at least partly accommodate another product refresh cycle, as I inferred above.

 

[twickers14]

If the date is pushed back I would be a happy bunny. I have pondered on getting the A2C of C but have held back to see how things settle in 2022. If it were as easy (and sensible) as the US Trust test, which I have done ready for our trip to Florida next April, I would have done it by now but quite a bit of hard work is required and ahem, $130 (£100) to just take the test!

 

[UberStonks]

All “legacy” drones manufactured before the new EU& UK regs came into place (ie all those that do not have a “C” class marking will still be able to be flown after 2022. They all fall into the A3 category. Just restricts you more but they still are legal to fly

 

[Lastrexking]

All “legacy” drones manufactured before the new EU& UK regs came into place (ie all those that do not have a “C” class marking will still be able to be flown after 2022. They all fall into the A3 category. Just restricts you more but they still are legal to fly

Nope. Not all drones. Drones under 250g will stay in the open category. .

 

[zocalo]

If the date is pushed back I would be a happy bunny. I have pondered on getting the A2C of C but have held back to see how things settle in 2022. If it were as easy (and sensible) as the US Trust test, which I have done ready for our trip to Florida next April, I would have done it by now but quite a bit of hard work is required and ahem, $130 (£100) to just take the test!

Yeah, I'm doing the same. I don't see much point rushing into getting the A2 CofC until things are a little clearer, especially since it serves little practical purpose for me right now given what and when I tend to photograph with my drone. It's pretty rare that "proximity to people" is going to be an issue, "buildings and structures" a little more relevant, but again not all that often.

With the latest developments, and given I'm not going to need the paperwork before 2023 (or possibly later), so I figure I might as well wait and see what happens with a view to doing it a few months before the deadline, whenever that turns out to be. Or possibly even not at all, if I only have marked drones by then.

 

[eEridani]

Once upon a time I manufactured and sold medical test products to a company within the EU - there was a CE mark requirement - and yes my small company was able to comply. At the time, CE was very easy to meet, and create the required paper trail showing the products met the requirements. A true UL label would have been harder.

It would be very easy for DJI to meet this CE requirement paper wise - and the requirement for the product side is a sticker that shows CE has been met. DJI only need change the serial number label at the last minute to fully comply with the dates involved, or add a CE mark sticker during production.

I wouldn't count them out just yet.

On the flip side, a printer company in Czech shows CE marking isn't required for certain products, and sells within the EU based on that alone. DJI might invoke the EU rule denoting it isn't required against the EU requirement rule.

 

[zocalo]

Once upon a time I manufactured and sold medical test products to a company within the EU - there was a CE mark requirement - and yes my small company was able to comply. At the time, CE was very easy to meet, and create the required paper trail showing the products met the requirements. A true UL label would have been harder.

It would be very easy for DJI to meet this CE requirement paper wise - and the requirement for the product side is a sticker that shows CE has been met. DJI only need change the serial number label at the last minute to fully comply with the dates involved, or add a CE mark sticker during production.

I wouldn't count them out just yet.

On the flip side, a printer company in Czech shows CE marking isn't required for certain products, and sells within the EU based on that alone. DJI might invoke the EU rule denoting it isn't required against the EU requirement rule.

The problem isn't with DJI (or any other manufacturer). The problem is that the UK's DfT hasn't appointed anyone to verify that the drones being submitted for certification are actually compliant with the requirements of the UK's version of the drone classification C-marking, which is over and above the CE mark (or is it now UKCA for drones?) they need as well. In order to do a proper job on that it's not just a case of checking the paperwork, but will entail physically verifying things like the weight of the aircraft, flights speeds, speed limiter operation, impact energies, and so on, basically akin to the "crash tests" that cars have to go through.

There isn't much that manufacturer can do here - in order to get the approval for the C-mark they are entirely dependant on the DfT sorting out the problems on their end, appointing someone to administer the certification process, and only then can they submit their drones to go through the process. That they are announcing drones now, without the C-mark, almost certainly means they don't think that's going to be resolved anytime soon and their best option is to deal with a market where a lot of potential buyers are going to reluctant to spend as a result of the lack of the mark rather than continue sit on their hands and inventory.

 

[Rilot]

I'm becoming more and more convinced that the transition period will be extended beyond Jan 1st 2023. The EU and UK still haven't fully decided on the full specifications for C marking and don't look like they're going to get anything finalised any time soon.

 

[eEridani]

Based on logic only, if DJI at some point sells an Air 2 into Europe that complies with all the proper tests and markings, grandfathered Air 2 drones will be allowed the same marking, as long as DJI includes them in the type certificate.

As electronics get better and batteries get smaller, maybe a new 100gm drone that you attach your own 100gm camera to will be the wave of the future. I imagine DJI could make a drone and spec it's maximum takeoff weight of 100gms for sustained flight in 100kt winds. DJI wouldn't be responsible for a user attaching a 100gm weight to it and flying it around in 10kt winds. After all - isn't a 100gm drone without a camera considered a toy and not covered in any of this bureaucratic frolicking?

And regardless, there are enough customers out there who will somehow buy a drone and fly it regardless of what rules are being broken, just ask the automakers if 500HP is really needed in the cars they sell, and if they'd be able to sell said HP if the cars had speed governors.

 

[wco81]

Hmm, so even if they can re-certify legacy drones, what would be DJI's incentive to even try to re-certify?

We're talking a full year from now?

Maybe DJI wants even people who bought the Air2S to buy new models instead. They can tell you you can still operate under A3 restrictions.

 

[zocalo]

Hmm, so even if they can re-certify legacy drones, what would be DJI's incentive to even try to re-certify?

We're talking a full year from now?

Maybe DJI wants even people who bought the Air2S to buy new models instead. They can tell you you can still operate under A3 restrictions.

It'd be a pure cost vs. PR decision, I think. DJI will incur costs for certification, and for managing the process of issuing the certification marks - which could include new panels, or even having them fitted. DJI would presumably has a good idea of how many legacy models are still operating out there based on the decline in legacy users sending them telemetry, accessory sales, etc. and would presumably do some research to assess uptake if they were seriously considering it.

While it would be nice if they would do that for the Mavic line, quite frankly I can't see that happening, and even less so as the timespan where a C-marked replacement is available grows. Maybe they might feel it's worth the PR for the more expensive models like the Inspire and Matrice, but even then it would be a numbers game, and they're probably not going to work out well for the operators.

 

[Lastrexking]

This is the reason I’m sticking with the Mini2 for now.

 

[lissforester]

This is the reason I’m sticking with the Mini2 for now.

SAME AS THAT.
Under 250g is the way to go for now for newbies, which I consider myself one.
Not so good for the guys that have dug deep in their pockets and purchased bigger drones.
I was completely ignorant of all this stuff when I looked to purchase my first drone, it was only as I looked into gaining my Flyers ID and Operators ID that all this became apparent to me, I was fortunate that I made the decision to get the DJI Mini 2, partly budget and partly the rave reviews it was gaining.

 

[Rilot]

There aren't going to be any retroactive certifications. The EU simply doesn't do this, ever. They don't even retroactively approve drugs and they save lives.
Once the transition period ends, everything >250g will be flying in A3 only unless certified.
Even if the Mavic 3 somehow manages to get a C mark, it will be C2 as it is over 900g. This means you will need an A2 CofC to fly it at all.