Mavic 3 Pro not for EU or UK?

[wco81]

Is there any doubt that DJI will have a C1 drone between the Mini and the M3C or M3P in the next year, possibly before the end of the year?

 

[ZmoothOperator]

You have to keep a distance of 5 meters to uninvolved people in low speed mode, that's all.

30 meters if you want to fly faster than 3 ms. The fact that there can be no people within a 30 m horizontal distance whenever you fly outside of cine mode makes quite a difference to me.

 

[miemo]

You have to keep a distance of 5 meters to uninvolved people in low speed mode, that's all.

But that’s NOT all. What really makes the urban area operations in A2 category tricky is the 1:1 rule, since usually with a drone you want to take it up in the air for the shots, in practice demanding way more horizontal distance from uninvolved people than your quoted 5m (or even the 30m in normal speed modes).

“keep the drone at a lateral distance from any uninvolved person that is not less than the height at which the drone is flying (this is the ‘1:1 rule’, i.e. if the drone is flying at a height of 40 m, the distance from any uninvolved person should be at least 40 m”

Flying Drones close to people | EASA

Before you fly your drone, you need to check where you are allowed to fly. We covered this in detail in this EASA light article “Geo-Zones – know where to fly your drone”. Wherever you are flying it is likely that you will also need to think about the safety of any people in the area. As a...

www.easa.europa.eu

 

[miemo]

Is there any doubt that DJI will have a C1 drone between the Mini and the M3C or M3P in the next year, possibly before the end of the year?

Hoping to see a sub-900g Air-series drone with e.g. updated 1” sensor for main wide camera and the Mini3Pro-sensor based 70mm equiv tele from Mavic 3 Pro. Personally would be fine in letting go of the 4/3 sensor and longer telephoto for a lighter C1 drone.

 

[Skyscope]

But that’s NOT all. What really makes the urban area operations in A2 category tricky is the 1:1 rule, since usually with a drone you want to take it up in the air for the shots, in practice demanding way more horizontal distance from uninvolved people than your quoted 5m (or even the 30m in normal speed modes).

I know, this comes originally from the related Acceptable Means of Compliance (AMC) and the Guidance Material (GM).
But take a closer look to them in Original, especially at GM1 UAS.OPEN.030(1), for example here: Easy Access Rules for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (Regulation (EU) 2019/947 and Regulation (EU) 2019/945):

SAFE DISTANCE FROM UNINVOLVED PERSONS​

The safe distance of the UA from uninvolved persons is variable and is heavily dependent on the performance and characteristics of the UAS involved, the weather conditions and the segregation of the overflown area. The remote pilot is ultimately responsible for the determination of this distance.​

My points are:

• Class C2 and therefore Subcategory A2 has to cover the operation of drones up to 4 kg, and the safety regulations are designed accordingly.
• The Mavic 3 Pro at 958 g, although falling into C2, is at the lowest end of the 900g to 4kg MTOM range.
• GM1 UAS.OPEN.030(1) offers an opening to AMC1 UAS.OPEN.030(1) - the 1:1 "rule" - to deviate from it after one's own examination of the individual circumstances of the planned operation.

Besides, in general according to GM/AMC:

EASA, as a "simple" EU institution, cannot enact a binding legal act of secondary law, because EASA has no legislative competence like the European Parlament and the Council or the Commission.
AMC and GM explain legal standards by definition and this should lead to clarity and in a way to legal certainty, but they are not a matter of delegated legislation by the EU.

In conclusion, in my opinion the 1:1 rule does not have to be interpreted as strictly for the Mavic 3 Pro with its 958 g MTOM as you described above.

 

[GadgetGuy]

Hoping to see a sub-900g Air-series drone with e.g. updated 1” sensor for main wide camera and the Mini3Pro-sensor based 70mm equiv tele from Mavic 3 Pro. Personally would be fine in letting go of the 4/3 sensor and longer telephoto for a lighter C1 drone.

Best way to shed 57g is on the heavy Mavic 3 battery, without giving up any of the three cameras. That gets you to sub 900g, and should qualify for C1, if that is the only perceived issue.

 

[wco81]

I know, this comes originally from the related Acceptable Means of Compliance (AMC) and the Guidance Material (GM).
But take a closer look to them in Original, especially at GM1 UAS.OPEN.030(1), for example here: Easy Access Rules for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (Regulation (EU) 2019/947 and Regulation (EU) 2019/945):

SAFE DISTANCE FROM UNINVOLVED PERSONS​

The safe distance of the UA from uninvolved persons is variable and is heavily dependent on the performance and characteristics of the UAS involved, the weather conditions and the segregation of the overflown area. The remote pilot is ultimately responsible for the determination of this distance.​

My points are:

• Class C2 and therefore Subcategory A2 has to cover the operation of drones up to 4 kg, and the safety regulations are designed accordingly.
• The Mavic 3 Pro at 958 g, although falling into C2, is at the lowest end of the 900g to 4kg MTOM range.
• GM1 UAS.OPEN.030(1) offers an opening to AMC1 UAS.OPEN.030(1) - the 1:1 "rule" - to deviate from it after one's own examination of the individual circumstances of the planned operation.

Besides, in general according to GM/AMC:

EASA, as a "simple" EU institution, cannot enact a binding legal act of secondary law, because EASA has no legislative competence like the European Parlament and the Council or the Commission.
AMC and GM explain legal standards by definition and this should lead to clarity and in a way to legal certainty, but they are not a matter of delegated legislation by the EU.

In conclusion, in my opinion the 1:1 rule does not have to be interpreted as strictly for the Mavic 3 Pro with its 958 g MTOM as you described above.

Well we will see how aggressively they enforce A1 vs. A2 compliance in the EU after this year.

Will police actively have drone pilots land their drones to check if the drone has C1 or C2 labels?

Or will they use Aeroscope regularly to detect C2 or legacy drones and go look for pilots when such drones are detected in areas with uninvolved people?

Will they be able to use Remote ID to send fines without directly tracking down the pilots or maybe tracking him or her down later?

I just returned from Spain which has a lot of restricted zones for recreational flights and where supposedly the police have a lot of resources for things like Aeroscope to aggressively catch and fine people for doing unauthorized drone flights.

I was only able to fly twice in a 2-week trip because only two of the places I visited had contact information for heliports and other agencies in zones which allowed recreational flights only if you coordinated and cleared it in advance, according to the Enaire drone map for the country.

 

[globetrotterdrone]

Best way to shed 57g is on the heavy Mavic 3 battery, without giving up any of the three cameras. That gets you to sub 900g, and should qualify for C1, if that is the only perceived issue.

That would be the very obvious.
But something tells me, that DJI somehow had to redesign more than the battery in order to comply which obviously they did not consider economic enough for EU countires. They could even just let one of the cells empty to reduce the weight, but they didn't which tells me, there was probably no easy way to get C1 and C2 within the same range.

 

[miemo]

EASA, as a "simple" EU institution, cannot enact a binding legal act of secondary law, because EASA has no legislative competence like the European Parlament and the Council or the Commission.
AMC and GM explain legal standards by definition and this should lead to clarity and in a way to legal certainty, but they are not a matter of delegated legislation by the EU.

In conclusion, in my opinion the 1:1 rule does not have to be interpreted as strictly for the Mavic 3 Pro with its 958 g MTOM as you described above.

Your reading definitely differs from the official government body responsible for aviation regulations here in Finland. Their official guidelines highlight the 1:1 rule quite clearly from the instruction material to the A2 license exam. Would be pretty difficult to try to explain your reading to the police here should the decide to inspect a C2 drone flight bypassing the 1:1 rule. But good for you if you're able to do that In DE.

 

[Skyscope]

Would be pretty difficult to try to explain your reading to the police here should the decide to inspect a C2 drone flight bypassing the 1:1 rule. But good for you if you're able to do that In DE.

At least I've never heard any Police officer or other regulatory office employee here in the field discussing about the fine details of AMC/GM. They know about the official regulations, where the 1:1 rule is not even mentioned. And I highly doubt this will change in future regarding these not so official fine details in C2 operation.

Even on our official sites of the national authorities the 1:1 rule isn't mentioned regarding C2, and from what I can see, this is the case in Finland too.
I also don't see a check while flying as the main problem, but rather the validity of the insurances.

Anyway, it's not my intention to get anybody into trouble or at least uncomfortable, so if you have other requirements for operating drones, the Mavic 3 Pro is not for you then, and you'll have to stick to C0 or C1 drones, or have one of them in addition.

 

[wco81]

It just depends on how aggressively law enforcement in the different EU states want to enforce these drone rules.

I remember before these EASA Open Category rules were promulgated starting in 2020 and 2021 (delayed by the pandemic), you couldn't even fly in Austria for instance because it would cost hundreds of Euros to get a permit for a recreational flight of ANY drone with a camera.

So I didn't even fly in Austria until AFTER 2021 and I got my A1/A3 license.

Now I hear that Spain has police aggressively tracking down drone pilots if they're in areas they're not suppose to be in.

When I went to Portugal last year, I had to spend weeks planning flights and submitting applications to fly, providing specific GPS coordinates and such. I did get to fly there because I got approval for the couple of dozen different locations I applied for permits.

Greece is similar, you have to preauthorize and provide detailed flight plans.

Maybe with the specific A1/A3 and A2 categories coming into effect in 2024, there will be more uniformity in having the ability to fly in more countries without having individual permission applications and such.

 

[c.oberschneider]

I remember before these EASA Open Category rules were promulgated starting in 2020 and 2021 (delayed by the pandemic), you couldn't even fly in Austria for instance because it would cost hundreds of Euros to get a permit for a recreational flight of ANY drone with a camera.

Not sure how you'd come to this conclusion, but that's contrary to my experience. And I'm from
Austria.

 

[wco81]

Not sure how you'd come to this conclusion, but that's contrary to my experience. And I'm from
Austria.

Threads like this one.

Flying in Austria

I've read about Austrian drone laws, but they seem unbelievably strict for some hobby flying, that's why I'm asking some of you Austrians to clarify this to me. I don't want to disturb anyone, I just want to take my drone up to a ski resort and fly over the forest. If anyone could clarify this...

forum.dji.com

And the old Austro Control website listed the fees for drones with cameras.

I actually emailed them in 2019 and 2020, because I couldn't wait for the EASA rules to take effect across the EU.

 

[GadgetGuy]

That would be the very obvious.
But something tells me, that DJI somehow had to redesign more than the battery in order to comply which obviously they did not consider economic enough for EU countires. They could even just let one of the cells empty to reduce the weight, but they didn't which tells me, there was probably no easy way to get C1 and C2 within the same range.

If there is enough demand, a lighter battery version can easily be offered later. Different battery versions to comply with different rules are not all necessarily released at the onset.

 

[mamamia]

there was mavic pro platinum it will be Mavic 3 Pro Light