Mavic 3 - Will You Upgrade?

[hiflyer201]

Yikes! is this the drone forum or Forbes? you have to love it..it runs the gamut from what kind of glue should I use to get my drone in the air again to how soon will I be able to retire my 3 month old drone and get something newer.

 

[dirkclod]

Yikes! is this the drone forum or Forbes?

Oh yes we are affiliated. ?

 

[cgmaxed]

Actually, I am very pleased with my Mavic 2 Pro. The only thing I would have liked would be all-around sensors. But that would not make me buy a $1500+ more drone. I fear that the newer drones will have more flying limitations and that would actually be a deterrent to the purchase, unless the new drone has infinitely more improvements.

I suspect they have waited so long to release the Mav3 because they need to make sure it will significantly outperform virtually all consumer drones (price relative) on the market, including their own current releases ie the FPV drone and Air2S.

 

[dirkclod]

I suspect they have waited so long to release the Mav3 because they need to make sure it will significantly outperform virtually all consumer drones (price relative) on the market, including their own current releases ie the FPV drone and Air2S.

As well as the others.

 

[JeffreyS]

As a professional photographer and strictly a Phantom 4 Pro user for a few years, I recently bought the M2P for transportability. Images are nearly as good as my P4P's. I will upgrade the Mavic if there is a big enough improvement in the sensor and the image quality. More pixels of better quality. Better DR, less noise.

 

[Drone Master]

Many will pull out their wallets for a 3 Pro for whatever features it will have. The 8K if truly on board and with a better sensor array as expected will be why. That and for it's new design will entice almost all of us to possibly purchase if we can afford it.?

 

[dirkclod]

Many will pull out their wallets for a DJI Pro 3 for whatever features it will have. The 8K if truly on board and with a better sensor array as expected will be why. That and for it's new design will entice almost all of us to possibly purchase if we can afford it.?

If I can’t afford it I will start a go fund me ?

 

[sar104]

Haven't heard anything. But if I were to take a wild guess, a very wild guess, I would guess it's not less 4 miles. Night flying with bright enough strobes gets VLOS easily within 4 miles. If it's less than that, Well, I would never buy a drone that is restricted to less than 4 miles; spotters can help get you to a 4 mile point. And what about those who use drones for delivery purposes. They may need more than 3-4 miles of range when they get BVLOS permits. The use of spotters can easily get you out 4 miles or more. I just don't see a regulation forthcoming in my crystal ball. However, their may be a rule created with certain conditions. I just doubt it would be locked into an app.

How, exactly, do you think that spotters get you more distance?

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

I’d like to see DJI make model batteries beyond 4 or so years before I spend any more with them.
As every model gets a new battery (of cour$e) it seems to be their way of forcing upgrades in 6 or thereabouts years after release of a model.

 

[neggy]

without a CLEAR path from the FAA on the remote ID clusterfark, I'm not putting dollar ONE into any sUAV until there is a standard and DJI supports it

I'm still not happy with DJI dropping battery support for the Mavic Pro platform either

 

[dirkclod]

Haven't heard anything. But if I were to take a wild guess, a very wild guess, I would guess it's not less 4 miles. Night flying with bright enough strobes gets VLOS easily within 4 miles. If it's less than that, Well, I would never buy a drone that is restricted to less than 4 miles; spotters can help get you to a 4 mile point. And what about those who use drones for delivery purposes. They may need more than 3-4 miles of range when they get BVLOS permits. The use of spotters can easily get you out 4 miles or more. I just don't see a regulation forthcoming in my crystal ball. However, their may be a rule created with certain conditions. I just doubt it would be locked into an app.

Hate to turn this but your statement confused me on spotters.
So I asked someone who I know knows and he asked you in post 28.
Would really be interested if you answered him as I didn’t think
you could string out spotters. And no way one by you can see 4 miles. Answer him so we will understand what you meant. Thanks.

 

[Thomas B]

Hate to turn this but your statement confused me on spotters.
So I asked someone who I know knows and he asked you in post 28.
Would really be interested if you answered him as I didn’t think
you could string out spotters. And no way one by you can see 4 miles. Answer him so we will understand what you meant. Thanks.

Ditto.
Unaided verbal communication to the PIC is required with a spotter when used.

 

[sar104]

Ditto.
Unaided verbal communication to the PIC is required with a spotter when used.

Just to be completely clear, that requirement could be inferred to exist in the recreational exception 49 U.S.C §44809 (a) (3):

The aircraft is flown within the visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft or a visual observer co-located and in direct communication with the operator.​

But it doesn't exist in 107.33, where there is no required co-location or method of communication.

§107.33 Visual observer.

If a visual observer is used during the aircraft operation, all of the following requirements must be met:​

​

(a) The remote pilot in command, the person manipulating the flight controls of the small unmanned aircraft system, and the visual observer must maintain effective communication with each other at all times.​

​

(b) The remote pilot in command must ensure that the visual observer is able to see the unmanned aircraft in the manner specified in §107.31.​

​

(c) The remote pilot in command, the person manipulating the flight controls of the small unmanned aircraft system, and the visual observer must coordinate to do the following:​

​

(1) Scan the airspace where the small unmanned aircraft is operating for any potential collision hazard; and​

​

(2) Maintain awareness of the position of the small unmanned aircraft through direct visual observation.​

 

[dirkclod]

The ..Direct Communication..is what gets me. That must be within
direct speaking not by radio of phone communication correct .
Not by VO strung out a mile apart right ?

 

[sar104]

The ..Direct Communication..is what gets me. That must be within
direct speaking not by radio of phone communication correct .
Not by VO strung out a mile apart right ?

For recreational pilots, the requirement is co-located (which obviously rules out stringing them out) and direct communication. Even if direct communication doesn't allowed radio or phone, the co-location requirement would make that unnecessary.

For Part 107 pilots, the requirement is explicitly that the RPIC, pilot (if not the RPIC) and the VO(s) must all continuously be able to see the aircraft. That doesn't rule out having non-co-located VOs communicating by radio or phone but, since it doesn't relieve the pilot of the requirement to be able to see the aircraft at all times, that doesn't buy you any extra distance.

 

[dirkclod]

For recreational pilots, the requirement is co-located (which obviously rules out stringing them out) and direct communication. Even if direct communication doesn't allowed radio or phone, the co-location requirement would make that unnecessary.

For Part 107 pilots, the requirement is explicitly that the RPIC, pilot (if not the RPIC) and the VO(s) must all continuously be able to see the aircraft. That doesn't rule out having non-co-located VOs communicating by radio or phone but, since it doesn't relieve the pilot of the requirement to be able to see the aircraft at all times, that doesn't buy you any extra distance.

Ok thanks but that still doesn’t make it clear to me if the VO has to be by the PIC. But that’s been covered I guess in other threads
and this isn’t where to discuss it.
My bad But thanks for responding to my message.

Now back on topic guys I’m sorry I took it OT.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

I'm still not happy with DJI dropping battery support for the Mavic Pro platform either

And Spark . . . AND I think MA too now ?
I checked the DJI shop in Oz, not available for the original Air !

 

[flydronefly]

I probably will, I've always liked to have the latest & best affordable tech, the MP2 has been great for me, I need something that has advanced capabilities such as good all round sensors, good battery life & very important to me is capable of flying Litchi autonomous missions when needed, & obviously a top end camera, I have a feeling the Mavic 3 (if & when it does appear) should tick all these boxes & if it is compatible with the new DJI FPV goggles with occusync 3.0 then it has me sold already, can only hope, just have to start saving the funds now.

I think the Air 2S was originally planned to be compatible with the goggles and motion controller. Not sure if this will be available in future firmware updates or if they're just holding out this feature for their more premium drones.

 

[GDadd]

The original question: "what can the upcoming Mavic 3 have to offer that would make you want to upgrade or replace whatever drone you have now?"

1) I suspect the M3 will become their flagship platform, and with it many new and existing prosumers will buy it, experience it, cite a wide range of uses, and share collective experiences and techniques on forums like this - covering a broader, richer, and longer period than DJI's less expensive drones which turnover more frequently.

2) I would speculate that like the M2P/Z, the support for the M3 will outlast iterations of the Air & Mini platforms and last at least 3 years.

3) I am bought into DJI's ecosystem, physically with FPV goggles and skill-wise having learned the nuances of their video and photo features

4) My personal track record with DJI upgrades has been consistently positive

5) An expected impressive camera upgrade would round out my reasons to upgrade.

Capabilities to capture better, more interesting video and stills will continue to be a reason to upgrade (for me) unless/until DJI puts out a real lemon or usage restrictions make owning one prohibitively uninteresting.

That said, call me guilty but I'll surely be one of those who places an order for an M3 before they hit the shelves. I'm also a sucker for the new tech, and I appreciate how DJI keeps pushing new, usable features.

 

[DavidT_ NZ]

True. I updated my desktop 6mnths ago. It can now handle 8k. Video software needed updating as well.

Like TV’s that went through plasma to 1080p to 4K to ……… ? I stopped on a large screen Sony Bravia 1080p some years ago and my home cinema is just fine for my tired eyes! Crystal clear viewing across the lounge with excellent colours and contrast. My new HP ZBook bells and whistles high end laptop runs at 4K; nice to have. But unless producing videos for commercial distribution, I have no use nor real interest in pushing the limits any higher. And my Mavic Air 2 covers everything that I need off a drone, at present. At some stage things hit “consumer saturation point” where the extra expense for higher resolution is not justified by the potential usage. That is when I would start looking at alternative smart technological features on a new drone. Better flying, safety, sensors, recording, optical zoom functions, waypoint controls, fitted strobes, camera settings, RC controls, etc. We are being spoilt for choice! Safe flying. ????