Mavic Pro 2 - 905 grams???
- Thread starter RPSM
- Start date
Yes I agree, the key here is kinetic energy transfer (80J limit), 900g is considered as alternative for those who cannot certify energy transfer.
In any case I thought EASA was looking into enforcing these new rules by Q1 2019.
So the European Council passed the reform on June 27th.
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/p...e-of-drones-council-signs-off-on-easa-reform/
In there it is stated it would be effective 20 days after publication in the EU journal, so it should be effective by now.
"The rules require that drone operators must be registered if their drones are capable of transferring more than 80 Joules of kinetic energy upon impact with a person."
EU Council Adopts First EU-Wide Drone Rules - Flight Safety Foundation
So despite what EASA does, in theory currently now all drones above 80J (Phantoms, Inspires, etc) would need to be registered.
Then in the EASA website:
Next steps
The EU Commission will discuss the Regulation proposed by EASA. The adoption is expected by the end of 2018.
Civil drones (Unmanned aircraft) | EASA
The consultation document has the same as "next steps". Its not in force yet and its not going to be for a while.
Its also likely to change during that time.
Even after its finalised there'll be an implementation period before its forced onto members.
We'll be wondering about the Mavic 3 release dates in the Argos catalogue before this is wide spread.
Its also likely to change during that time.
Even after its finalised there'll be an implementation period before its forced onto members.
We'll be wondering about the Mavic 3 release dates in the Argos catalogue before this is wide spread.
Skyscope
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2016
- Messages
- 89
- Reactions
- 123
(Attachments
Hi there, a bit off-topic but I would not know where to start this.
At least it is a sign that things are not settled:
NODE is a organization started by DJI to take influence in these things - and right now the topic is noise:
Letter Embed | New Mode
Hope they will do this for a 909 Gramm limit in the near future aswell
At least it is a sign that things are not settled:
NODE is a organization started by DJI to take influence in these things - and right now the topic is noise:
Letter Embed | New Mode
Hope they will do this for a 909 Gramm limit in the near future aswell
Right, plus from EASA:
"2.4.5.
Date of entry into force and date of applicability
The applicability timeline has been reviewed to address a request from several stakeholders to anticipate the dates
and to even allow the MSs to decide to apply the regulation earlier.
Therefore, a general application date has been defined of 6 months after the publication of the regulation in the
Official Journal of the European Union."
"In addition, a derogation of a further 3 months is allowed for operators to register themselves."
https://rpas-regulations.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/EASA_EU_Opinion-No-01-2018_180207.pdf
The norm was published in the EU journal on August 22nd 2018, so it will become effective on September 11th 2018. Below the entry in the EU journal including the 80J reference:
EUR-Lex - 32018R1139 - EN - EUR-Lex
So basically 6 months later, by March 11th 2019 EASA will start enforcing the rules across its area of influence. Note EASA members might start enforcing the rule before this date. After the rule is enforced in a member country, operators will have 3 months to comply with it.
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2018
- Messages
- 74
- Reactions
- 34
- Age
- 56
It’s not impossible that someone messed up, that someone felt confident that EASA wouldn’t implement in time (some learned members on this forum think the same - incorrectly obviously), or they simply didn’t consider it material. That both drones are just a few grams over would seem to indicate a mistake - whether in the specifications listings or in the design. Weird, but not unheard of. Maybe we are all just “holding it wrong”...
Again... the norm is 80J, the 900gram was proposed later as an alternative.
Even if that would be a problem, which is not, for DJI it only takes to release a battery with 5% less capacity and voila, there you get your 10 grams less.
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2018
- Messages
- 74
- Reactions
- 34
- Age
- 56
Like it or not, these are the new regulations in all of the EU - and the U.K. if Brexit occurs - from Q1 next year (if not earlier). Frankly I think the regulations are great, and will make drones more acceptable and easier to fly.
For me they're positive. I travel often across EU and it was a pain to check every individual local regulation.
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2018
- Messages
- 74
- Reactions
- 34
- Age
- 56
I agree on the battery, though it has to be an official DJI battery and not after market to comply. The 80J is a red herring, the MP2 is way over, regardless of what gnirtS says. There are some good threads here if you search for “drag coefficient” from a couple of flight engineers discussing this, and how, fundamentally, it is not trivial to calculate it. If you do however input a base DC into a TV calculator you will see the MP2, and in fact any current drone, will have a much, much higher energy transfer.
Sorry, but I think you got the wrong law.
As shown in the opinion sheet that you posted aswell: spring 2019 will be the soonest possible date to finish this new law.
And why should someone bother to get people to sign this campaign if it is all done already?
As shown in the opinion sheet that you posted aswell: spring 2019 will be the soonest possible date to finish this new law.
And why should someone bother to get people to sign this campaign if it is all done already?
Now look at the ACTUAL consultation document timeframe.
Really... Let's see your maths and working to back up that claim (especially given the M2 was way under that).
Unless you can provide that i'll just assume you're just making random crap up with no actual facts.
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2018
- Messages
- 74
- Reactions
- 34
- Age
- 56
OK you’re right. Let’s start with your math as you’re the one claiming it’s under 80J. It’s clearly not, but, let’s see.
https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/g/fil...ury-model-small-unmanned-aircraft-impacts.pdf
Looking at page 17 specifically, you'd need the mavic 2 to be travelling around 12-13m/s to impart 80J. The paper also states that 120J of energy transfer can lead to serious injury, and even death.
The mavic has a maximum speed of 20m/s. At maximum speed, and if it hit a person, there is a 200J transfer of energy. There is a 90% chance the person hit will die.
Simply put, you could kill someone if you really wanted to with a Mavic 2.
Just like how you can die walking on the road, being hit by a car, stroke, heart attack, random punch, falling glass from a building etc
All DJI needs to do is limit speed to meet the regulations
Looking at page 17 specifically, you'd need the mavic 2 to be travelling around 12-13m/s to impart 80J. The paper also states that 120J of energy transfer can lead to serious injury, and even death.
The mavic has a maximum speed of 20m/s. At maximum speed, and if it hit a person, there is a 200J transfer of energy. There is a 90% chance the person hit will die.
Simply put, you could kill someone if you really wanted to with a Mavic 2.
Just like how you can die walking on the road, being hit by a car, stroke, heart attack, random punch, falling glass from a building etc
All DJI needs to do is limit speed to meet the regulations
Similar threads
DJI Drone Deals
New Threads
-
-
-
-
Litchi needs permission to start and control phone conversations & record audio?!
- Started by Ronny St.
- Replies: 0
-
Forum statistics
