This reckless drone flying has to stop...

[MrDanner]

Colorado fire officials urging people to stop flying drones near wildfires

This is exactly why we see more and more regulations and our hobby/businesses are increasingly frowned upon by the public. This is reckless and stupid and I hope these people are caught and fined.

 

[DroningOn]

This is exactly why we see more and more regulations.

There are ALREADY clear and unambiguous “regulations” prohibiting this behavior..... how would adding more help? Should they add a sentence to the end of the existing law “and we mean it this time!!!”
Problem solved

 

[mr.bill]

All the laws and awareness and yet people still drink and drive. You can’t fix stupid.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Agree, you can't fix stupid but I think tripling the amount of fines or mandatory jail time for disrupting firefighting operations might somewhat mitigate it.

 

[EdM]

How about they just go out and catch a few and make examples out of them. If it's such a large ongoing problem it would seem it would be a relatively easy thing for them to do.

 

[Dizzy1971]

Not sure how much of a problem it is here in Canada,but the law is very clear in these situations. I know what people are getting at when they talk about these folks who go against the law and fly in restricted areas,but as mentioned, there ARE already laws/regulations on the books. So it’s just up to enforcement people to catch these clowns and throw the book in order to make the point. If we keep making more and more regulation,without enforcing what we have,then we end up with no hobby at all.

 

[DroningOn]

..

 

[DroningOn]

are you on an android device? This is at least the second time your post looks like it belongs in a different thread.
Did you mean to put this post in this thread?

Not on android but yes, some wires got crossed. This thread came up as an alert of a response on the woman that was hit in the face with a drone. I just went back and checked it again and link brought me here again. My apologies. XenForo strikes again

 

[MavicCF]

I live in Colorado (actually near a large wildfire in Durango) and last year we had problems with this as well. One tanker actually had to jettison a full load of retardant due to drone activity in its intended drop zone (the tanker couldn't land with the retardant for safety reasons). Apparently similar things were going on this year, so DJI stepped in and put a large NFZ (probably around 40 miles in diameter) around the fire. It is somewhat annoying as I am about 30 miles from the fire, but I get the point. This is probably the most effective means of dealing with idiots.

 

[macoman]

Yup, sorry folks if some people don't like this but I think what DJI is doing making a NFZ in sensitive areas is a great tool to combat idiots that don't follow the law.

 

[Thwyllo]

Yup, sorry folks if some people don't like this but I think what DJI is doing making a NFZ in sensitive areas is a great tool to combat idiots that don't follow the law.

And it's exactly that sort of quick response that makes me think we're going to be seeing more manufacturer-installed restrictions in future as they seek to keep their current markets open.

 

[lmel2005]

It's not logical, to make "regulations" in order to prevent idiots' acts.

If it is dangerous (for someone) to fly within an area, it is dangerous even if the pilot is clever and responsible.

If we discuss dji's "regulations" I think that regulations and laws are not a company's responsibility. It is very dangerous for people, if we let them take the law in their hands.

Organized communities have (or must have) the mechanism to prevent someone, from disturbing firemen while a fire is in progress. DJI (and every DJI) shouldn't have to do with this.

We must decide, if we want fair laws and democratically elected authorities, or we want DJI to have the ability to force land every drone they want, whenever they want, car companies turn of our cars, and telephone makers mute our phones. It's not simple and it's not an "idiots'" matter.

Just my thoughts. I'm not a law expert.

 

[Thwyllo]

You aren't wrong but you're not entirely right.

There are countries where drones are 100% banned and others where their use is severely curtailed. That has restricted or closed those markets to DJI. If they introduced a model in Morocco, for example, that was incapable of flying higher than say 100 feet or 300 feet away, coupled with software controls (NFZs etc..) that prevented their use near or over any building or built-up area, it's just possible the authorities might reopen the market to them.

In other countries they are struggling to ensure they aren't seen as a danger of any sort, hence their rapid response to this issue. I mean think about it, since when did anyone in China give a flying toss about what people did with their products?

This is about nothing more than protecting their own interests and staving off the likelihood of a ban or restrictions that would throttle their business, so they will always try and remain in pace with, if not ahead of, administrative opinions and policies.

Think too what a marvellous source of intelligence all this NFZ data is to them (or "other parties") I'm sure a lot of it is public domain but hey, having detailed mapping like that, constantly updated....

It's a bit like when Huawei offered to install a complete WiFi infrastructure on the London Underground for the Olympics... completely free of charge.... In five minutes they'd have had every corporate network in the city under surveillance!

 

[lmel2005]

You aren't wrong but you're not entirely right.

There are countries where drones are 100% banned and others where their use is severely curtailed. That has restricted or closed those markets to DJI. If they introduced a model in Morocco, for example, that was incapable of flying higher than say 100 feet or 300 feet away, coupled with software controls (NFZs etc..) that prevented their use near or over any building or built-up area, it's just possible the authorities might reopen the market to them.

In other countries they are struggling to ensure they aren't seen as a danger of any sort, hence their rapid response to this issue. I mean think about it, since when did anyone in China give a flying toss about what people did with their products?

This is about nothing more than protecting their own interests and staving off the likelihood of a ban or restrictions that would throttle their business, so they will always try and remain in pace with, if not ahead of, administrative opinions and policies.

Think too what a marvellous source of intelligence all this NFZ data is to them (or "other parties") I'm sure a lot of it is public domain but hey, having detailed mapping like that, constantly updated....

It's a bit like when Huawei offered to install a complete WiFi infrastructure on the London Underground for the Olympics... completely free of charge.... In five minutes they'd have had every corporate network in the city under surveillance!

Of course they protect their investment, and they care about their profits. There's no doubt.

But I personally don't like their policies.

If some government bans their drones, they shouldn't sel drones to that country, and it is upon citizens to decide if they want this government.

Authorities in every country must have control upon law making and law enforcement. Do they have control upon Dji's "regulations"?

I don't like buying a product, pay for it, and use it when and where the industry wants. We have laws about everything, and authorities controlled by communities.

And I didn't mention yet, the cost of all these restrictions updating, and who pays for it.

 

[Thwyllo]

None of it is about "what the industry wants", it's about what the government wants and therefore what DJI and similar companies give to them. Nobody cares if the consumer doesn't like it, if it gets their drones sold in that market then it's all good.

I'll repeat what I said, if you think DJI gives a toss about what you do with their drones you're fooling yourself. They only do what's right for them to be allowed to keep selling product and part of that is appearing to be a "responsible citizen".

Who's paying? You mostly, and the government likes that too. All they have to do is give DJI an updated flight restriction map, together with any new regulations they want to implement in terms of, say, distance, height, speed etc.., and DJI pumps out another update. Or worse still, produces a next generation of product with more restrictions built in. I foresee that happening increasingly, especially in the consumer market.

 

[lmel2005]

None of it is about "what the industry wants", it's about what the government wants and therefore what DJI and similar companies give to them. Nobody cares if the consumer doesn't like it, if it gets their drones sold in that market then it's all good.

What about the rest of industry, making drones?
Governments don't care about them, or they are banned from the markets?

250 governments gathered together, and gave dji (and only dji) an order to "regulate" my drone? Don't think so.

In every country, there are laws. I haven't hear of a single country, where dji (not xiaomi, or parrot, or eutel etc) was banned, because they didn't comply with a law saying "dji (not other manufacturers), must restrict their products, according the regulations we apply in our country".

In any case, I do not have to be happy because some chinese industry (for example), decided to do the police officer in my country, according to the instructions of the North Korean government (for example too).

 

[Thwyllo]

Come back when you have half a clue about how business - and Chinese companies especially - works and we'll discuss all the things you clearly don't understand.

By the way, there are only 193 (or 195 depending how you look at it) countries in the world, not 250 - so a basic knowledge of geography would probably help as well.

 

[Odom1957]

The real problem is not the drones, people flying them, no fly zones, etc. The problem is that Law Enforcement doesn't do anything about it. The same goes for underage drinking, hazing in colleges, left lane drivers, cops who are above the law, could go on for days!

Catch the people who are breaking the law, punish them, then it will stop.

 

[Thwyllo]

The real problem is not the drones, people flying them, no fly zones, etc. The problem is that Law Enforcement doesn't do anything about it. The same goes for underage drinking, hazing in colleges, left lane drivers, cops who are above the law, could go on for days!

Catch the people who are breaking the law, punish them, then it will stop.

Well it IS the people flying them isn't it....and like a lot of other things in life, zero tolerance would require massive resources and would very quickly clog up the system. A pragmatic, reasonable approach would be much more beneficial.

 

[lmel2005]

Come back when you have half a clue about how business - and Chinese companies especially - works and we'll discuss all the things you clearly don't understand.

Xiaomi isn't an chinese company? Do you have a clue about that?

I said "I don't like", not "I don't understand". No "clues" will make me happy with dark and unclear industry policies.

And of course, you don't know me (do you?), you don't know what clues I have about business, and my knowledge on everything.
I said my opinion, and didn't judge you (or anyone else), even if I understand what you "clearly" believe about the subject.