vertical limit dji mavic pro 2

[jagraphics]

Drone police are gonna get me now ! Oh no!

Just THE police... Airspace is controlled. Some areas more than others. However if you wish to drive a car or fly an aircraft there will be rules. This is true globally.

Do remember that in some remore/wild areas whilst there is a lot less air traffic there is no reason why a private pilot might not be flying there in his Bell helicopter, Cessna aircraft or Mavic UAV. The thing is the first two will register their flight plans and know about each other. In the UK UAV pilots are highly recommended to register all flights. ( expect from this time next year it will be mandatory to register UAV flights.

As to altitude there are many videos of Mavic's going to 7 to 8,000 feet above sea level. (all the "max hight" videos I have seen videos of are on the coast and over water. )

 

[Vegasdad]

Hold on popcorn is almost done...

 

[Juliis717]

Hold on popcorn is almost done...

I want some! Takes for ever for the drone to return home from 1647ft altitude. I'm hungry

 

[paulatkin73]

I want some! Takes for ever for the drone to return home from 1647ft altitude. I'm hungry

for that you need to use assistant 1.1.2, as explained in other thread and alter the g_config_mode_sport_cfg_vert_vel_down param.

 

[Jackcutrone]

I went to the Nolimitdronz website. Apparently for $35 you can get their firmware which removes DJI’s limits on where, how high, how fast, etc you can fly your drone. They offer free software for SAR operations and say it speeds getting the bird in the air instead of waiting for DJI to approve your exemption request.

Intriguing. But why would I need that? Perhaps if I got involved in SAR work but I am not though perhaps someday. I am not the Drone police though I admit to a tendency in the direction. The op may have a legitimate need for the nolimits firmware and I sympathize with him. And there are many and probably most drone pilots who would use the added capabilities responsibly and thoughtfully. Unfortunately there are too many who would not. And it is always the latter who cause the problems for the rest of us. That is the quandary.

I suppose one solution would be to have laws that are so restrictive that only a limited number of drone pilot would be authorized to fly but that is neither a desirable nor feasible restriction. So we will just have to go on as we are with most of us being responsible but getting labeled because of those who do dumb things with their drones.

 

[Ken K]

Max altitude over my neighborhood. Wish it went higher also. Mostly All my neighbors want a copy too.
View attachment 62915

If you're taking photos, rather than video, why not take several overlapping (approx 30%) shots and stitch them?

 

[Peter Hughes]

I can understand that some people will want to experiment and push the limit. they're not malicious people. Surly the gub'mint will make allowances for safe experimentation.

What do you mean by “Safe experimentation “?

Surely Air space is divided up into height zones for a reason and manned aircraft need to know that it should be safe to fly above 120 meters without the risk of someone practicing “Safe experimentation “

 

[JDawg]

What do you mean by “Safe experimentation “?

Surely Air space is divided up into height zones for a reason and manned aircraft need to know that it should be safe to fly above 120 meters without the risk of someone practicing “Safe experimentation “

There is no height limit in the US except around airports. This has been discussed in 20 differnt threads the last few months.

 

[davemgood]

What do you mean by “Safe experimentation “?

Surely Air space is divided up into height zones for a reason and manned aircraft need to know that it should be safe to fly above 120 meters without the risk of someone practicing “Safe experimentation “

I may not have been clear. Like the guy said about scaling a mountain face (climbers, maybe) that is greater than the approved limit. Maybe the word 'safe' was not the correct word to use. I see what you mean. QUESTION: With me being registered with the FAA, could I get a waiver if the flight is considered safe and the property owner/guardian approves? The only other alternative is to get a commercial license from the FAA, even if I don't want to go in business and proffer that I'm qe qualified- and the property owner's approval. Thoughts?

 

[philippecaron]

en France suivant on est Limite à 150 m (ailleurs) et ailleurs à 100 m ou 50 m suivant zones
.
IL est aussi Interdit de VOLER Au dessus des villes villages et d'habitations privées. Pour des raisons de sécurité et de vie privée, cela me semble raisonnable.
Mais à force de faire n'importe quoi (même si les cas sont peu nombreux) la législation se durcira.

 

[jagraphics]

en France suivant on est Limite à 150 m (ailleurs) et ailleurs à 100 m ou 50 m suivant zones
.
IL est aussi Interdit de VOLER Au dessus des villes villages et d'habitations privées. Pour des raisons de sécurité et de vie privée, cela me semble raisonnable.
Mais à force de faire n'importe quoi (même si les cas sont peu nombreux) la législation se durcira.

Internationally the language used for Civil Aviation is English (even the Americans make a passable attempt at it )
Seriosuly you will get a better responce if you use English.

 

[BrucenYvette]

I know that many folks simply want to fly above the regulated 400' AGL regardless of rules and safety and that this can be detrimental to both safety of others and our freedom thus far to fly.

However, it is worth noting for those who have justifiable reasons for flying above 400' AGL that, my understanding of 14 CFR Part 107.51, one can fly higher than 400 feet AGL in order to clear an object or structure. For example, if I'm flying over a tower that is 500 AGL tall, FAA allows me to fly my drone a max altitude of 900' AGL above the structure's immediate uppermost limit. This regulation applies to commercial flight of a drone, so I'm assuming that the hobbyist (which I am) who is NOT under 107 regulation would also be permitted to fly above 400' AGL under same guidelines.

So, DJI may be creating an issue for a legitimate need to exceed 500' AGL in the effort to "legislate" safety because of the few who are going to disregard the safety issues.

 

[Ken K]

en France suivant on est Limite à 150 m (ailleurs) et ailleurs à 100 m ou 50 m suivant zones
.
IL est aussi Interdit de VOLER Au dessus des villes villages et d'habitations privées. Pour des raisons de sécurité et de vie privée, cela me semble raisonnable.
Mais à force de faire n'importe quoi (même si les cas sont peu nombreux) la législation se durcira.

In English for our French friend:

"In France, the limit is 150 m (elsewhere) and elsewhere, the limit is 100 m or 50 m depending on the zone. .

It is also forbidden to fly over villages, towns and private dwellings. For security and privacy reasons, this seems reasonable.
But by doing ignoring the rules (even if the cases are few) the legislation will be toughened ."

Not sure what is meant by "elsewhere" so that's a direct translation.

 

[paulatkin73]

If you follow the news - the state of OK plans to do a similar legislation to outlaw any amateurs flights over rural private property.

 

[Meta4]

So, DJI may be creating an issue for a legitimate need to exceed 500' AGL in the effort to "legislate" safety because of the few who are going to disregard the safety issues.

I've read it three times and can't work out what it is that you are saying.
Can you spell that out in different words?

 

[FoxhallGH]

is there a way to over ride the dji 500m vertical limit?

This is going a bit strange ... In this case, the OP @Mark Lloyd - has a valid reason for exceeding 400' / 120m altitude ceilings. Maybe I'm not correct regarding other countries, but here in the UK, if you wanted to ascend a 500 metre mountainside, as long as you can a) remain within a perpendicular distance of 400' / 120 m from that mountainside, and b) retain Visual Line of Sight [VLOS] on the Drone - then ascending to / through 500 metres is all within the rules. I would suggest that in this case, the problem is not going to be about exceeding 500 m vertical above the take-off point, but in maintaining VLOS on the drone!

 

[jagraphics]

This is going a bit strange ... In this case, the OP @Mark Lloyd - has a valid reason for exceeding 400' / 120m altitude ceilings. Maybe I'm not correct regarding other countries, but here in the UK, if you wanted to ascend a 500 metre mountainside, as long as you can a) remain within a perpendicular distance of 400' / 120 m from that mountainside, and b) retain Visual Line of Sight [VLOS] on the Drone - then ascending to / through 500 metres is all within the rules. I would suggest that in this case, the problem is not going to be about exceeding 500 m vertical above the take-off point, but in maintaining VLOS on the drone!

I can see a problemn where you are using a drone to film climbers on a vertical rock face >400 feet. The drone might be 100 feet below the top of the cliff face and 20 feet from it but be 600 feet above ground level at the base of the cliff.

No matter how you write the rules some one will always find a ligitimate exception. Though base jumpers might argue if they decide to drop off from the top.
BTW do base jumpers have to notify anyone of their "flights" especially with the squirrel suites?

 

[kilomikebravo]

The thing is the first two will register their flight plans

FTR, that is not necessarily true. The only "flight plans" that MUST be filed are IFR flight plans, (Instrument Flight Rules.) Both the Cessna and the helo could be VFR traffic (Visual Flight Rules) where no flight plan is required.

 

[JDawg]

I know that many folks simply want to fly above the regulated 400' AGL regardless of rules and safety and that this can be detrimental to both safety of others and our freedom thus far to fly.

However, it is worth noting for those who have justifiable reasons for flying above 400' AGL that, my understanding of 14 CFR Part 107.51, one can fly higher than 400 feet AGL in order to clear an object or structure. For example, if I'm flying over a tower that is 500 AGL tall, FAA allows me to fly my drone a max altitude of 900' AGL above the structure's immediate uppermost limit. This regulation applies to commercial flight of a drone, so I'm assuming that the hobbyist (which I am) who is NOT under 107 regulation would also be permitted to fly above 400' AGL under same guidelines.

So, DJI may be creating an issue for a legitimate need to exceed 500' AGL in the effort to "legislate" safety because of the few who are going to disregard the safety issues.

"I know that many folks simply want to fly above the regulated 400' AGL regardless of rules "

Except this rule does not exist (for the US) for recreational fliers regardless of how many times the misinformed post it.

 

[jagraphics]

"I know that many folks simply want to fly above the regulated 400' AGL regardless of rules "

Except this rule does not exist (for the US) for recreational fliers regardless of how many times the misinformed post it.

That seems a little strange that registered, qualifed and (I assume) insured UAV pilots can not fly over 400 feet but unregistered, uninsured and untrained UAV pilots can
I appreciate it is difficult to prove a negative but do you have any evidence for this? I assume there is a link somewhere that will confirm this.

Not arguing as I am not likley to fly a consumer drone in the USA I am just intrested in what seems to be an anomaly.