Demonstration of why Altitude Limits should be removed

[The Roach]

Started at ground level in the valley and flew to 2400 feet altitude yet was never more than ~400 off the ground.

PILOTS should be responsible for their actions, NOT DJI. DJI is missing a huge hole in their safety program. Buy maintaining strict control over the hardware, DJI is opening itself up to lawsuits. Why would one sue or charge only the pilot when DJI is publicly pushing flight restrictions in the name of public safety? I'd go after DJI for the failure of it's advertised safety features, no matter what mods are made to the craft. Coupled with the fact other drone manufactures are now selling drones with 'no geofencing' as a feature is proving DJI has done more harm than good to the industry.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[tcope]

I want a unicorn. Won't really make a difference if I ask people here if I should have one.

Do you think people want the limit removed? Do you think more people would buy a Phantom if it were removed? If so, why would DJI go out of their way to limit their sales.

There _is_ a reason.

My 2 cents (and it makes sense) is that its a liability issue. DJI needs to be able to show _some_ form of limitation when it comes to altitude. When you look into liability cases, which I'm sure DJI has, they need to show some limit.

Here is what you (and everyone) _should_ be considering... the limit could me _MUCH_ lower. Personally, I think you should be thankful it's not far lower.

To address the example you posted. I'm not sure how you flew 2400' above the take off point as th limit would be 1640.

You could attempt to sue DJI over the limit. You would lose. it's 100% within their right and there are a _ton_ of manufactures that do this. If you have a vehicle made in the past 20 years (or so), there is a rev limiter based on the orginal tire rating.

 

[Older_Man]

I don't agree with DJI's policy making on their software to fly my drone !.

 

[pbxcomm]

Coming from a family and friends as long time pilots.. WE are not "Pilots".. We (or most of us) flying drones have not had near the training that pilots (private or commercial) have had, if any at all. There are flight limitations and regulations for every aircraft that is airborne. Drones are no exception and are capable of flying at altitudes of small planes and commercial jets on approach or in hold patterns, other aircraft (including drones) should be held to the same restrictions, but, they (drones) are not. I acknowledge DJI's efforts. DJI attempts to be clear about safety to drone operators and understand that collisions are very real and inevitable. The years I have spent in aviation, I'm just beginning to understand airspace and regulations.

 

[tcope]

I don't agree with DJI's policy making on their software to fly my drone !.

Not sure that statement makes sense but... use Litchi or other software then. However, the altitude limitation will be the same.

 

[Fly Dawg]

I don't agree with DJI's policy making on their software to fly my drone !.

In fairness to that remark, neither do I. However, all of these implementations, if you will, are all in fact safety related. And do you know who caused all the ruckus? Reckless flyers. If it were not for those operators who continually flew their aircraft at un-safe altitudes, or any other un-safe manner, such as around airports, these implementations would never exist. And for that reason, we are now, paying the piper, so to speak, for other's who deemed it necessary to take unnecessary risks in flying just because they could. Why do you think their are speed limits on highways and roads? Safety. Due to reckless drivers. It's basically the same effect and outcome here as well. As long as "Operators" ( And notice I did not use the term Pilot) continue to operate their aircraft in a reckless manner, these restrictions will continue to worsen, and very soon the FAA itself will have no option but to impose it's own "Legal" and "Mandatory" restrictions for operators and their aircraft, which will include hobby fliers. So, in a nutshell, just get used to it. There is nothing you can do, except to follow current guidelines and fly safe.

 

[pbxcomm]

That's correct.. If you believe DJI has unfair imposed rules and restrictions, wait until the FAA gets ahold of this. We may be limited to flying below any aircraft, or below 200'.

 

[Older_Man]

I want a unicorn. Won't really make a difference if I ask people here if I should have one.

Do you think people want the limit removed? Do you think more people would buy a Phantom if it were removed? If so, why would DJI go out of their way to limit their sales.

There _is_ a reason.

My 2 cents (and it makes sense) is that its a liability issue. DJI needs to be able to show _some_ form of limitation when it comes to altitude. When you look into liability cases, which I'm sure DJI has, they need to show some limit.

Here is what you (and everyone) _should_ be considering... the limit could me _MUCH_ lower. Personally, I think you should be thankful it's not far lower.

To address the example you posted. I'm not sure how you flew 2400' above the take off point as th limit would be 1640.

Just to be fair and honest and this mostly just for me but I would be fine with a 400 ft. max limit and a max distance of 1/2 mi for my P3S.Now,if you have a P3A or P3P or greater then the distance should be as advertised instead if updating the software and limiting the range !.
If you are on vacation or in the mountains and turn on your quad copter then it should be smart enough to set at 0 ft. even tho you might be 900 ft elevation.That would still give you 400 ft. to fly at that location.

 

[sar104]

If you are on vacation or in the mountains and turn on your quad copter then it should be smart enough to set at 0 ft. even tho you might be 900 ft elevation.That would still give you 400 ft. to fly at that location.

And that is exactly what it does. At 7500 ft in my case. Did you think that those of us who live in the mountains can't fly at all?

 

[Older_Man]

And that is exactly what it does. At 7500 ft in my case. Did you think that those of us who live in the mountains can't fly at all?

I didn't say that,what I meant was you shouldn't have to recalibrate anything traveling through the mountains unless your prompted to do so.

 

[pbxcomm]

I too am good with 400' @ 1/2 mi. out.. However, I like the challenge and 1600' is definitely on my bucket list and/or 4 mi. out as well. In the meantime, I'm searching for such a location to do this safely and return the aircraft in one piece, also I admit I'm not at that skill level as yet.

 

[sar104]

I didn't say that,what I meant was you shouldn't have to recalibrate anything traveling through the mountains unless your prompted to do so.

You don't have to recalibrate anything. I have no idea what you are referring to.

 

[The Roach]

I want a unicorn. Won't really make a difference if I ask people here if I should have one.

Do you think people want the limit removed? Do you think more people would buy a Phantom if it were removed? If so, why would DJI go out of their way to limit their sales.

There _is_ a reason.

My 2 cents (and it makes sense) is that its a liability issue. DJI needs to be able to show _some_ form of limitation when it comes to altitude. When you look into liability cases, which I'm sure DJI has, they need to show some limit.

Here is what you (and everyone) _should_ be considering... the limit could me _MUCH_ lower. Personally, I think you should be thankful it's not far lower.

To address the example you posted. I'm not sure how you flew 2400' above the take off point as th limit would be 1640.

You could attempt to sue DJI over the limit. You would lose. it's 100% within their right and there are a _ton_ of manufactures that do this. If you have a vehicle made in the past 20 years (or so), there is a rev limiter based on the orginal tire rating.

I can't talk about how I got to 2400 feet here, just know that I did. I'm one that believes in personal responsibility and believe this should be enforced by the justice system. Harsh judgements are the key, not manufacturer interference. As for car manufacturers, limiting speed based on tire capability does make sense - it will prevent a failure of the hardware when pushed past the maximum. Altitude restrictions don't prevent hardware failures. I do however respect your opinion.

 

[Nick Dalton]

Could it be that ground level does NOT mean the same as sea level?
I seem to remember having to set my altimeter to zero before every take off. (I haven't flown fixed, or rotary wing since I left the army 25 years ago. [emoji3])
200 feet above a mountain is a different hight than 200 feet above a beach.. [emoji23]

 

[sar104]

Could it be that ground level does NOT mean the same as sea level?
I seem to remember having to set my altimeter to zero before every take off. (I haven't flown fixed, or rotary wing since I left the army 25 years ago. [emoji3])
200 feet above a mountain is a different hight than 200 feet above a beach.. [emoji23]

Could what be that ground level and sea level are different?

 

[Fly Dawg]

After thinking about the opening statement in this thread, my curiosity has grown a bit.
"Started at ground level in the valley and flew to 2400 feet altitude yet was never more than ~400 off the ground."
Complicating matters even more by this:
"I can't talk about how I got to 2400 feet here, just know that I did."

The first statement, IMO, could only occur if the AC were following an incline up hill. Yes, the AC could be less than 400FT from the ground, in reference to the hillside incline, but not from referencing the takeoff point in the valley.

The second statement, seems to be "secretive" and I will just leave that one alone.

 

[pbxcomm]

If I recall, the Phantom will control its headings and altitude by barometer (failsafe) as well as GPS.. Your aircraft setting to zero at pre-flight is a base, the correct altitude during and post takeoff would be corrected per barometer (pressure) or air pressure. This maybe why the Phantom is reading a different altitude than expected when physically at a higher altitude (Barometer/pressure vs GPS).

 

[Fly Dawg]

If I recall, the Phantom will control its headings and altitude by barometer (failsafe) as well as GPS

Altitude= Barometer
Location= GPS
Heading = Compass

The barometer is not very accurate and can be quite a bit off at times. GPS and Compass determine location and headings.

 

[The Roach]

After thinking about the opening statement in this thread, my curiosity has grown a bit.
"Started at ground level in the valley and flew to 2400 feet altitude yet was never more than ~400 off the ground."
Complicating matters even more by this:
"I can't talk about how I got to 2400 feet here, just know that I did."

The first statement, IMO, could only occur if the AC were following an incline up hill. Yes, the AC could be less than 400FT from the ground, in reference to the hillside incline, but not from referencing the takeoff point in the valley.

The second statement, seems to be "secretive" and I will just leave that one alone. View attachment 87222

You are correct, the AC was following an uphill incline. That was the point I was attempting to make, sorry for the confusion. The second statement isn't "secretive", it's just that forum rules prohibit discussing AC mods.

 

[Fly Dawg]

The second statement isn't "secretive", it's just that forum rules prohibit discussing AC mods.

If I am not mistaken, the only mod's that are prohibited are "Hacking", Software or Firmware of the systems. Antenna mods and such are acceptable.