RC-Hangout

Well.. Another multirotor has made the evening news.. Some idiot claims he wanted to test his DJI in bad condition.. Loosing control and crashing it on the White House lawn. Fellas... They r gonna screw us... The majority of us fly'n with common sense are gonna be screwed by the powers that be due to the handful of idiots out there. Catch the clip of the news broadcast via MSNBC Nightly News with Brian Williams.

I really don't even know what to say about this...

All I can say is lets see how the plays out. I hope its seen as an isolated event and not the hobby as a whole.

Pffffff some people just don't have a brain.

Ever watch "wag the dog" ? The president wants to pass drone legislation. Kind of convenient a government employee happens to crash into an insignificant tree outside the white house. Perfect timing??

This morning the News reported he was with security and was drinking.

Great that's all we need now. A drunk inexperienced pilot.

Never heard about it over the pond:)

Does it surprise anyone that the machine in question is once again a DJI Phantom?

Nope:) i think DJI is the Ford Escort of the heli world:)

Stambo wrote:Does it surprise anyone that the machine in question is once again a DJI Phantom?

I have a phantom also. It is just so convenient and I get 15-20 min flight time with a gopro attached. It's easy to pack up and take with me on trips.

Maybe they should not sell them as RTF after the 180 sized quads. The build it barrier would prevent a lot of entry from unskilled users.

xokia wrote:

Stambo wrote:Does it surprise anyone that the machine in question is once again a DJI Phantom?

I have a phantom also. It is just so convenient and I get 15-20 min flight time with a gopro attached. It's easy to pack up and take with me on trips.

Maybe they should not sell them as RTF after the 180 sized quads. The build it barrier would prevent a lot of entry from unskilled users.

It seems the one in question didn't even belong to the guy that flew it and he was drinking.
The owner should be prosecuted also for letting him do it.
DJI are said to be releasing a mandatory firmware update to prevent flight in the DC no fly zone.
A lot of good that will do if you disable the GPS.
You can legislate all you want but you will never stop idiots or criminals, only disadvantage the already (mostly) law abiding hobbyist.

Werd!

Stambo wrote:

xokia wrote:

Stambo wrote:DJI are said to be releasing a mandatory firmware update to prevent flight in the DC no fly zone.
A lot of good that will do if you disable the GPS.
You can legislate all you want but you will never stop idiots or criminals, only disadvantage the already (mostly) law abiding hobbyist.

How do you enforce a mandatory update? I am still running the original firmware that came with my quad. So I don't even have the airport restrictions that were put in place. I don't usually update things unless there is a reason to update. My quad flies fine I see no reason to update.

I assume that this will be loaded from production and if you update at all it will be the latest rather than choosing from available firmwares.
It will never affect me as I have nothing Naza.
In my opinion Naza stuff is over hyped and over priced.

Way I understood it from the FliteTest review of the Inspire is that it more or less requires you to plug it in periodically for firmware update check. If you skip the check too long it will not take off.

I have a hard time believing it actually will ground itself or that they think they can get away with such a "feature". Particularly on something so expensive. If it is the case, though, I expect there will be hacked software out there so you can plug the unit into the computer and it will fake it into thinking an update check was done.

pvolcko wrote:Way I understood it from the FliteTest review of the Inspire is that it more or less requires you to plug it in periodically for firmware update check. If you skip the check too long it will not take off.

I have a hard time believing it actually will ground itself or that they think they can get away with such a "feature". Particularly on something so expensive. If it is the case, though, I expect there will be hacked software out there so you can plug the unit into the computer and it will fake it into thinking an update check was done.

Doesn't work that way currently. Maybe future revisions of the FW will do this but you then would have a hard time convincing people who already have a functioning quad to do an update to get a down grade.

I don't know how much good it will do. So you prevent a stupid person from doing one stupid thing. What is to prevent them from doing some other stupid thing? No matter how hard you try the world will produce a better idiot.

I really think any GPS based quad, plane, helicopter....whatever should require the user to build it themselves. This raises the bar and the complexity out of the relm of the average user. It decreases sales but is more responsible IMO. If they want to increase sales they can create smaller non GPS based quads to sell to the average consumer. I know they could "pay" someone to build it but not everyone will do that. The purpose is to only raise the bar for entry.

xokia wrote:No matter how hard you try the world will produce a better idiot.

The whole problem summed up in one short sentence.

xokia wrote:I really think any GPS based quad, plane, helicopter....whatever should require the user to build it themselves. This raises the bar and the complexity out of the relm of the average user. It decreases sales but is more responsible IMO. If they want to increase sales they can create smaller non GPS based quads to sell to the average consumer. I know they could "pay" someone to build it but not everyone will do that. The purpose is to only raise the bar for entry.

Although I agree with you too an extent, it's too late.
Unfortunately Pandoras box is already open. There are already too many of these things out there to close it now.
I think perhaps a cheap and reasonably easy to obtain licencing system for anything over a certain weight, one that requires enough intelligence to pass a simple test.
Also the requirement to have your licence number on your aircraft.
Two things that are very easy for law enforcement to verify should they so desire.
Sure it would cost us a bit extra but it would make it a little more difficult for the idiots to get into the air.
Perhaps even a requirement for retailers to see the licence before selling the aircraft.
This is not going to do much to online sales but I suggest that a lot of the idiots would buy these as an impulse buy.
They see it, they want it, the buy it and they fly it.
All the while having absolutely zero knowledge of how it works and what to do when it goes wrong.
Let alone what the rules are regarding it's use.

Stambo wrote: Also the requirement to have your licence number on your aircraft.

How big of letter and placed where? It is not so simple. Take a stand up Jet Ski for instance the law requires the letters be the same size as what is required for a full size boat. You can't wrap around anything. This makes it difficult as a jet ski hull is small in comparison. A quad is even smaller at 300FT no one will be able to read them.

Stambo wrote: I think perhaps a cheap and reasonably easy to obtain licencing system for anything over a certain weight, one that requires enough intelligence to pass a simple test.

No thanks......gooberment will just see it as a way to tax you. Hunting in the US has become a rich mans sport because of this very thing.

Here in Oregon you used to not need a boating license to operate a jet ski. Now they require it and its a lifetime license with no fee they just want you to pass a test. Sure makes sense does absolutely no good though. Same knuckle heads do the same things.

I would require anything beyond a 300 sized machine to be in kit form. Then set some reasonable safety rules people can follow. Fine them if they don't.
Some of the current rules I don't like. Like the requirement to notify an airport tower if you are within 5 miles of an airport. Ok sure if it's a major airport everyone knows where those are. But I would guess most people do not know where ALL the smaller airports are there are literally thousands of them. Plus there is no method to contact these guys and they would probably get annoyed if I were calling them everyday. If a plane is flying at 100 ft well their are bigger issues then my helicopter at that point.

The idea of the licence number is more if you crash it in to something (or land it on the whitehouse lawn) it can be traced back to it's owner.
I tend to put my cell phone number on mine so if I lose it, and someone honest finds it, I have a chance of getting it back.