Thread Tools
Oct 10, 2016, 08:22 PM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by VintageSlots
When I go out to the airport and fly a Cessna 182, I don't need to get approval from Cessna.

I have a pilot's license. With that comes responsibility and the FAA assumes I will fly responsibly.

To get a Part 107 drone license one has to take a pretty extensive test.

Too bad, DJI doesn't allow people who have the certification from the FAA to not have to fly their drone without "just sending an email and two days time".
Or 8 - 10 days while they are on vacation?
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Oct 10, 2016, 10:34 PM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by scissortail
Or 8 - 10 days while they are on vacation?
Well, don't fly when they are on vacation

Problem solved.
Oct 10, 2016, 10:35 PM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by scissortail
Or 8 - 10 days while they are on vacation?
Well, don't fly when they are on vacation

Problem solved.
Oct 11, 2016, 07:34 AM
Multirotors are models too!
Quote:
Originally Posted by flitelab
A pilot in the eyes of the law that has already granted us access to airspace DJI blocks us from.

Talking in circles to justify GEO.

There needs to be a full opt out option to give operator full control responsibility and liability where it should be.
BEST POST in a long while in this thread!!
Latest blog entry: Test entry
Oct 11, 2016, 07:36 AM
Multirotors are models too!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tahoe Ed
Can I be perfectly clear. We do not sponsor Casey. I guess that I have to say that over and over. He is sponsored by someone other than DJI. We do not condone his flying activities as has been previously mentioned. We recommend that our users fly according to the FAA's recommendations. His loss had nothing to do with Geo. Of that I can guarantee you. We appreciate his support of DJI's products and are sorry for his loss.
Is DJI giving him product?
Latest blog entry: Test entry
Oct 11, 2016, 08:11 AM
Cats and robots DON'T mix well
AVCampos's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty105
Is DJI giving him product?
The answer to your question is in the very post you quoted.
Oct 11, 2016, 08:45 AM
Multirotors are models too!
Quote:
Originally Posted by AVCampos
The answer to your question is in the very post you quoted.
OK, then who is giving him multiple P3s, P4s and potentially a 2nd (and probably more) Mavics?

If it is a marketing company hired by DJI, then DJI needs to pull their plug.

If he is buying them himself, which is currently impossible with the Mavic, then someone needs to pull Casey's plug.

Whether he is directly hired or not, he is setting a horrible example for potential DJI owners.
Latest blog entry: Test entry
Oct 11, 2016, 08:58 AM
What goes up, hopefully lands!
Repaid1's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty105
OK, then who is giving him multiple P3s, P4s and potentially a 2nd (and probably more) Mavics?

If it is a marketing company hired by DJI, then DJI needs to pull their plug.

If he is buying them himself, which is currently impossible with the Mavic, then someone needs to pull Casey's plug.

Whether he is directly hired or not, he is setting a horrible example for potential DJI owners.
He never had a P3 that I have seen. He had 3 P4's which "might" have been provided originally by "true" DJI. There is some question when he was given 3 more P4's and he decided to give them away to viewers as to the source be it dealer or DJI direct. From then on he has bought 4 P4's himself directly from Apple store with his own credit card. The Mavic came from someone in the industry with ties to DJI enough to get one and they gave it to him. Just like the video recently for the DJI store there in NYC. Certain places have them what they do with them is up to them as it seems DJI isn't asking for them back (heck maybe they are? )

When he says DJI, it seems more than likely he is meaning who he get's DJI products from and not the actual company it self. So when he says called his DJI people does not mean he is dealing direct with DJI, just a distributor/LHS. As mentioned he was told by his "DJI people" that he isn't getting another sample as they probably don't have access to one.

He now has to either wait for that source to get a shipment of the first batch, or go to the Apple store and buy his own. When somebody gives you a gift, are you required to not re-gift it..or just it's bad protocol?

That's what I have followed watching his Vlog at this point. I do know that when he got the Mavic and didn't know how to focus it DJI proper did contact him about the issue as it was being critiqued wrongly, other than that they are aware of his exploits, but it's not like they can tell the vendors or the Apple store he is on a DNS (Do Not Sell) list or anything that absurd that people are suggesting. However they can strongly discourage them from giving him free stuff or risk losing that for themselves, and it's pretty much evident that they might be leaning that way.
Last edited by Repaid1; Oct 11, 2016 at 09:11 AM.
Oct 11, 2016, 10:54 AM
DJI Enterprise Support Manager
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty105
Is DJI giving him product?
No, we are not.
Oct 11, 2016, 11:13 AM
What goes up, hopefully lands!
Repaid1's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tahoe Ed
No, we are not.
Then can I have some instead???
Oct 11, 2016, 11:35 AM
DJI Enterprise Support Manager
Quote:
Originally Posted by Repaid1
Then can I have some instead???
Only if you get 5 million followers and fly in a responsible manner.
Oct 11, 2016, 11:44 AM
What goes up, hopefully lands!
Repaid1's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tahoe Ed
Only if you get 5 million followers and fly in a responsible manner.
Well, I got half of it covered now 5 million ya say? hmmmmm.
Last edited by Repaid1; Oct 11, 2016 at 11:51 AM.
Oct 11, 2016, 11:48 AM
Registered User
Av8Chuck's Avatar
Wow, and Bill Clinton didn't have sexual relations with that woman. Its all in how you define what the word"is" is.

I realize many on this forum won't remember that, but your attempts to provide plausible deniability for DJI are about as honest and effective.

No one has suggested that there should be a DNS list, they just pointed out the dichotomy between Casey and GEO. I believe the first drone Casey reviewed that flew away and crashed on the roof was a P3Pro. The idea that DJI has no control over who reviews their pre-release products is laughable.

All Clinton had to do was pay for the dry cleaning, admit to congress what he had done and then it would have been over. He didn't break any laws. Its not illegal for DJI to give Casey a drone to review to trade on his popularity. It's just counter to the narritive that Brenndan puts out about GEO.

Not sure why people get upset about that being pointed out. If DJI continues to insist they have nothing to do with this then they should expect to get this sort of push back. Then we should expect that Frank Wang will become the first Chines US president...
Oct 11, 2016, 11:49 AM
Registered User
Av8Chuck's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tahoe Ed
Only if you get 5 million followers and fly in a responsible manner.
I think you prove the point, but if you have 5M followers it doesn't matter if you fly responsibly!
Oct 11, 2016, 11:56 AM
sillygoo.se
ianwood's Avatar
Does GEO interfere with / contravene part 107? Assuming GEO places modals on top of app control and / or prevents flight into certain GEO areas, does it conflict with:

Quote:
Just like a manned-aircraft PIC, the remote PIC of an sUAS is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that UAS.
Quote:
The remote PIC must retain the ability to direct the small UA to ensure compliance with the requirements of part 107. There are a number of different methods that a remote PIC may utilize to direct the small UA to ensure compliance with part 107. For example, the remote pilot may transmit a command for the autonomous aircraft to climb, descend, land now, proceed to a new waypoint, enter an orbit pattern, or return to home. Any of these methods may be used to satisfactorily avoid a hazard or give right of way.
If GEO has the "final authority" in these cases, the PIC cannot retain "final authority" to direct the small UA. Shouldn't GEO really only function on the ground? Wouldn't that be a much safer way for it to work? You set a flight radius and then GEO gives you a pre-flight notification and acknowledgement of any GEO locations within range of the flight area.

Once in flight, GEO needs to go away and let the PIC retain "final authority" as directed in 107.


Quick Reply
Message:

Thread Tools