Dept of Interior Reverses Chinese Drone Decision

[PatR]

Department of Interior grounds Chinese drones

A developing story with far-reaching implications. Appearing across multiple outlets the DOI seems to have grounded all Chinese RPAS in its care. Department of the Interior spokesperson Melissa Bro…

www.suasnews.com

 

[AMann]

I wonder if this will include the use of Chinese made drones by contractors on BLM land other DOI ands? I have some BLM contracts for archaeological surveys and also use Chinese made GPS units. That could be considered in a way as taxpayer money being used (through my contracts) for helping to purchase Chinese tech as well.

Also, has anyone had any issues using them on low security areas on DOE or DOD lands?

 

[LUIS MARTINEZ]

Department of Interior grounds Chinese drones

A developing story with far-reaching implications. Appearing across multiple outlets the DOI seems to have grounded all Chinese RPAS in its care. Department of the Interior spokesperson Melissa Bro…

www.suasnews.com

Just this morning I read two stories of Chinese made drones' usefulness to US Government agencies:

Redirecting

www-wsj-com.cdn.ampproject.org

How an NTSB drone documented a B–17 crash

NTSB investigators flew a popular consumer quadcopter to document the recent Boeing B–17 Flying Fortress crash in Connecticut, providing the first aerial views of the tragic scene. The detailed data gathered in a series of flights at the state’s busiest airport may provide insight not achievable...

www.aopa.org

Guess the USGS and NTSB will be up creek w/o a paddle soon. Thank you US Congress, as usual you are on top of things!

 

[PatR]

There ARE alternatives, they just aren’t as cheap and simple to set up as the Chinese products.

As our government never admits to making a mistake perhaps this action by the DoI is a corrective action for accepting the findings of an independent investigation regarding a Chinese drone maker and espionage/data collection from an unqualified source, with that investigation perhaps paid for by the maker being investigated. A perception of conflict thing.

As for our gov screwing us around, what’s new?

 

[AMann]

There ARE alternatives, they just aren’t as cheap and simple to set up as the Chinese products.

As our government never admits to making a mistake perhaps this action by the DOI is a corrective action for accepting the findings of an independent investigation regarding a Chinese drone maker and espionage/data collection from an unqualified source, with that investigation perhaps paid for by the maker being investigated. A perception of conflict thing.

As for our gov screwing us around, what’s new?

What are the alternatives? They must include GPS and all other components made in an approved country, and not sold for a military budget (Lockheed, Boeing, etc., drones would not count as they would cost well over what a typical DOI project budget could afford).

It’s just not the drones mentioned above, there’s environmental monitoring drones used at oil fields that are owned by the US government and managed by DOI, they are being used for mapping by USGS, and for doing wildlife studies as well. If Congress is serious about doing this, they should’ve just phrased it in to give US manufacturing a chance to catch up. Instead, a lot of important and ongoing projects are going to be put on hold overnight because of somebody’s rash decisions.

 

[LUIS MARTINEZ]

There ARE alternatives, they just aren’t as cheap and simple to set up as the Chinese products.

As our government never admits to making a mistake perhaps this action by the DoI is a corrective action for accepting the findings of an independent investigation regarding a Chinese drone maker and espionage/data collection from an unqualified source, with that investigation perhaps paid for by the maker being investigated. A perception of conflict thing.

As for our gov screwing us around, what’s new?

There are always alternatives, if you have the $$$...I mean a General Atomics Reaper is what? $16-20 million? Chump change, and I'm sure it can draw a ****of a map

 

[PatR]

If you could get the company interested in manufacturing for the mass market, and they are not, for about $8k you could obtain a multirotor Y6 or hex that converted from heavy lift to medium lift in less than 10 minutes, carry any payload you desired to mount, convert from 6s to 12s simply by using an additional power receptacle and more batteries, with all of it sourced from the U.S., Japan, and countries within the E.U.. Not one component or line of code would originate in China. Better still it would not contain a single geo restriction.

Being used to a specific brands inundating advertising has left them myopic, and no longer looking at alternatives. They also fail to recognize that much of what makes a drone useful and functional did not originate in China. A fair percentage of what China sells to us originated as IP and technology liberated from other countries.

Once you think outside of the DJI “box” there are quite a few options, but they are handled differently. If and when people do start thinking out of the DJI box, more of those options will be sold and prices will decrease by some percentage.

 

[LUIS MARTINEZ]

If you could get the company interested in manufacturing for the mass market, and they are not, for about $8k you could obtain a multirotor Y6 or hex that converted from heavy lift to medium lift in less than 10 minutes, carry any payload you desired to mount, convert from 6s to 12s simply by using an additional power receptacle and more batteries, with all of it sourced from the U.S., Japan, and countries within the E.U.. Not one component or line of code would originate in China. Better still it would not contain a single geo restriction.

Being used to a specific brands inundating advertising has left them myopic, and no longer looking at alternatives. They also fail to recognize that much of what makes a drone useful and functional did not originate in China. A fair percentage of what China sells to us originated as IP and technology liberated from other countries.

Once you think outside of the DJI “box” there are quite a few options, but they are handled differently. If and when people do start thinking out of the DJI box, more of those options will be sold and prices will decrease by some percentage.

If wishes were fishes we'd all be throwing nets.
I agree it is not impossible to beat DJI, but it does take start up millions, and a strong desire not to get rich the first year, DJI tackled the bull with both hands and gained dominance. American manufacturers surrendered and ceded the consumer drone market to China. I'm no China fan, but I'll vote with my wallet.

Being naturally suspicious, I smell behind the scenes pressure on Congress by gutless American entrepreneurs because they want government assured protectionism of their future business.

 

[AMann]

If wishes were fishes we'd all be throwing nets.
I agree it is not impossible to beat DJI, but it does take start up millions, and a strong desire not to get rich the first year, DJI tackled the bull with both hands and gained dominance. American manufacturers surrendered and ceded the consumer drone market to China. I'm no China fan, but I'll vote with my wallet.

Being naturally suspicious, I smell behind the scenes pressure on Congress by gutless American entrepreneurs because they want government assured protectionism of their future business.

and they will use Chinese parts to do it, down to the tiny electronics and machine parts like surface mounted IC’s and resistors, motor windings and so on.

 

[PatR]

Luis, a couple reasons why we don’t see more U.S. drone manufacturers.

U.S. companies simply can’t export UAV technology. They are severely hamstrung by ITAR regulations. They cannot sell to a world market unless and until they can control the dissemination of the technology from start to end, and. That process has to be documented and federally approved. Since that is absolutely something that can’t be done there’s no reason to address a world or international market at levels lower than governments.

Our government is fully aware that any UAV technology that is exported to an open market will shortly be copied by foreign entities. If that technology opens new doors for those entities in surveillance or weapons capabilities it would expand foreign capabilities that would be used against us.

OTOH, ITAR does not restrict the import of UAv tech, so everything stolen from us and others gets to come back and be sold at cut rate prices by those that stole it to common consumers. It doesn’t matter that the stolen tech is returned in a form considerably degraded from the original, it’s coming in, not going out.

Another issue is open source code that’s liberated for use without fair compensation or in violation of open source agreements. U.S. companies are subject to international court prosecution so they play a fair game, which costs more. When a Chinese company elects to violate the same agreements nothing can be done unless and until the Chinese government allows a legal case to proceed. In effect they protect their companies from international litigation.

Nothing we see coming out of China is “cutting edge” technology. In fact, most of it is old tech that’s been re-packaged for general consumer use. If we were to look back we would see that mapping, LIDAR, thermal, waypoint flight planning, multi spectral, object tracking, and other higher end technology was being used on DIY and custom made drones long before DJI, Yuneec, Autel, or any other Chinese company incorporated any of it. At best, the Chinese have done some great work with miniature security cameras by turning them into 4k products but the fact is we have had vastly better payloads that have been in use for a decade or more, and they are only slightly larger.

All in all, the greatest benefits obtained from Chinese drones is in their “packaging” and pricing.

 

[LUIS MARTINEZ]

Luis, a couple reasons why we don’t see more U.S. drone manufacturers.

U.S. companies simply can’t export UAV technology. They are severely hamstrung by ITAR regulations. They cannot sell to a world market unless and until they can control the dissemination of the technology from start to end, and. That process has to be documented and federally approved. Since that is absolutely something that can’t be done there’s no reason to address a world or international market at levels lower than governments.

Our government is fully aware that any UAV technology that is exported to an open market will shortly be copied by foreign entities. If that technology opens new doors for those entities in surveillance or weapons capabilities it would expand foreign capabilities that would be used against us.

OTOH, ITAR does not restrict the import of UAv tech, so everything stolen from us and others gets to come back and be sold at cut rate prices by those that stole it to common consumers. It doesn’t matter that the stolen tech is returned in a form considerably degraded from the original, it’s coming in, not going out.

Another issue is open source code that’s liberated for use without fair compensation or in violation of open source agreements. U.S. companies are subject to international court prosecution so they play a fair game, which costs more. When a Chinese company elects to violate the same agreements nothing can be done unless and until the Chinese government allows a legal case to proceed. In effect they protect their companies from international litigation.

Nothing we see coming out of China is “cutting edge” technology. In fact, most of it is old tech that’s been re-packaged for general consumer use. If we were to look back we would see that mapping, LIDAR, thermal, waypoint flight planning, multi spectral, object tracking, and other higher end technology was being used on DIY and custom made drones long before DJI, Yuneec, Autel, or any other Chinese company incorporated any of it. At best, the Chinese have done some great work with miniature security cameras by turning them into 4k products but the fact is we have had vastly better payloads that have been in use for a decade or more, and they are only slightly larger.

All in all, the greatest benefits obtained from Chinese drones is in their “packaging” and pricing.

Or simply they just can't compete. Not sure what exporting regulations have to do with building a drone in the US. And yes they steal and sell us our own technology.

 

[PatR]

Permit me to ask, would you have acted as police chief for $300.00/month, with no life/health insurance, retirement, union, or other protections?

Can our service, tech, and manufacturing industries pay wages as low as $0.80/hour, work employees 10-12 hours/ day, 7 days a week without paying over time? Can our businesses ignore every labor, safety, health, end environmental regulation in order to reduce production and overhead costs?

Will our government subsidize business making products for export, allowing businesses to operate for years at a loss for the sole purpose of acquiring international debt revenue?

Perhaps if we did all those things we could and would make products that cheap. When one side is not allowed to have bullets in their gun when attending a gun fight it’s not a competition, it’s a slaughter.

 

[LUIS MARTINEZ]

Permit me to ask, would you have acted as police chief for $300.00/month, with no life/health insurance, retirement, union, or other protections?

Can our service, tech, and manufacturing industries pay wages as low as $0.80/hour, work employees 10-12 hours/ day, 7 days a week without paying over time? Can our businesses ignore every labor, safety, health, end environmental regulation in order to reduce production and overhead costs?

Will our government subsidize business making products for export, allowing businesses to operate for years at a loss for the sole purpose of acquiring international debt revenue?

Perhaps if we did all those things we could and would make products that cheap. When one side is not allowed to have bullets in their gun when attending a gun fight it’s not a competition, it’s a slaughter.

If we trusted the naysayers the Wright brothers would have been just two eccentric bicycle makers...

 

[PatR]

This is true, and like most U.S. companies, the Wright Brothers funded their aero experimentation from their own pockets, and they weren’t hamstrung with government regulations. Also, the government was not providing any funds or clearing the way for them.

 

[Phaedrus]

And then Orville moved on and into the government as part of the early aviation regulatory agencies.

 

[Fred Garvin]

Wasn’t he offered the first Pilot License?

 

[PatR]

IRRC, he was offered it but declined and it was issued to the new department head...

Edit
License #1, issued in 1927, 24 years after the Wright’s first flight in 1903 to: William P. MacCracken Jr: Asst. Secretary of Commerce for Aeronautics.

 

[PatR]

That should be pretty much the end of this thread...

 

[LUIS MARTINEZ]

God I hope so. TDS is so sad to see.

 

[M8len]

So here is what I'd like to see. Instead of people talking about the conspiracy theories and other military style drones that could possibly be used in place of DJI I would love to hear what the actual issue is with DJ. I talked to a lot of people including government agencies that refused to use DJI for some idea thay they are taking all your information.

If you keep DJI assistant on a separate computer and don'ts sync your flight log to cloud is there really a way for them to get your information. Do we believe that the controller is sending it back to China? Also I have a hard time believing that the drones are going to be the way they take over the world. As I type this out on my Samsung phone and my wife is next to me using Facebook on her iPhone. I dont believe that all this info is staying in the US

I guess I just don't understand the issues and what could possibly happen with their software. Also I have seen numerous American companies who siad t that they are American-made but then utilize DJI flight controllers and other Chinese parts.

Just looking for some ideas on what the problem could really be and how we can go about solving it besides buying expensive platforms that are less effective and dramatically increase price and liability.