Geo Fencing, here we go again.

[Dave Pitman]

But I assume you are then open to liability in the unlikely event there were an incident? Also, FAA.....??

Not in the least. To summarize.

Are DJI's choice of parameter settings approved or specified by any authority? Not at all.
That takes care of the authority question.

So, what about liability insurance?
I have not heard of any underwriter requiring, or even requesting, that the factory default firmware be used in order to be covered under any policy. I have personally asked directly and the response has been: "What...huh?"

Funny thing about DJI's nannyware is that in a certain circumstance, the FW can interfere with the PIC's operation of the aircraft which is explicitly prohibited by the FARs.

All of this has been discussed with Mr. Shulman ad nauseam. Like I said above. DJI does not care. BTW, they do not argue that their nannyware is any sort of legal requirement either. But they would like you to think so.

If some form of geo-fencing becomes a requirement mandated by authories, all manufactures will be imposing it.

 

[R Martin]

But I assume you are then open to liability in the unlikely event there were an incident? Also, FAA.....??

You are always open to liability. Geofencing doesn't negate that. It's not a crutch or excuse, just a pain in the nether region.

 

[TreeLineView]

So folks are in agreement that if I use that ( Mod Removed) app to change the software parameter and disable the manufacturer Geofencing, in the unlikely event I had a flyaway or other incident, that this in no way could influence an FAA investigation? Just playing devil's advocate. I"m sure the endless EULA we constantly check off has it burred in there somewhere.

 

[dronecyclops]

So folks are in agreement that if I use that ( Mod Removed) app to change the software parameter and disable the manufacturer Geofencing, in the unlikely event I had a flyaway or other incident, that this in no way could influence an FAA investigation? Just playing devil's advocate. I"m sure the endless EULA we constantly check off has it burred in there somewhere.

How would the FAA know? Why would they care since geofencing is not required by the FAA that's why some buy drones without it and are ?

 

[R Martin]

So folks are in agreement that if I use that ( Mod Removed) app to change the software parameter and disable the manufacturer Geofencing, in the unlikely event I had a flyaway or other incident, that this in no way could influence an FAA investigation? Just playing devil's advocate. I"m sure the endless EULA we constantly check off has it burred in there somewhere.

Geofencing isn't doing you any favors or causing you any harm (unless its blocking you from flying in an area that you have authorization to fly in). It is simply a CYA feature that the manufacturer built into their product to prevent you from inadvertently flying in an area you aren't authorized to fly in. It has no bearing on any investigation arising from a breach of the regulations. It is not an excuse to explain the RPIC's failure to follow the regulations. It is in place to protect the manufacturer from liability that may arise from your actions. Use it or not; delete it or not; it makes no difference other than probably void some warranty of hidden clause the manufacturer set up.

To bluntly answer the question you are asking: it isn't there to save your butt from an FAA investigation because you screwed the pooch. It is there to save DJI from any liability directly stemming from you reckless behavior. Not saying you fly that way. Just a direct answer.

 

[TreeLineView]

OK, thanks for the good discussion. I have been burnt trying to fly the end of a runway where I have an written authorization and I tried with DJI to get it unlocked for two days. No luck. I will be looking into nolimitdronez to see if they support the Matrice series

 

[R.Perry]

So folks are in agreement that if I use that $#@#$# app to change the software parameter and disable the manufacturer Geofencing, in the unlikely event I had a flyaway or other incident, that this in no way could influence an FAA investigation? Just playing devil's advocate. I"m sure the endless EULA we constantly check off has it burred in there somewhere.

There is potential liability with anything that moves. That's how lawyers get rich. I have had dealings with the FAA over the years. What I have always gathered from my experiences with them is their first priority is safety, and was the PIC operating in a safe and prudent manner.
The encounters I have had with them they were always fair and I never got the feeling that they were just looking for someone to burn at the stake. Now the NTSB is a different story, if their is an accident the first person they look at is the PIC. Reality is if you are living by the rules and something happens fear the lawyers more than the FAA.
To me the biggest fear is a flyaway that ends up injuring someone, with a flyaway it seems to me it would be pretty difficult to place the blame on the PIC. Most likely the lawyers would go after the manufacturer mainly because they have more money and it is pretty hard to blame a pilot if all control of the aircraft has been taken from him.

 

[prodigal27]

Geo Fencing sucks. I understand why it's there, but if I'm certified and trusted by the governing authority of my country (FAA) I should be able to disable it. If DJI wants to be an industry leader they need to work alongside the professionals they are selling to.

 

[Dave Pitman]

DJI's geofencing has value. As R.Martin said above, it is primarily there to keep DJI out of trouble, not the operator. It helps keep DJI's name out of the headlines for things like crashing your Phantom on the White House lawn. (For those "old timers" that understand this reference !)

It is a good thing for all of us that ignorant folks don't fly their craft where they shouldn't. But when someone becomes commercially certificated by their authorizing agency, then DJI (like Yuneec) should allow it to be deactivated plain and simple.

I mentioned the fact that in certain circumstances, DJI's geo can interfere with the operation and therefore is technically in violation of the FARs. I'm talking about in flight, not prohibiting takeoff. If there was an incident that occurred in that situation, DJI legal would have their hands full.

Another problem with DJI geo is that it leads those ignorant people to think that if DJI lets them take off somewhere, it must be fine. Which may not be the case at all.

 

[Fred Garvin]

Another problem with DJI geo is that it leads those ignorant people to think that if DJI lets them take off somewhere, it must be fine. Which may not be the case at all.

You see this all the time over in the Mavic Forum. It’s a regular read: “I did the self-unlock so I was good to go”, not understanding that it had nothing to do with gaining FAA approval for the airspace. Even when you try to explain it, many seem to resist understanding the concept. Some get angry, some just ghost, but every once in a while you do get through.

 

[R.Perry]

Well having a 107 doesn't automatically make a prudent and responsible pilot, it just means you past the test. No different than private and commercial pilots, most are pretty good, but a few shouldn't be flying.

As for the guys on other forums, many are the ones that advertise their stupidity on Utube.

So we punish everyone to protect a Chinese company that has no clue as to what freedom means.

As for me, I don't need to worry about geo fence.

 

[Dave Pitman]

No change will be coming from DJI until sales suffer.

I have to think that in addition to the ban on Chinese equipment, DJI geo-fencing is also to blame in this market share decline.

For an example, the P4P is the affordable workhorse for photogrammetry, but many are going with the Autel Evo 2 Pro even though it has a rolling shutter and the control is not quite as polished. It also does not have manufacturer geo-fencing.

Even when DJI's geo-fencing is disabled by parameter, or even unlocked via DJI's own system, it can still cause problems with SDK based waypoint apps. Com-ops are just getting fed up with it, in my opinion. There didn't used to be an alternative and now there is.

DJI Dipping, Drones Getting Pricey, and Signs of Industry Maturation - Drone Trends for 2021 | SkyWatch

What’s new in the commercial drone industry?

www.skywatch.ai

 

[R.Perry]

My attitude, juse spend the 40 bucks and disable geo fence. Saves a lot of wasted time.

 

[Dave Pitman]

Sometimes SDK apps, (e.g. Drone Deploy and Map Pilot) will still fail even when geo is disabled at the aircraft level, unfortunately. You can still fly in those cases, but not with the automation.

 

[R.Perry]

Dave, my primary issue is with Drone Deploy, I love the program, however when in a authorization zone it has issues even if geo fence isn't disabled. Not only does the British program disable geo fence, it also improves the Inspire 2 performance considerably. The main thing I want to emphasize is if Geo Fence is disabled, the pilot still has the obligation to fly legally. There is no US regs that require us to use geofence, so why use it. Maybe other countries do have laws affecting the use of geo fence and if so the pilots should obey those laws.
The company I'm contracted to at first did not want geo fence disabled. Well now all of their drones have geo fence disabled and what an improvement. How much time is spent screwing around with the Chinese to get them to give approval to fly. The other issue sometime the fight needs to be done asap and in area's where LAANC gives a very fast approval, now you need to wait on the Chinese to get around to doing their thing.
The American technology will catch up and hopefully surpass DJI and then we won't need to deal with them.
I truly hope Done Deploy begins to focus on American or British made drones.
I will say thing, I love the Inspire 2 and the Mavic Pro, but I hate communist telling me what I can an can't do.

 

[Satoshi N.]

I'm disabling geofence on my drones. DJI, I know communist want to control everything, I'm an American, we believe in freedom, something you don't understand.

can you please tell me how to do that???....disable DJI's geofencing

 

[R.Perry]

can you please tell me how to do that???....disable DJI's geofencing

I posted the link on here somewhere. Or do a search for disabling DJI geo fence. The software is from England, and works great.

 

[Satoshi N.]

I posted the link on here somewhere. Or do a search for disabling DJI geo fence. The software is from England, and works great.

Found the link!....thanks. Have you heard the rumors about Autel possibly implementing their own version of geofencing at some point?

 

[RGShanks]

I don't do many flights in restricted airspace but when I need to I play by the rules, and I'm sick of it.
I get authorization to fly close to Modesto, Ca airport (MOD). Needed to map two miles of road where a pipeline is going.
Did an unlock with DJI the night before, all is good, right.
Arrive on site, and you guessed it, would not launch, attempted a self unlock, not happening.
I'm sick of some foreign country telling me where I can and can't fly. Geo Fencing is coming off all my drones.
I fly legally, so I don't need a baby sitter.

Well enough of my ranting.

Unfortunately, that software company doesn't support the Air 2S! ...or the Mini 2

 

[Gahan Haskins]

Was flying near an approach to a Class B airport, somewhat near the end of an active runway. LAANC clearly showed the area was approved at or below 100 feet AGL. Got my LAANC clearance before takeoff. **Not so fast, my friend.**

DJI's own in-house fence ran right through my LAANC approved area and literally would not permit me to cross their lines. I could not physically pierce their virtual iron curtain. Wasted an hour on the phone with support and finally waved the white flag. After salvaging the shoot as best I could, I got on the phone with DJI and told them how illogical, counterintuitive, and high-handed it was to overrule the accepted gold-standard of airspace approval in the U.S. (FAA/LAANC approval). They quickly resorted to a non-sensical, circular argument that made absolutely no sense. I used the analogy of buying a car from them that limited you to 55MPH on the interstate when the feds had approved 70MPH. It just bounced right off of them. I then sat down and emailed them a more detailed version (with maps/exhibits/screenshots) and thought surely it would set off lightbulbs. Crickets....

Can you imagine Cessna and Beechcraft taking the same approach??

They are Communists.