I only want the aircraft I purchased back!
Most cars are too powerful for the speed limits in most nations. As long as I can get up to 70mph (a little more for safety) I don't need anymore. It the same for my I1 - 500m distance and 122m height - it works as advertised.
Not everyone is like you thankfully, some, if not most people like speed and power. No one picks a hundai if they can afford a Ferrari.
Sorry a boring, practical Honda CRV for me. I can fit my Inspire 1 and kit in the boot.
This question should be addressed to Apple not DJI. The App uses the default mapping and satellite.
Fair enough, not every country has the same laws, not suggesting you break them. Just pointing out not everyone wants a crappy underpowered car barely capable of achieving the max speed limit, which happens to be 85mph as the highest posted limit I know if in the usa.
Yes but the no fly overlays do not exist in apple maps, that's coming from DJI right? I left a message at DJI support about this and a field that was decommissioned as an airport since 2003. No reply
Doesn't really matter, there's no way to disable the nfz other than blocking gps signal and flying atti mode unfortunately.
Well your rules are stil fine,but for example Belgium will get rules that won't alow you to fly except on dedicated RC area's and private grounds where you need permission..Altitude limit will be 10 mtr! and not more then 50 mtr range.Talking about ******** rules.I have allready seen Belgium pilots who only fly in the Netherlands anymore.
Technically there is no enforceable law that requires a 333 for commercial use or governs uav flight at all at this time other than a few local city ordinances, but regardless of that fact lets assume he has one.
I'm afraid it's you who are misinformed. This might help clear it up. They are still working on their uav specific recommendations but have passed no laws regarding them yet. They are claiming they fall under full sized aircraft regulations which is quite ridiculous and will not hold up in a court of law, they know this and have pretty well stopped hassling people about it. The only thing they could possibly do at this point is try to charge you with reckless engagement or something if you fly in an unsafe manner and interfere with air traffic. Fly safely and they can do nothing because they have zero jurisdiction over uavs as of now, however that will change eventually and it will be vastly different from what they are incorrectly claiming is law currently.
Thanks for this and yes, makes the future pretty clear. The important word throughout the issue on either side of the equation is "responsibility" Feels right to me.
