Lily Drone!

[llp2000]

Not mean to be a downer, I never said Inspire 1 or many other larger RC are safe, or safer than anything else. When a company claim to general public that ANY ONE could HAND launch this new larger sized drone and expect it to be safe, it is irresponsible no matter how good the intention is. Please review their ads before making statement of "no idiots will buy it.", old lady and young kids are not idiots, but may not be the best customer to safely HAND launch this toy.

BTW, whenever I fly my Inspire 1, I stay a safe distance away from the chopping blades, and respect that fact.

 

[MarqueGlisson]

I ordered mine in March - one year before anticipated release .

 

[Mazz]

Now that this is getting close I wanted to bring it back up. As a local UAV enthusiast, I had a lot of friends and others asking me if I had heard about this "lily drone." They always get excited when they see a quad they think they can't crash as easily. The answer was always the same. "A quad that flies by itself? It's coming but not in February." I never believed this tech would be ready in the time they announced but here is their chance to prove me wrong.

 

[jon b]

I got my pre-order refunded... Not that I have an issue other than "I don't need a drone to take a selfie" Cant wait to see where they eventually end up with the fight logic

 

[RaptorMan]

As I mentioned in another thread about the Lily I think the makers of the Lily will find the FAA isn't all that happy to see a drone that's designed to not be controlled by hand and is entirely autonomous. I suspect they will be denied the permission to fly unless they modify to include a more direct human control interface and not simply a pendant it follows.

Additionally, if and when the FAA rules against them they may then extend there prohibition against other drones using ANY autonomous flight control and that would include the Phantom and Inspire 1/2. I could see the folks at Lily arguing that they should be permitted autonomous flight because DJI and others now do that and the FAA coming back saying -- you're right, we'll rule they can't do it either.

So, if the Lily becomes available by the end of the winter I could see all autonomous flight made illegal by the end of spring and Autopilot and Litchi would be forced out of business. DJI would be forced to remove the intelligent flight modes and anyone using them would be subject to criminal prosecution.

This isn't tin foil hat folks, you and I know just how much governments hate drones and there'd be little within government to stop the FAA from making such a decision. And, there's always an idiot that crashes into the Empire State building and the public may well acquiesce when the FAA prohibits autonomous flight modes.


Brian

 

[The Editor]

As I mentioned in another thread about the Lily I think the makers of the Lily will find the FAA isn't all that happy to see a drone that's designed to not be controlled by hand and is entirely autonomous. I suspect they will be denied the permission to fly unless they modify to include a more direct human control interface and not simply a pendant it follows.

Additionally, if and when the FAA rules against them they may then extend there prohibition against other drones using ANY autonomous flight control and that would include the Phantom and Inspire 1/2. I could see the folks at Lily arguing that they should be permitted autonomous flight because DJI and others now do that and the FAA coming back saying -- you're right, we'll rule they can't do it either.

So, if the Lily becomes available by the end of the winter I could see all autonomous flight made illegal by the end of spring and Autopilot and Litchi would be forced out of business. DJI would be forced to remove the intelligent flight modes and anyone using them would be subject to criminal prosecution.

This isn't tin foil hat folks, you and I know just how much governments hate drones and there'd be little within government to stop the FAA from making such a decision. And, there's always an idiot that crashes into the Empire State building and the public may well acquiesce when the FAA prohibits autonomous flight modes.


Brian

Amazon would be screwed then!

 

[jon b]

Yeah, but they have limited the distance to 100 ft and tops out at 25mph. Don't think the FAA will worry too much here. It's always pointing at the operator so no privacy issues. Just dumb people doing dumb things with it

 

[Phatzo]

i am not so negative. amazon pays a lot of tax and makes same in turnover+ the tech getting more and more sophisticated i do not think (personally) FAA will do anything. airdog is also autonomous and the new Yuneec announced also able to follow autonomously... and behind yuneec is intel... to big of companies to go against and split the population into "classes" like in modern movies... why don't we go on and say in 20 years from now there will be hunger games and running man or similar...
the tech evolves yes idiots come and go get cought and not - **** happens and life's ***** and then you die.
on the other hand there are to many things that drones and autonomous crafts will be used for good, military (we know they always have the best toys) and law enforcment. it all mostly comes from millitary what we use today. jeep YJ or CJ come from the willis - a millitary jeep
FAA will find its way to regulate but not make it illigal. to many of us with it around and the mass can change anything.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RaptorMan]

Yeah, but they have limited the distance to 100 ft and tops out at 25mph. Don't think the FAA will worry too much here. It's always pointing at the operator so no privacy issues. Just dumb people doing dumb things with it

Even with a range limit of 100 feet and a speed limit of 25mph the owners of them are still not incapable of doing stupid things and causing crashes.

Does the owner with the pendant run under a tree or near a building?

Does the owner let there 4 year old kid play with it?

Does the owners 4 year old kid take it out without the parents knowledge?

Do the potential owners comprise a different subset of the population that magically avoids stupid people?

Whether it's 1000 feet, 100 feet or even 10 feet there will be idiots that either don't think it through or are incapable of thinking it through and the end result will be drones running into things -- and people! When the regulators and government types hear about a drone hitting a 4 year old and shredding her eye it won't matter to them that this was a specialty drone as it will be all drones that come under fire.


Brian

 

[Mopar Bob]

What do you think will be more dangerous: autonomous drones that can cause damage and possibly kill someone OR the autonomous cars that are being rolled out now (i.e. Google, Tesla) that can cause more damage and kill many? I think we live in a crazy world now where technology is taken over because of it's possibilities and not because it's needed. My personal opinion is that if you want an autonomous vehicle, take a bus. And if you want an autonomous drone, watch a video or someone else flying their drone. And then let the technology advances be aimed at improving the safety of the flight with collision avoidance, fail safe systems and redundancy features.

 

[Morgon]

OR the autonomous cars that are being rolled out now (i.e. Google, Tesla) that can cause more damage and kill many?

Let's be fair here. The only accidents that Google's autonomous car has been involved in have all been caused by other human drivers. The cars themselves have been operating near-flawlessly. That doesn't say that they couldn't malfunction in some way, of course, but so can humans, and they do so much more frequently than machines do.

Edit: Welp, I get to nibble on my words - released today, there was a accident in February involving the Google Car that Google claims partial responsibility for, because the software made assumptions (that the driver of the bus, which it collided with at very low speed, made opposite assumptions for).

Still, not bad for a million+ miles of driving. You couldn't possibly say the same for anyone you know.

 

[Rye]

Don't order this POS.
custome service is appealing too. I referred 16 in total and earned commission for 10 of them. I made the hard decision to cancel my Lily order because frankly better drones are on the market for the same price now. I got $29 back for my cancellation. Lily conveniently decided that the commission I earned would come off my refund! If I had of been told that before, I wouldn't of cancelled for $29!

 

[RaptorMan]

So, nearly a year after they started demonstrating the Lily drone and it's still not available. They may make GoPro look quick in rolling out there drone and GoPro wasn't quick enough. In order to beat DJI you need to either leapfrog them in tech or come out with a market segment DJI is uninterested in. One might argue that this limited tracking drone is a market segment DJI is uninterested in, but if the Lily were to have decent sale I can bet that DJI would have a competitive product within 3 months. My guess is they already have a working prototype in case the market develops.

But, I do not see the market developing and unless the Lily has really good collision avoidance sensors, and I do not believe they do, then my guess is pretty much all of them will crash into something within 5 hours of flight time and most of them within 2 hours.

The other thing and I mentioned this before is that they do not have a true RC of any kind so there is no actual human control. The pendant doesn't count as I see it.


Brian