Hello Fellow Yuneec Pilot!
Join our free Yuneec community and remove this annoying banner!
Sign up

BUILD XXX

Joined
Aug 12, 2018
Messages
633
Reaction score
328
Age
44
Location
NorCal
I have been anticipating for a new Build FW for quite sometime now. Talked to Yuneec CS this morning, concerning the NFZ lock and from what I got and understood is that Yuneec is concerned about HR 302????? Wut??????!!!!!! What does this mean?

I stared the facts that (a) Yuneec sUAS does not have an identifier unlike its competitor. (b) what’s the problem in that department? lol

1) Will the NFZ lock be pushed back instead? Due to HR 302?

2) Does this mean that Build 757 will be the only build until we really know the true layman’s definition of HR 302 and how it can affect the future flight of drones?

CS answer: “Good question, frankly it looks like it and, I don’t have the answers. They don’t tell us anything, but to let customers send their drones if there’s any problems”
 
I would speculate CS is simply guessing. I doubt the Chinese have any concern regarding HR 302. He is most accurate with "They don't tell us anything....". Yuneec, just as nearly all Chinese manufacturers, don't share information with their own service centers until there is an official release. The NFZ release could easily pop up today or a month from now. The reason it's not available at this point is simply unknown.
 
A 400’ altitude cap for recreational drones has been included with the FAA reauthorization bill, along with some rather nasty stuff for dealing with drones deemed a “credible threat”, but without defining credible threat. Implementation of the passed bill will be progressive but the actual time frame for implementation and enforcement is an unknown. An e-mail today from the FAA supports that. The one bullet dodged was a requirement for transponders or discrete identification broadcasting. We aren’t getting stuck with that so products currently in our hands are still good to go.

Something very important to some is avoiding any aerial conflict with first responders, crime scene activities, and fire fighting. The FAA has made a clear statement they are aggressively going after anyone, amateur or pro, that interferes. The federal fine runs up to $20k with jail time and local jurisdictions may add considerably more to that.
 
That's good to hear. I was figuring that the requirement for transponders or ID broadcasting would be a basic requirement and figured it would just price many of us out of our 107's. That would be absolutely required for us to fly in future Amazon airspace...0-400'. I still don't think tech is anywhere near ready for autonomous flight though. I believe that unmanned car, running over a pedestrian, proved that. They would have to change the rules allowing them to fly over people or make visual sensors that can 100% detect a person in a complicated background from 400 feet. I certainly don't want a 50-75lb drone flying over my head with existing technology. Can you imagine that stuff getting hacked?
 
Unmanned multirotor tech is indeed lacking in maturity for use in autonomous operations. That is not the case with larger winged and rotary systems that use considerably more advanced, expensive, well proven systems. The government has indirectly paid for the development of such systems for over a decade through military contracts awarded to aerospace companies. Those systems have been operating continuously with great success in wartime environments, where the rules for operating with manned aircraft have been in development for the same period of time. For those that don’t know, manned and unmanned aircraft fly at the same time from very busy airports without conflict. Several countries, with Australia and Belgium being among them, have been flying in populous airspace for quite some time. The U.S has as well but generally in less populous airspace.
 
If a new update pop's up soon it most likely has nothing to do with this new law but if a month or two goes by I would want to know what Im downloading before jumping into it right away.
 
If a new update pop's up soon it most likely has nothing to do with this new law but if a month or two goes by I would want to know what Im downloading before jumping into it right away.

We will probably have a drone identifier code written into the FW is that even possible?
 
We will probably have a drone identifier code written into the FW is that even possible?
I think the FAA wants a ID tracker that would be installed on a drone. When we get an update we all get the same update which would make Yuneec send out a different update to each drone owner to get a different ID code. Clearly Yuneec is not going to do that.
 
I think the FAA wants a ID tracker that would be installed on a drone. When we get an update we all get the same update which would make Yuneec send out a different update to each drone owner to get a different ID code. Clearly Yuneec is not going to do that.
But with so many drones now flying its going to be near impossible to get trackers on them. I have a feeling a date will come when all new drones are sold with trackers installed and all the drones flying now will slowly go away from just getting old, crashes etc. and will be weeded out of the system
 
I think the FAA wants a ID tracker that would be installed on a drone. When we get an update we all get the same update which would make Yuneec send out a different update to each drone owner to get a different ID code. Clearly Yuneec is not going to do that.

It can be done actually and this rolled out with the P4P a year ago, during an update. But I guess by having a physical tracker makes more sense to them
 
But with so many drones now flying its going to be near impossible to get trackers on them. I have a feeling a date will come when all new drones are sold with trackers installed and all the drones flying now will slowly go away from just getting old, crashes etc. and will be weeded out of the system

I’m kind of glad to be flying a TH+ right now vs. DJI [emoji41]
 
I think the FAA wants a ID tracker that would be installed on a drone. When we get an update we all get the same update which would make Yuneec send out a different update to each drone owner to get a different ID code. Clearly Yuneec is not going to do that.

They would not have to. Each Yuneec drone already has it’s own, unique, auto pilot serial number.

The value of older equipment, stable in firm and software and lacking restrictions, is likely to increase as more regulations are introduced.
 
They would not have to. Each Yuneec drone already has it’s own, unique, auto pilot serial number.

The value of older equipment, stable in firm and software and lacking restrictions, is likely to increase as more regulations are introduced.
All the more reason to keep things in good condition. Im also glad I bought my H Plus now and I would recommend that if anyone is thinking about buying any drone do it soon before the FAA gets moving.
 
When I opened the front door today I could barely see the sun because of all the drones in the air; falling from the sky by the thousands and crashing into planes 20000 ft alt. Total chaos.


A 400' limit would be an effective ban on gliders and large RC aircraft. Just plain stupid. I'll bet the AMA is already making deals with Congress to force people to fly exclusively on their fields and join their organization.
 
I’ve got over $50k in 40% RC aerobatic stuff that becomes effectively useless with a 400’ altitude cap. Flat spins, hammerheads, knife edge spins, falling leafs, and humpty bumps all require altitude to execute. The RC glider community will experience the death of thermal duration and dynamic soaring. Bear in mind those genres have been practiced for over 50 years and never caused anyone problems, then or now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Darksmile
Fortunately, the FAA bill's wording says "400 feet above ground level", not 'above take-off elevation' and not 'altitude'. If you are flying on a hillside, that gives you additional altitude above take-off elevation. I've taken advantage of that on several occasions with beautiful results. I know, that doesn't help with some stunt flying maneuvers that require more height above ground.

Another interesting item in the bill is the requirement for recreational UAS pilots to take an "aeronautical knowledge and safety test" and "maintain proof of test passage". I agree with the idea that all UAS pilots flying aircraft above a certain weight should know the rules. Right now, you can buy a drone and fly it without any knowledge of the regulations. These are the people that drive fearful lawmakers to create more stupid regulations.

If I could only fly my camera drone at an AMA (or equivalent) airfield, I'd loose interest quickly and stop flying it. I am a member but that is not what I bought my TH for. My hobby is aerial videography. Unfortunately, some of the most visually stunning locations are already off limits :(.
 
Fortunately, the FAA bill's wording says "400 feet above ground level", not 'above take-off elevation' and not 'altitude'. If you are flying on a hillside, that gives you additional altitude above take-off elevation. I've taken advantage of that on several occasions with beautiful results. I know, that doesn't help with some stunt flying maneuvers that require more height above ground.

Another interesting item in the bill is the requirement for recreational UAS pilots to take an "aeronautical knowledge and safety test" and "maintain proof of test passage". I agree with the idea that all UAS pilots flying aircraft above a certain weight should know the rules. Right now, you can buy a drone and fly it without any knowledge of the regulations. These are the people that drive fearful lawmakers to create more stupid regulations.

If I could only fly my camera drone at an AMA (or equivalent) airfield, I'd loose interest quickly and stop flying it. I am a member but that is not what I bought my TH for. My hobby is aerial videography. Unfortunately, some of the most visually stunning locations are already off limits :(.

Yes, sir. I agree
 

New Posts

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
20,955
Messages
241,591
Members
27,287
Latest member
wccannabis