DJI Demands Withdrawal Of Misleading Drone Collision Video

[Jagerbomb52]

DJI Demands Withdrawal Of Misleading Drone Collision Video

 

[Chefinthesky]

DJI has a number of good points, and as a company I understand their desire to defend their products and their brand. For me, the issue is outside of what is seen in the videos. A drone crashing into a plane or helicopter is dangerous, period - so making efforts to avoid it is of course necessary... however the first thing that came to my mind wasn't about the damage done by the drone itself - what about the battery(ies)? What happens when a lipo battery smacks into a wing full of jet fuel? What's the worst case scenario there? Is that a topic of debate or engineering approach to make the unlikely event of a drone striking a plane or copter less likely to be catastrophic? is it even possible for a sudden fire/explosion/ignition incident? The batteries would undoubtedly be smashed to bits, with all sorts of potential chemical & metallurgic reactions, etc. Fire only needs three things to exist, air fuel & a spark - and a drone hitting a flying vessel could certainly complete the three. So I think this topic is necessary and important - but is the discussion going in the right direction?

 

[record.play.rewind]

DJI has a number of good points, and as a company I understand their desire to defend their products and their brand. For me, the issue is outside of what is seen in the videos. A drone crashing into a plane or helicopter is dangerous, period - so making efforts to avoid it is of course necessary... however the first thing that came to my mind wasn't about the damage done by the drone itself - what about the battery(ies)? What happens when a lipo battery smacks into a wing full of jet fuel? What's the worst case scenario there? Is that a topic of debate or engineering approach to make the unlikely event of a drone striking a plane or copter less likely to be catastrophic? is it even possible for a sudden fire/explosion/ignition incident? The batteries would undoubtedly be smashed to bits, with all sorts of potential chemical & metallurgic reactions, etc. Fire only needs three things to exist, air fuel & a spark - and a drone hitting a flying vessel could certainly complete the three. So I think this topic is necessary and important - but is the discussion going in the right direction?

DJI has a great legal team, and I wouldn’t be surprised if will use all their might to pull all of legal stops to have the video removed and or take people to court.

 

[AH-1G]

. Safety is always paramount in aviation.

 

[AeroJ]

I was hoping someone would point out all the problems with that test. Let's hope they force a retraction or qualifying statement.

 

[FlushVision]

Surprisingly, I largely agree with what dji has said in that letter, pointing out that the test was not realistic. But I do take a small issue with dji saying they haven't manufactured a Phantom 2 in years. Though factually true (dji stopped producing the Phantom 2 Vision Plus towards the end of summer 2015) they continued to be sold for some months after then to clear the shelves, so to speak, and I still have an airworthy P2V+ which I flew as recently as last Thursday. So, while they are not so common these days (It's nigh on impossible to get a new battery for them), there are still a few flying about. Another point is that while in default they are restricted to 400', that limit can be altered upwards to whatever height you wish just by a click of a button in the GUI and without any need to prove any competence. Going a mile high with a Phantom 2 is not impossible as a swift search on YouTube will testify! (whether it will get back on the ground in one piece is another matter).

 

[AeroJ]

Another point is that while in default they are restricted to 400', that limit can be altered upwards to whatever height you wish just by a click of a button in the GUI and without any need to prove any competence

But to be fair, our TH's can do that ! In fact only last night I pushed my top limit up to 200m because I am going to be flying from the bottom of a large hill soon !

 

[aber57]

I believe I could win a lottery jackpot, get struck by lightning, etc. All unlikely but without argument possible. Could a DJI or any other brand impact a jet? Absolutely.
DJI is the most popular brand. I see this the same as a movie or TV show showing an iPhone getting hurled and striking someone in the head. Would anyone think that the only reason that it struck someone was only because it was an Apple phone and they have iCranium iGuidance making them strike spouses that you are mad at as a built in feature? If you wanted to make drone impact video and you wanted an instantly recognizeable device and you dispatched a helper to go CL buy a cheaper one what would they likely find for sale and buy?

 

[Chefinthesky]

My Yuneec drones all carry a Drone Crash Test Rating of 'yeah I crashed it but it still flies'. Notify the NTSB!

 

[AeroJ]

Interesting to watch this story develop, and how it is reported. I think I counted at least 19 major news services that reported the original announcement, and today I found just 1 who is reporting DJI's challenge to it.

Drone producer demands that UD research group ‘withdraw’ research and video

 

[BigAl07]

DJI's response is inaccurate to say the least.

An Aeronautical Lesson for DJI’s lawyer, Brendan Schulman

 

[PatR]

The test process used in the video was almost exactly the process used to determine if a piece of light weight insulating foam could penetrate the leading edge of a Space Shuttle wing. A leading edge much stronger than found on civilian airplane wings. End result, it did, punching through an extremely hard carbon/carbon leading edge and violating the re-entry heat shield, and was determined to be the cause of an in flight Space Shuttle break up over Texas with the death of all aboard.

That makes it a valid test from my perspective.