No More DJI drones? Your thoughts?

[FlyingClayDisk]

[Image: https://denyignorance.com/uploader/image...-42-13.png]

My guess is that the GPS/vidcap tech in the equipment DJI is making is either implementationally modular --  loosely couple via an insecure bus -- or doesn't have a sufficient secure substrate with common access to support guaranteeing that it will operationally meet national security requirements.  The desired embeds likely add camera operational modulation via GPS keying, as well as, for higher resolutions and advanced lensing, data acquisition stream filtering via content analysis implemented in onboard FPGA fabric.  As with similar challenges in cars, phones, and printers, it's up to the manufacturer to ensure supply and manufacturing chain conformance, and some of these smaller fly-by-night outfits don't cut it, especially when other countries cut corners and don't separate their mil and civ tech as efficiently as we do.

Great reply and agreed.  However, I suspect there's more going on than just this, on the policy side of things.  What you point out (and I agree) is fairly easily fixed and, given the market for drones at present, I'm confident that manufacturers will correct these issues in short order.  They're not overly expensive to work solutions for.  But I'm betting that's not going to be enough.  In other words, regulatory agencies will find another, or deeper, reasons to prohibit them.  And, that's really the fundamental question I am posing in the OP...is this just a ruse for a larger concern for drones in general.

As you probably know, I work in aviation.  Personal drones are practically like 'satan' in aviation; they are not well liked at all and there are many who wish they would be outlawed completely.  I am not among that crowd!  And, I don't think they pose nearly the risk that some suggest they do; I think much of it is exaggerated or imagined.  Do they cause damage?  Absolutely, and very expensive damage too, but they're not going to bring an airliner down.  They might frag a motor (worst case) and that's about it, but so too will a bird...and I don't think we're going to be outlawing birds anytime soon (but anything is possible with the stupid government these days).  So, I see it as a deeper issue.

Drones are pretty handy at seeing things that other people want to keep out of sight, and I believe this is the real underpinning reason here.  Heck, I can even remember back when I was just a kid; I used to have model rockets (back in the late 60's and early 70's).  Estes (the company) came out with this thing they called the 'Cam-Roc' which was basically a camera you could mount on your rocket to take aerial photos.  I wanted one really bad (but never got one).  Point is, even back then there were concerns about losing control of what could be photographed from the air (and by 'control' I mean regulatory 'control').

It doesn't take a whole lot of imagination to visualize all the things in which drone footage might create uncomfortable public relations issues for authorities (much like cell phone cameras already do).  Just look into the fine print of almost any public event, and you will inevitably find some language prohibiting the use of drones.  If you dig into this, 'public safety' is always cited as the reason why, but we all know that's only part of the reason why (and it's also a convenient excuse / ruse).  The real underpinning reason is having a birdseye view of things really changes the complexion of what "really" happened.  Sure, helicopters can provide the same, but helos are expensive and heavily regulated.  Drones, not so much.  Thus the attempts at regulating drones much more heavily...IMO.