Interesting, thanks @Westbury . I know itāll do more than the 47 with a following wind etc, but Iāve not noticed any change on mine.
I rarely power it at home so it hasnāt had WiFi for a bit, Iāll take it away from home and switch it on next chance I get and see if that updateās been pushed to me somehow.
The most annoying part, to me is I bought an Air 3S with a given specification and performance. The have now retrospectively without my permission reduced itās performance !
How would you feel if you bought a car that did 70 mph and the manufacturer send out an updatr that reduced the speed to 50 a year after you bought it. Is that even legal under trading standards ?
This will be the C marking (which is identical to the UK marking).
To be able to fly these drones āover Peopleā (A1) and ānear peopleā (A2) they have to meet the requirements of the c ratings. That includes having 120m maximum altitude, and have a maximum speed.
How would you feel if you bought a car that did 70 mph and the manufacturer send out an updatr that reduced the speed to 50 a year after you bought it. Is that even legal under trading standards ?
I agree it sucks @Westbury , but Iād be willing to bet that, somewhere in the long EULA we were forced to accept there will be some appropriately-vague legal verbiage they can use to justify doing exactly this whenever they choose. This sort of deliberate degradation is not uncommon in software unfortunately - at least this one isnāt about extracting more money from us (āUnlock higher speeds with a monthly DJI subscriptionā would be more shaky ground for them to defend I guess ).
Re. trading standards, even if that clause werenāt there in the EULA, I canāt see them upholding a complaint that DJI made a change to their product in order to make said product compliant with regulation.
On the positive side you can now fly it virtually anywhere.
With one hand giveth, and the other hand taketh away eh @SimonDale ? . I do agree this is a net positive, ability to fly in A1 is a huge plus point for me personally, and I can live with a speed reduction in order to get there. For cinematics I can work around it in post most of the time at the expense of some creative freedom, and when I want to go fast I have other drones specifically for that - which I wouldnāt generally fly over or even near people due to their speed / impact mass and general safety.
(I suppose there is an argument to be made that this didnāt have to be an automatic speed limit - my car still does 155mph even though the highest limit here is 70, and being able to push above the limit for a short while can occasionally be useful for getting out of a sticky situation - but sadly this sort of hard control is a symptom of a wider shift in our technology and society as a whole IMO. And thatād probably be a subject for another day, on another forum ).
True! But the UK does recognise the EU C1 class marking. And the UK1 class marking has identical requirements (DJI just needs to self-certify that it also meets the identical UK1 requirements).
I wonder if you can request to have a non-C1 class marked version of that drone. In theory they could make two firmware versions available and you could choose if you want to be able to fly over people (A1), or if youāre happy in far from people (A3), or using our A16 OA, you could have the other firmware.
The issue with that is it opens up the possibility of having a drone that is physically C1 marked (or UK1 marked), but then doesnāt actually comply with the C1 / UK1 requirements.
Compliant with other countries regulations ? The speed restriction is an EU one, last time I checked were not in the EU !
Indeed, we are not. But global compliance in tech is often reduced to lowest-common-denominator - which is unfortunate but unless thereās significant financial opportunity or regulatory requirement for special case in a given jurisdiction it does make legal, commercial and engineering sense. I suspect were Trading Standards to be invoked here DJI could make the commercial case that āthe drone was not technically compliant with the C1 class marking, and we had to make this change to ensure it wasā.
DJIās legal & compliance team will almost certainly have explored options around this and decided the route theyāve take is the one that exposes them to least risk.
Again, Iām not defending their position or actions here, but I can well imagine how this would have played out having spent the past few decades working for global tech companies.
(Itās probably also the case that, since weāre treating C1 as UK1, thereāll end up being the same speed restriction for UK1, perhaps more strongly enforced, and someone from the CAA has told DJI that as a prerequisite to retrospective UK1 cert for the Air 3S they needed to get their house in order with respect to speed limits).