Skip to main content
  1. Home
  2. Emerging Tech
  3. Photography
  4. News

DJI study suggests little risk from raising drone weight limit 4-times higher

Add as a preferred source on Google

How big does an out-of-control drone have to be to cause damage? Bigger than you think, at least according to a new white paper from the Chinese drone manufacturer DJI. The paper, published today, suggests that the FAA’s 250-gram weight limit is too low — and that a limit four times that would be a better standard for classifying a drone as safe.

FAA regulations allow unmanned drones to be flown without registration if they weigh 250 grams, or about 0.55 pounds, or less. For commercial flight, pilots must go through a rigorous certification process to fly a drone above 250 grams.

Recommended Videos

DJI’s research suggests that unmanned aircraft systems as large as 2.2 kg., or about 4.85 pounds,pose little risk. The company’s drone lineup contains a wide range of sizes, with the folding Mavic Pro weighing in at 743 grams or 1.64 pounds.

The current FAA regulations were set in conformity with Registration Task Force (RTF) research from 2015. “The RTF had only three days to decide how much a drone should weigh to require registration, and RTF members — including myself — unanimously set a 250-gram limit for registration purposes only, not for safety rulemaking,” said the paper’s co-author, Brendan Schulman, DJI vice president of policy and legal affairs. “Nevertheless, regulators around the world are using the FAA’s 250-gram limit as a safety standard for the lowest-risk drones, despite its flaws. We hope our white paper spurs more detailed evaluation for better and more accurate rulemaking.”

DJI’s research suggests that the data the RTF had to find on short notice is outdated and flawed, including a 50-year-old equation that suggests an object with 80 Joules of kinetic energy would have a 30-percent fatality rate if it came in contact with a person. At the time, DJI says, there wasn’t enough research to the contrary, so the committee unanimously approved the 250-gram limit.

However, DJI suggests that using the same equation as the kinetic energy of a missile or actual aircraft isn’t accurate for a plastic drone with no fuel source to spark an explosion. Instead, DJI factored in a more specific calculation for just how much kinetic energy transfer a drone would create on impact using variables on where the drone might hit, as well as drag and the energy transfer on impact.

DJI also factored in more variables, such as the pilot’s skill level, probability of technical failure, and not just the population density of the area, but the amount of unsheltered pedestrians at any given time.

Most drone bodies are made from plastic foam or carbon fiber and will break on impact, and without fuel, there wouldn’t be an explosion on impact, DJI says. Worst case scenario, DJI suggests, the drone is falling straight out of the sky or flying horizontally at maximum speed.

“In its haste, the RFT had to use shortcuts and assumptions that are not well-matched to the characteristics of a UAS,” the report reads. “By making this additional ‘reality check’ adjustment to the calculation, we can conclude that the RTF’s calculation of mass for its cutoff should have been over four times higher.”

DJI’s research suggests that a more accurate “lowest risk” drone category would be drones weighing 2.2 kg. or less, but that further analysis is needed. “Given the faulty assumptions that underlie the selection of 250 grams, regulators should be hesitant to adopt a 250-gram UAS category without conducting their own rigorous safety analysis based on the desired policy goals,” the white paper concludes. “Review of the RTF’s work shows that its selection of 250 grams is far too low, and far too conservative, to be used to create a lowest-risk UAS regulatory category. Based on a similar approach to risk estimation, with adjustments for real-world factors, we propose 2.2 kg as the upper threshold of a ‘lowest-risk’ UAS category.”

Hillary K. Grigonis
Hillary never planned on becoming a photographer—and then she was handed a camera at her first writing job and she's been…
Yet another study says AI is bad for elections, and the rabbit hole gets worse
AI may be an election bomb waiting for someone to light the fuse
Voters cast their ballots on Election Day

Another election, another study has concluded that asking an AI chatbot for political guidance is a spectacularly bad idea. Research conducted during Hungary’s 2026 parliamentary election found that ChatGPT and Google Gemini offered not just inaccurate but also inconsistent and unreliable voting advice. The chatbots misclassified voter profiles, overlooked relevant parties, recommended parties absent from the ballot, and sometimes produced materially different answers when given the same information repeatedly.

AI keeps failing the voter test

Read more
Samsung’s humanoid robot ambitions are real, but factories come first
Samsung’s new robotics division has humanoids in its sights, although its immediate business is far more practical factory automation
Robot Touch Human Finger

Samsung wants a place in the humanoid race, but its new robotics push begins with machines built for factories rather than homes.

The CEO-led RX robotics division will initially focus on manufacturing robots. Samsung has separately identified humanoids as a priority, although it hasn’t announced a commercial model or explained where one fits into the division’s immediate plans.

Read more
The future of AI may depend on this one behind-the-scenes change
Running Claude on Android.

Whenever a new AI model arrives, it's easy to get caught up in the bells and whistles. We talk about how much smarter it is, how quickly it answers questions, or how realistic its images have become. But here's the thing: none of that matters much if the AI can't reliably work with the apps and services people use every day.

That's why an upcoming update to the Model Context Protocol (MCP) caught my attention. It isn't a new chatbot or a fancy AI model. In fact, most people will never even know it's happening. But it could quietly make the AI ecosystem a lot healthier. If you've never heard of MCP before, don't worry. Think of it as a shared language that lets AI assistants safely talk to apps like Gmail, Slack, calendars, databases, and countless other services. Instead of every company inventing its own way to make those connections, MCP gives everyone a common rulebook.

Read more