Veteran DFR Operator’s 10,000-Flight Reality Check: Stop Panicking About The FCC Ban

While agencies across America scramble to figure out what the FCC’s foreign drone ban means for their fleets, one veteran public safety drone operator is offering the kind of practical advice that only comes from putting thousands of hours on the equipment: stop overthinking it and fly what you have.

Luis Figueiredo, known in public safety circles as “Drone Detective,” runs the UAS program at the Elizabeth Police Department in New Jersey. His Thursday DFR Drop on LinkedIn cuts through the panic that has gripped many agencies since the FCC banned all future foreign-made drones in late December. His core message: the equipment you already own still works, and the operational data proves it.

10,000 Flights, Two Docks, One M350: The Numbers That Matter

Figueiredo’s operational data is the kind of real-world validation that press releases cannot provide. His department wrapped up 2025 with approximately 10,000 DFR flights using equipment that some agencies are now treating like radioactive material: two DJI Dock 1 units and one standalone DJI M350.

Both the Dock 1 and M350 were released in 2023. Over two years later, they are still going strong. That kind of durability is exactly what we have been documenting in our coverage of Blue sUAS reliability issues, where Orlando Police testified to zero DJI failures in five years compared to five Blue sUAS failures in just 18 months.

“Let that sink in,” Figueiredo writes. “This isn’t theory. This is real-world operational data.”

The Question Everyone Is Asking, Answered By Someone Who Actually Flies

Figueiredo says he has been flooded with calls since the FCC ban asking the same question: “Which DFR platforms should we buy now: U.S.-made or foreign-made?”

His answer is refreshingly practical. For dock-based DFR operations, previously FCC-approved DJI Dock 3 and Dock 1 units remain his top recommendations if agencies can still get them. For non-dock DFR programs, the DJI M30T, M350, M4TD, and M400 are what he calls “your workhorses.”

This aligns with what we reported when the FCC confirmed that existing, previously authorized DJI models can continue to be imported and sold. The ban targets new FCC authorizations, not equipment that already has valid certifications. That distinction is critical for agencies making procurement decisions right now.

The “Future Upgrades” Trap: Why Waiting Is The Real Risk

Skeptics keep asking Figueiredo about future DJI releases and upgrade paths. His response cuts through the speculation with operational logic that policy analysts in Washington seem to have missed entirely.

“Simple. Cross that bridge when you get there,” he writes. “The current approved products are more than capable of keeping your DFR program operational through multiple administrations. By the time future upgrades become an issue, the drone landscape and regulations will almost certainly have shifted dramatically.”

He is not wrong. We have been tracking the regulatory whiplash in this industry for years. The FCC vote itself was driven by a National Security Determination that arrived just two days before the December 23 deadline. Anyone who thinks they can predict where drone policy will be in 2027 is fooling themselves.

DFR Success Is About Capability, Not Country of Origin

The most important point in Figueiredo’s post is one that gets lost in the national security rhetoric: “DFR success isn’t about where the drone is made. It’s about whether it works.”

What makes a DFR program successful? Figueiredo lists the factors that actually determine whether a drone will be there when lives are on the line: reliability, uptime, integration, training, policy compliance, and launching when the call drops. Notice what is not on that list: country of manufacture.

This perspective comes from someone who has been operating DJI equipment at Elizabeth PD since at least 2018, when the department first began using unmanned aerial vehicles. We covered their program back in 2020 when Elizabeth PD received five DJI Mavic 2 Enterprise drones through DJI’s U.S. Disaster Relief Program. That institutional experience is exactly what makes Figueiredo’s operational insights so valuable.

The Cost Reality No One Wants To Discuss

Figueiredo’s advice implicitly addresses a problem we have documented extensively: the crushing cost burden agencies face when forced to switch to Blue sUAS alternatives. Florida’s St. Cloud Police Department is paying $890,000 over five years for a DFR program that would cost roughly $150,000 to $250,000 with DJI equipment.

Brooklyn Park, Minnesota committed $4.6 million for its Skydio-based DFR expansion. By contrast, agencies that can still procure DJI equipment are getting proven capability at a fraction of the price.

“We don’t ground helicopters when legislation shifts,” Figueiredo observes. “We don’t cancel patrol cars because the next model might not arrive. We buy what works, operate within the rules, and adapt when the environment changes.”

What This Means For Agencies Still On The Fence

The practical takeaway from Figueiredo’s post is clear: agencies with existing DJI equipment should stop panicking and start flying. Those still building DFR programs should focus on capability and reliability rather than waiting for regulatory clarity that may never come.

DJI Dock systems have proven themselves across America’s most demanding operational environments, from El Paso’s 22-dock citywide network to Asheville’s Hurricane Helene response. The DJI M30 series and M350 continue to be the workhorses that save American lives while policy debates drag on in Washington.

Figueiredo’s final message to agencies paralyzed by uncertainty is worth repeating: “DFR is about capability, not paralysis by uncertainty. Build the program. Fly the missions. Collect the intelligence. The rest? The rest will sort itself out, just like it always has.”

DroneXL’s Take

Luis Figueiredo is saying out loud what many public safety drone operators are thinking privately but afraid to say: the FCC ban does not change the operational reality on the ground. Previously approved equipment still works. The drones that have been saving lives for years will continue saving lives tomorrow.

What I find most compelling about Figueiredo’s perspective is the data backing it up. Ten thousand DFR flights with two-year-old equipment is not a talking point. It is operational proof that the “buy American at any cost” narrative ignores the actual needs of first responders. While politicians and lobbyists debate national security abstractions, operators like Figueiredo are out there running missions and keeping communities safe with the tools that work.

My prediction: we will see a growing divide between agencies that follow Figueiredo’s advice to maximize existing equipment and those that panic-purchase overpriced Blue sUAS alternatives they cannot fully utilize. The agencies that stay focused on capability rather than compliance theater will deliver better outcomes at lower cost. In three years, the data will prove who made the right call.

What do you think? Are you following Figueiredo’s approach of maximizing existing DJI equipment, or has your agency already made the switch to Blue sUAS alternatives? Share your operational experience in the comments below.

Editorial Note: This article was researched and drafted with the assistance of AI to ensure technical accuracy and archive retrieval. All insights, industry analysis, and perspectives were provided exclusively by Haye Kesteloo and our other DroneXL authors, editors, and Youtube partners to ensure the “Human-First” perspective our readers expect.