DJI Beat Blue UAS Drones — DHS Hid the Scores

The Department of Homeland Security tested two DJI drones alongside Blue UAS-approved aircraft in a complex New York City environment, and the DJI aircraft scored higher on all nine evaluation criteria. That result never made it into DHS's public report. A for-official-use-only addendum obtained and published by DroneXL on October 2, 2026 shows the DJI Matrice 4T scoring 4.6 out of 5 and the Matrice 30T scoring 4.3, against a best Blue UAS score of 3.7.

Background

The test was run by DHS's National Urban Security Technology Laboratory (NUSTL), which evaluates drones for first responders operating in dense urban conditions — think GPS multipath, RF congestion, and tall buildings that block satellite links. NUSTL chose Hudson Yards in Manhattan as the test site specifically because it's hostile to drone navigation.

Blue UAS is a Pentagon-managed list of drones cleared for US government purchase after passing a cybersecurity review. Chinese manufacturers, including DJI, are barred from the list regardless of performance under National Defense Authorization Act "covered nation" rules — the same restriction behind the FCC's broader effort to keep Chinese-made drones off US telecom equipment lists. NUSTL's test evaluated six Blue UAS-listed drones on performance alone, then separately ran two DJI aircraft through the identical nine-criteria scoring as a comparison.

The Numbers DHS Left Out

The public version of DHS's report acknowledged that "covered-nation" drones were tested and said there were "significant differences" versus the Blue UAS fleet — without saying what those differences were or which direction they ran. The addendum fills in the blanks:

Three of the six Blue UAS drones tested couldn't hold position in the urban canyon, one suffered a flyaway, and another failed to pair with its controller for up to 15 minutes, according to the public report. Among the DJI aircraft, a Matrice 30T lost satellite and vision positioning overnight and drifted into a structure, sustaining damage — yet the addendum still scored it 4.3 overall on the strength of its other metrics.

Price is part of the backdrop: a Matrice 4T runs roughly $12,958 and a Matrice 30T about $18,608, versus $28,382 for the top-performing Skydio X10D.

Why DHS Kept the Scores Under Wraps

The addendum's own language is telling: DJI's disadvantage was framed around "cybersecurity concerns associated with being manufactured in a covered nation," not operational shortcomings. In other words, DHS isn't disputing that the Matrice drones flew better — it's arguing the security risk outweighs the performance gap, a judgment agencies get to make but didn't disclose to the public safety agencies relying on the published report to pick hardware.

That matters because the Blue UAS program is marketed as a performance-vetted list, not just a security-vetted one. Omitting the comparison data makes it harder for fire departments, police drone-as-first-responder (DFR) units, and search-and-rescue teams to understand exactly what trade-off they're making when they buy from the approved list instead of a cheaper, better-scoring DJI aircraft — something they are free to do unless state or local rules say otherwise, since the Blue UAS restriction applies to federal procurement, not private or most local agency purchases. For background on who can and can't legally buy and fly DJI hardware in the US today, see our DJI US ban status guide.

DSPA Takes It to Congress

The Drone Service Providers Alliance (DSPA) is using the leaked addendum to escalate a fight it had kept mostly out of the public eye. CEO Vic Moss is calling on "every drone pilot and first responder in the country to call Congress," asking lawmakers to designate a single agency to test every manufacturer's security protocols — DJI included — using the same methodology applied to performance testing, rather than excluding a brand by country of origin before the data is even collected.

DSPA's ask is narrow: run security and performance evaluations side by side, publish both, and let agencies weigh the trade-off themselves instead of having it decided for them in a redacted appendix.

What This Means for Drone Pilots

For public safety agencies building a DFR program, the addendum is now public record and can be cited in procurement debates, even though DHS never intended it to be. Agencies bound by federal grant conditions or state "trusted drone" laws still can't legally buy DJI hardware with that money, regardless of score. Agencies spending local or department funds, however, now have documented performance numbers to weigh against the security concerns DHS cites — something our DJI drones complete guide covers model by model for exactly this kind of buying decision.

For hobbyist and commercial DJI pilots outside government procurement, nothing changes operationally today. But the leak adds fresh pressure on the FCC and Congress as both continue reviewing covered-nation drone restrictions, and it's the kind of document that tends to surface again in litigation or legislative hearings.

Sources: DroneXL | DroneXL — DSPA Congress appeal