Are the feds ever going to loosen the rules for the little guys?

[PatR]

BLOS drones have been in use inside the U.S. since at least late 2004. The Hunter was being used back then for border security. Later, the Predator was employed on our northern border for the same purpose. It has also been deployed for aerial surveillance at numerous cities during presidential visits. Both the Scan Eagle and Puma have been used for pipeline inspections in Alaska since 2013, while Scan Eagle obtained a CoA to survey BNSF rail lines in appx 2015. Currently, both the Scan Eagle and Global Hawk are used for long range recon by the Coast Guard, and ling range drones have been in use on DDG’s and other Naval vessels since 2008.

The Scan Eagle has over 1 million flight hours in dedicated aerial surveillance over densely populated areas, the Shadow has close to that, and Aerosonde is playing catch up. We can be pretty sure our gov fully comprehends what they’ve been doing with Predator and Reaper.

Point being, there’s nothing about BLOS drone ops our FAA has any real questions about as all the stuff mentioned has been either closely monitored or directly supervised by the FAA, with some aerospace companies hosting the FAA to provide them drone training.

 

[NMUnmanned]

BLOS drones have been in use inside the U.S. since at least late 2004. The Hunter was being used back then for border security. Later, the Predator was employed on our northern border for the same purpose. It has also been deployed for aerial surveillance at numerous cities during presidential visits. Both the Scan Eagle and Puma have been used for pipeline inspections in Alaska since 2013, while Scan Eagle obtained a CoA to survey BNSF rail lines in appx 2015. Currently, both the Scan Eagle and Global Hawk are used for long range recon by the Coast Guard, and ling range drones have been in use on DDG’s and other Naval vessels since 2008.

The Scan Eagle has over 1 million flight hours in dedicated aerial surveillance over densely populated areas, the Shadow has close to that, and Aerosonde is playing catch up. We can be pretty sure our gov fully comprehends what they’ve been doing with Predator and Reaper.

Point being, there’s nothing about BLOS drone ops our FAA has any real questions about as all the stuff mentioned has been either closely monitored or directly supervised by the FAA, with some aerospace companies hosting the FAA to provide them drone training.

The government operating large military and Law enforcement drones is a very different thing.

 

[PatR]

Only one difference really, they are all covered under military standards exception for airworthiness and crew training. In that we should accept they are greatly superior to our equipment, training, and ops standards.

However, with the exception of Predator, Reaper, and Global Hawk they are not as reliable as certificated general and commercial aviation aircraft. However, our government has, over more than a decade and millions of flight hours, been observing and collecting performance and operational BLOS data establishing what works and what doesn’t. They have had everything they need to create a rule set for BVLOS ops for a long time.

 

[Earnest Ward]

Food for thought: the USPS is also looking (yet again) at getting into the drone delivery business (and throwing in "image and other data collection services" for good measure.) USPS wants to look at using drones to deliver mail, and to "improve autonomous vehicle performance".

 

[Earnest Ward]

This is what UPS used to get their approval, a Swiss company.

Matternet's Technology Enabling First FAA-Approved Drone Airline - UASweekly.com

Today, Matternet, a pioneer in drone delivery for medical applications, announced its drone delivery system is enabling the first FAA-approved drone airline. The full Part 135 Standard certification was granted to UPS allowing the company to operate as a drone airline using Matternet’s drone...

uasweekly.com

Matternet

An end-to-end technology solution integrating the Matternet M2 Drone, the Matternet Station and the Matternet Cloud Platform. We provide our platform as a service to healthcare, e-commerce and logistics organizations.

mttr.net

From their website: "Authorized by the Swiss aviation authority for full logistics operations over cities "
Makes one wonder how much of the FAA's testing was original work and how much did they rely on the "Swiss Aviation Authority." Just saying.

On a side note, have Americans just given up on ever leading the UAS market? Hard to believe.

It seems that most of the focus in this thread thus far has been about the (eventual) hardware requirements. But - given the current lack of: a practical demonstration (i.e., "check ride") for initial 107 certification; RPiC current experience minimums; or BFR requirements - I'm thinking we might reasonably expect the FAA to set new experience requirements, or even an additional rating on our certificates, for BVLOS pilots.

 

[PatR]

I do believe you are accurately predicting the future. If the FAA was to adopt the practices of corporate aerospace drone operations we might expect 2nd class medical certification and a full scale pilot certificate as a prerequisite for commercial BLOS ops.

 

[R.Perry]

The government drones also operate on much different frequencies and have satellite links that are very secure. That is why a pilot can sit in a cubical in Los Vegas and blow stuff up in Iraq. We get to share the airways with routers, and cell phones. If we want safe BLOS we need better communications. I think we can forget about satellite links because I don't believe the satellites could handle thousands of drone data links. The only other option would be the cellular networks possibly providing the links, but here again their are areas not covered.

 

[PatR]

There’s actually a dearth of smaller government/military/commercial drones that are not flown using satellite communications, although they do use different frequencies and much better “line of sight” radio transmission systems.

Shadow, Puma, Scan Eagle, Aerosonde, Tiger Shark, and Black Jack all employ “direct link” communication systems. Effective range is determined by strength of signal between the transmitting and receiving antennas. They are flown from locations colocated with the operational areas. Range can be and is extended by placing secondary command and control stations down range of the launch and recovery sites, allowing aircraft to be launched from one location, flown for a many miles in the direction of secondary stations where they are “handed off” to secondary flight crews for continued operation further down range.

I won’t discuss frequencies or power levels but I’ve personally flown at distances well exceeding 100 kilometers using direct path ground station radio transmission systems, and at other times handed off the aircraft I was flying to a remote station to continue a flight for much longer distances. Recovery of the aircraft is a reversal of the outbound process.

At any given time there are a great many more systems of this type in the air than there are the satellite linked systems. The difference between the government level systems and what “the hobby sector” flies is quality of components, assembly practices, frequencies, reliability, and training. The limiting factor for direct path operations is signal cycle time and line of sight signal obstruction as the further away the aircraft the longer it takes for round trip signal reception and both ends of the system have to be able to “see” each other. Loss of signal usually induces the same response our little stuff performs, initiating an automated RTH on a pre-programmed flight plan.

So they know what works, what it takes to allow it to work, and how to fly them. Acceptable standards for minimum equipment and system performance were established years ago, but there are no regulations in place than can be used by others to follow. I’m fairly certain the systems that will be used by Amazon and UPS employ C2 systems quite different from the common isolated hand held transmitters we employ. They may have an RC transmitter associated with the system but odds are it will be interfaced with a computer as part of a ground station. The shorter distance BVLOS systems can employ standard type RC transmitters but will require a much improved antenna arrangement to maintain link. My best guess is systems of that type will be limited to relatively short range CoA authorizations similar to what law enforcement agencies are currently being provided.

Ultimately, BVLOS is going to happen when the regulatory requirements are in place, and we won’t like the requirements as very little, if anything, of what we have in our hands now will be compliant, and what would comply will be unaffordable at multiple levels.

 

[dougcjohn]

A little more interesting read on the UPS and side notes on Amazon & Google close on UPS heels.

FAA Approves UPS' Flight Forward to Be First Ever “Drone Airline”

This week the FAA granted the broadest approvals for drone delivery they have ever issued to Flight Forward, a subsidiary of UPS.

uavcoach.com

 

[FlyingGary]

UPS was granted a Part 135 certificate. Takes wads of cash to get one of those.

That definitely smells.

 

[PatR]

Like money[emoji6]

 

[Free2Fly]

Didn't I see an ad somewhere where they launched from the top of a UPS truck? Concept thing. Anyway, I saw a job posting for this in North Carolina (I think it was) that said 107 and 135 were both part of the qualifiers for the job. It'll be good to have experienced folks that are versed in the regulatory side be the guinea pigs, but if that's the standard it takes I'm afraid Al and Luis are both correct that it's always going to be a "money talks" game and the smaller operators won't ever be able to participate.

 

[PatR]

It was about 4 years ago the FAA and Drone Advisory Council (DAC) got together and created “Pathfinders” to establish drone standards. One of the plans was to use Pathfinders in conjunction with the ASTM testing labs above Los Angeles to develop certification standards, with emphasis on structural stress testing. That lab was designated as the primary certification test facility for drone components. At the time that plan was generated the CEO of a Boeing subsidiary chaired the DAC.

We need only to review the companies populating the DAC and who was selected to be Pathfinders to deduce the path that is being taken, and who that path will favor. Evidence of that is already being demonstrated by who is being granted FAA BLOS certification.