Beyond Line of Sight (BVLOS) Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC) Final Report

[Chaosrider]

Looks like an backunderhanded way to get all crewed aircraft to install ADS hardware and start transmitting.

That's inevitable, with the possible exception of ultralights.

It's just a question of timing.

TCS

 

[Ralph thompson]

Its inevitable, the future ATC systems globally will incorporate ADSB as their foundation.

 

[maelstrom]

If they're going 30-40MPH, they can see the drone and avoid.

Only if they’re lucky! My experience of flying a helicopter below 500ft is that it’s usually VERY difficult to spot something the size of a drone before it’s too close to easily avoid. If you’re that low, it usually means that you have a lot of your spare capacity diverted to other things like finding something on the ground and/or avoiding obstructions. Putting the onus on the manned aircraft to avoid the drone is a recipe for disaster, in my opinion.

 

[Vic Moss]

Only if they’re lucky! My experience of flying a helicopter below 500ft is that it’s usually VERY difficult to spot something the size of a drone before it’s too close to easily avoid. If you’re that low, it usually means that you have a lot of your spare capacity diverted to other things like finding something on the ground and/or avoiding obstructions. Putting the onus on the manned aircraft to avoid the drone is a recipe for disaster, in my opinion.

Well, you're not alone in that. The best from of action would be to have all manned aircraft stay above 500' AGL at all time. Give them a hard floor. Landing, launching, inspections and ag would obviously be exempt.

If manned aircraft stays above 500', and unmanned stay below 400', the issue would evaporate.

 

[Jagerbomb52]

Well, you're not alone in that. The best from of action would be to have all manned aircraft stay above 500' AGL at all time. Give them a hard floor. Landing, launching, inspections and ag would obviously be exempt.

If manned aircraft stays above 500', and unmanned stay below 400', the issue would evaporate.

From my experience talking to pilots here in in Canada this will never happen at least here. They are so against unmanned air craft you take your life in your hands just trying to talk to them. We are the problem and must be removed to solve the problem in their eyes. I'm sure many pilots in the USA feel the same way.

 

[Vic Moss]

From my experience talking to pilots here in in Canada this will never happen at least here. They are so against unmanned air craft you take your life in your hands just trying to talk to them. We are the problem and must be removed to solve the problem in their eyes. I'm sure many pilots in the USA feel the same way.

Luckily that's not as bad an issue here. The FAA is adamant that UAS are incorporated into the NAS. Congress has mandated it. So everyone is at the table. We'll see where is goes.

 

[Jagerbomb52]

Luckily that's not as bad an issue here. The FAA is adamant that UAS are incorporated into the NAS. Congress has mandated it. So everyone is at the table. We'll see where is goes.

Hopefully the little mouse (UAV operators) will be heard but somehow I think manned aircraft will have a loader voice at that table.

 

[Vic Moss]

Hopefully the little mouse (UAV operators) will be heard but somehow I think manned aircraft will have a loader voice at that table.

Technically, we little mice outnumber manned aircraft.

But we can all play nice if everyone agress.

 

[Jagerbomb52]

Technically, we little mice outnumber manned aircraft.

But we can all play nice if everyone agress.

I do wish you luck, think this could take some time though

 

[Robert Prior]

If they're going 30-40MPH, they can see the drone and avoid.

I wouldn't bet on it.

A couple of years ago (pre-pandemic) I saw a video made by a flying club made by pilots who also flew drones. They did low passes over a field with a drone in the air (careful not in the flight path) and shot video from both the drone and the plane. It was very difficult to see the drone even when you knew roughly where it would be.

Not a pilot (get too airsick for that) but I imagine that when flying low you have a lot to monitor and a drone wouldn't be easier to spot that it was for me at home playing the video full-screen.

I may be totally wrong about this, and would cheerfully accept correction by someone who's a pilot.

 

[eEridani]

I have never looked for a drone while flying. I think it may be as simple as the car driver blaming the motorcycle rider for all accidents with "He came out of nowhere and hit me!" even when the car made a left in front of the bike that had it's headlight on. Or the "He was in my blind spot." as the driver held up a thumb to block the view of the school bus.

 

[maelstrom]

The best from of action would be to have all manned aircraft stay above 500' AGL at all time. Give them a hard floor. Landing, launching, inspections and ag would obviously be exempt.

If manned aircraft stays above 500', and unmanned stay below 400', the issue would evaporate.

Whilst that would clearly remove most (but not all) of the danger, it’s simply not feasible in a some of the cases you mentioned. Search & rescue, helimed, police operations, crop spraying, pipeline inspections, to name just a few, all need to be able to regularly take place, unrestricted, below 500ft. If these aircraft are allowed to do it, and they definitely should be, the danger will always be there.

I would definitely support these operations needing to be specifically authorised and other types of commercial and recreational flying excluded.

 

[Vic Moss]

Whilst that would clearly remove most (but not all) of the danger, it’s simply not feasible in a some of the cases you mentioned. Search & rescue, helimed, police operations, crop spraying, pipeline inspections, to name just a few, all need to be able to regularly take place, unrestricted, below 500ft. If these aircraft are allowed to do it, and they definitely should be, the danger will always be there.

I would definitely support these operations needing to be specifically authorised and other types of commercial and recreational flying excluded.

This would be the best approach. For the operations we're talking about, the remote pilots would be seasoned professionals, with the possibility of a 108 rating. If so, NOTAMS would be part of the process of flying these longer range BVLOS operations. Both checking for NOTAMs, as well as putting them in place. We'd also need buy in from manned aviation for the operations you mention above.

Not an unreasonable requirement for future BVLOS operations.

 

[maelstrom]

This would be the best approach. For the operations we're talking about, the remote pilots would be seasoned professionals, with the possibility of a 108 rating. If so, NOTAMS would be part of the process of flying these longer range BVLOS operations. Both checking for NOTAMs, as well as putting them in place.

I think the problems start when people think that issuing a NOTAM means that they’re safe. Take a hypothetical case where an area was NOTAM’d for BVLOS operations but a helimed aircraft had to enter it on a life-saving mission. Unless the drone had some sort of autonomous avoidance system on board, there would be no way of safely deconflicting the two aircraft. Perhaps a requirement to have high-intensity strobe lights on the drone might help. However, looking at the number of mid-air collisions over the years between full sized aircraft, there’s no guarantee that this would be a foolproof solution.

 

[Vic Moss]

I think the problems start when people think that issuing a NOTAM means that they’re safe. Take a hypothetical case where an area was NOTAM’d for BVLOS operations but a helimed aircraft had to enter it on a life-saving mission. Unless the drone had some sort of autonomous avoidance system on board, there would be no way of safely deconflicting the two aircraft. Perhaps a requirement to have high-intensity strobe lights on the drone might help. However, looking at the number of mid-air collisions over the years between full sized aircraft, there’s no guarantee that this would be a foolproof solution.

NOTAM doesn't ensure safety if used by itself. But as one part of a multi-part safety mitigation system for every flight, it will help reduce the likelihood of an incident.

Having an autonomous detect and avoid system would be another part of this process, as would strobes.

The extended BVLOS missions will have a multiple safety approach for every flight. The process of approving that 108 type rating is just starting. We'll have a ton of opportunity to make sure it's done right, and make the NAS as safe as possible for all users, manned or unmanned.

It will never be 100% safe, nothing in the NAS is. But we can make it as close to 100% as possible.

 

[sar104]

I think the problems start when people think that issuing a NOTAM means that they’re safe. Take a hypothetical case where an area was NOTAM’d for BVLOS operations but a helimed aircraft had to enter it on a life-saving mission. Unless the drone had some sort of autonomous avoidance system on board, there would be no way of safely deconflicting the two aircraft. Perhaps a requirement to have high-intensity strobe lights on the drone might help. However, looking at the number of mid-air collisions over the years between full sized aircraft, there’s no guarantee that this would be a foolproof solution.

For search and rescue operations we go beyond just an informational NOTAM and put a full TFR in place. If emergency traffic needs access then that is communicated to the POC and sUAS operations are suspended.

In principle that would work for other cases too and might be the best answer until robust autonomous avoidance systems are in place.

 

[maelstrom]

For search and rescue operations we go beyond just an informational NOTAM and put a full TFR in place.

I was thinking more about if the NOTAM related to the BVLOS drone flight. I would be surprised if a drone operator checked the NOTAMs once his drone was airborne. Additionally, helimed flights wouldn’t be specifically NOTAM’d so the potential danger would always be there.

 

[sar104]

I was thinking more about if the NOTAM related to the BVLOS drone flight. I would be surprised if a drone operator checked the NOTAMs once his drone was airborne. Additionally, helimed flights wouldn’t be specifically NOTAM’d so the potential danger would always be there.

Yes - that's what I meant too. If it is a TFR then it is the responsibility of the incoming flights to get clearance.

 

[spudster]

Just the first of many?

Alphabet's Wing will begin drone deliveries in Dallas-Fort Worth on April 7th

Alphabet's Wing division has announced that it's launching a drone delivery service in the Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW) metroplex on April 7th.

www.engadget.com