Good news for UK holders of an A2 CofC

[zocalo]

The CAA has just announced that:

"Following the decision to extend the transitional period to 1 January 2026, holders of an A2 Certificate of Competence that references transition and legacy period dates of 31 December 2022, may continue to use these privileges until either the expiry date of the certificate, or the end of the new transition/legacy period (on 1 January 2026) whichever is sooner.
A re-issue of the certificate is not required. Our website has more information on the change."

Personally, I'd prefer it if they'd just use the EU's C-markings, or at least re-purpose each of them to a set of UK-specific rules, rather than force them into Legacy without a CofC, but we are where we are and will now have to wait and see how the DfT and CAA decide to square this circle sometime between now and 1st January 2026.

 

[Cymru]

Its "good news" hidden in bad news - the refusal to recognise EU class marks as previously stated.

Which means for anything over 250g after the period is restricted to A2/A3 operation.
Its going to be a lot more restrictive once we start seeing class marked drones. I can see another U-turn coming as the suddenly change of direction is surprising and seemingly not as the result of any consultation at all.

 

[zocalo]

Its "good news" hidden in bad news - the refusal to recognise EU class marks as previously stated.

Which means for anything over 250g after the period is restricted to A2/A3 operation.
Its going to be a lot more restrictive once we start seeing class marked drones. I can see another U-turn coming as the suddenly change of direction is surprising and seemingly not as the result of any consultation at all.

Yeah, we'll have to wait and see what next. The DfT/CAA seem set on the idea of sunsetting the current generation of drones into a legacy class, which means that some kind of new classification is needed, so it's now down to what the specs of that will be and how compliance is demonstrated, and that's not likely to be decided soon or they wouldn't have given themselves three years to sort it out.

My worry is that if those specs diverge from the EU then, while getting manufacturer's to put an extra marking on a sticker shouldn't be a problem (historically this was the norm), getting the actual certification done might be. There are only a handful of companies that can do this kind of certification, drones are a niche market, and at least one of them is going to have to provide that UK-specific certification service *at a bearable cost* for that to fly (if you'll excuse the pun). Should the DfT go down that route, and that certification cost is too high, then I suspect we're going to see a lot of smaller vendors pull out of the UK market, and maybe even some of the larger vendors like DJI limit the range of models they bring to the UK market.

 

[Cymru]

Thats a potential market killer for anything >250g if it goes ahead. Doesn't matter what drone it is, its 150m or 50m from people so pretty much no flying in or near towns and restricted to rural areas.

 

[zocalo]

View attachment 157407

Thats a potential market killer for anything >250g if it goes ahead. Doesn't matter what drone it is, its 150m or 50m from people so pretty much no flying in or near towns and restricted to rural areas.

I agree entirely. As things stand this is setting up to put >250g out of consideration for a whole bunch of legal flyers as every standalone structure that might have a person it essentially needs that 150m NFZ around it, but what we don't know yet is what the DfT/CAA intend to have instead of the C-mark, or how any potential future changes to CofCs and GVCs might play into it. My hunch is they'll aim for a UK-specific equivalent to the C-mark and specs, then struggle to find anyone willing to ratify drones are compliant at a price the market can bear, after which a change of direction will ensue. That probably means at least two years where pilots in the UK are essentially in limbo and heavily restricted in where they can fly unless they go to the trouble of getting a CofC or GVC.

Then again, as you suggested, they've already made two major changes with the massive extension of the transition period, and now dropping the C-mark recognition, so maybe we'll see another (things are supposed to come in threes, afterall). I'm pretty sure manufacturers, retailers, and probably many of the larger commercial drone users and bodies like the BMFA are going to be lobbying them pretty fiercely over the next few years, so I'm not going to write off a reasonable solution just yet. I'm fully expecting the current uncertainty to continue for some years though, and that's not going to be good for hobbyist and professional drone users alike.

 

[Cymru]

Another factor at play here which previously wasnt involved much is the DfT who seem to be calling the shots.

Agree with the first paragraph totally - expect more extensions, more rules backtracking, a system the same as EASA that doesnt recognise it, manufacturers not spending the money then more delays whilst they think of something else.

My "legacy" Mavic 2 Pro and Mini 3 combined with A2CoC will do me for a while. I've got no incentive at all to seek out a new class marked device now at all.

 

[zocalo]

Another factor at play here which previously wasnt involved much is the DfT who seem to be calling the shots.

The CAA answers to the DfT, so what's changed is that the DfT is getting much more involved. That's almost certainly a post-Brexit thing; previously EU law would have largely dicated much of what the CAA needed to do so the DfT would have largely been hidden in the background. Now that the DfT has the responsiblility of producing manageing UK-specific legislation and specs relating to airspace their involvement will likely become much more noticeable going forwards.

Given the turmoil in UK government and multiple changes in transport ministers, I suspect that may well be the root issue here; different ministers with different views in the DfT, that keep telling the CAA to change direction. The CAA does what they are told by the DfT and makes the appropriate announcements, so when the DfT changes its mind it could easily appear that the CAA is responsible. The DfT might not be behind every change of tack the CAA has announced, but I suspect it's going to be most of them.

 

[Johnmcl7]

Another factor at play here which previously wasnt involved much is the DfT who seem to be calling the shots.

Agree with the first paragraph totally - expect more extensions, more rules backtracking, a system the same as EASA that doesnt recognise it, manufacturers not spending the money then more delays whilst they think of something else.

My "legacy" Mavic 2 Pro and Mini 3 combined with A2CoC will do me for a while. I've got no incentive at all to seek out a new class marked device now at all.

This is what I'd planned to do but then at the time I think they were planning that even with the A2 cert, drones would still go back down to A3 and the new European classification system would be coming into play. With the Mavic 3 C1 certified I was toying with picking one up but now that's out the window so back to thinking about going with the A2 certification but I have little confidence they're going to stick with the current plan.

 

[zocalo]

The CAA posted a further update on this a few days ago, which you can find here. Basically, it seems they don't want to mirror the EU standard, or adopt a slightly different set of limitiations and rules using the same markings,
which would allow the EU class markings to be re-used within UK law. Neither do they have an equivalent UK specific system in place and able to allow drones to be independantly certified (I suspect the latter will be a *big* problem given how niche this will be), so they're now deleting all references to class markings in the CAA guidance docs. The key quote is this:

There are currently no designated standards, Market Surveillance Authority, or conformance assessment bodies established in the UK under UK Regulation (EU) 2019/945, therefore it will not be possible for manufacturers to comply with the UK class marking requirements of this regulation.
As such, there will be no UAS which are able to make use of the Open Category class mark provisions in UK Regulation (EU) 2019/947.

If I interpret that correctly, then there really isn't much change for now as the legacy period has been extended until 1st January 2026. Once that happens, however, then all drones, regardless of age and including new models released after that date, will essentially be classed as "legacy" unless the DfT and CAA have managed to get something similar to the EASA regs into place. Or they could move the goal posts yet again.

 

[old man mavic]

for me personally, now all the changes have been announced ,and in most cases implemented ,and on the statute books ,then for drone flyers in the UK there are only two paths to follow ,if you want to purchase a drone
(1) if you just want to fly only for recreational purposes ,then your only choice of drone ,is one that weighs less than 250g
(2) if you want to be able to fly anything heavier ,with better flight capabilities ,as a recreational flyer ,then you are going to need to go to the expense of completing a GVC course,and flying your drone with the necessary permissions ,and record keeping,that is required, so you can fly in similar places to those enjoyed by sub 250g drones
when you add the cost of a decent drone ,the price of the GVC course and the learning curve ,that needs to be mastered ,there are not many people ,who just want to have the occasional flight ,on a day out, or on holiday ,who will go to all that trouble, and expense ,so will end up just flying a sub 250g drone , the A2 C of C is really of little value,now that the very drones it was designed to be used for ,are basically dead in the water

 

[Cymru]

GVC isn't really feasible for fun flyers as you pointed out so the legal option is 250g.

The new class marks will offer people in Europe far more flexibility and i cant see manufacturers paying for a UK only certification.

Also in reality i suspect it'll just mean lots of people flying >250g drones illegally.

 

[zocalo]

Yep, it's a complete mess for prosumers who want higher quality hardware for the better imagery options it generally provides but don't fly professionally often enough, if at all, to justify a GVC, let alone manage all the requirements of operating under a GVC when they need to utilise it. It's got to especially suck for the companies that went through the hassle of preparing all the necessary training material of offering the CofCs as well.

Frankly, I can't see any UK-specific technical certification scheme getting off the ground (sorry) for something as niche as drones; it's a LOT of addtional expense for a quite tiny market, so pretty much only going to be an option for big players like DJI and Autel. Model aircraft clubs might be OK, as long as they can find suitably large open areas to operate in within the relevant category for their specific model(s) of aircraft, but it might also be a death knell for any clubs that don't have access to anywhere appropriate.

Sure, the CAA and DfT do have until 2026 to sort out a better long-term solution but, given the farcical nature of the rule and regulation making attempts so far, I'm not holding out much hope. Like Cymru, I am expecting a lot of pilots to simply start either just paying lipservice to the rules, if not ignoring them altogether, come 2026 though, and that's ultimately not going to be good for anyone. The CAA claims four key roles to describe their work, and number two on that list is "consumers have choice, value for money, are protected and treated fairly when they fly". That's presumably aimed at commercial airline passengers, but the wording is open-ended enough that it can be applied to drone pilots too, in which case the CAA is failing abysmally, IMHO.

 

[Felix le Chat]

Yeah, we'll have to wait and see what next. The DfT/CAA seem set on the idea of sunsetting the current generation of drones into a legacy class, which means that some kind of new classification is needed, so it's now down to what the specs of that will be and how compliance is demonstrated, and that's not likely to be decided soon or they wouldn't have given themselves three years to sort it out.

My worry is that if those specs diverge from the EU then, while getting manufacturer's to put an extra marking on a sticker shouldn't be a problem (historically this was the norm), getting the actual certification done might be. There are only a handful of companies that can do this kind of certification, drones are a niche market, and at least one of them is going to have to provide that UK-specific certification service *at a bearable cost* for that to fly (if you'll excuse the pun). Should the DfT go down that route, and that certification cost is too high, then I suspect we're going to see a lot of smaller vendors pull out of the UK market, and maybe even some of the larger vendors like DJI limit the range of models they bring to the UK market.

If you're interested, there are a number of manufacturing firms that have been in the process of R&D for building UK specific drone hardware for over 2 years now. I am aware of the partnership between central government (in the form of grant funding) and Coventry City council that has been operational for the last 2 years. The main thrust of this development centres around commercial systems (Coventry City airport's controlling shareholder is planning to build the UK's first commercial/private use 'AeroDrone-Drome' on-site and construct a lithium Ion/ Polymer battery manufactory at the same location). I have no doubt that this regional initiative is being mirrored at other locations in the UK... so Euro-compliant "C" classification would be redundant. Source of information: local politician who was part of the consultation process.

 

[zocalo]

If you're interested, there are a number of manufacturing firms that have been in the process of R&D for building UK specific drone hardware for over 2 years now. I am aware of the partnership between central government (in the form of grant funding) and Coventry City council that has been operational for the last 2 years. The main thrust of this development centres around commercial systems (Coventry City airport's controlling shareholder is planning to build the UK's first commercial/private use 'AeroDrone-Drome' on-site and construct a lithium Ion/ Polymer battery manufactory at the same location). I have no doubt that this regional initiative is being mirrored at other locations in the UK... so Euro-compliant "C" classification would be redundant. Source of information: local politician who was part of the consultation process.

I may be wrong, but I doubt these are going to be mass produced drones for public consumption, in which case the cynic in me reads what's going on as "we need to get these hobbyists out of the skies for commercial operations and to obtain as much government pork as possible".

I hope I'm wrong, but I have long and bitter experience working on UK government contracts in my day job to know it's not out of the question.

 

[Felix le Chat]

I may be wrong, but I doubt these are going to be mass produced drones for public consumption, in which case the cynic in me reads what's going on as "we need to get these hobbyists out of the skies for commercial operations and to obtain as much government pork as possible".

I hope I'm wrong, but I have long and bitter experience working on UK government contracts in my day job to know it's not out of the question.

I don't need to engage the 'cynic' circuit to also fully expect the 0-400'AGL 'Drone Corridor' to be sold off to commercial fliers such as Amazon, Google and all the other companies that specialize in delivery of consumables direct to your door... the precedent for flogging what was accepted for many decades as a free traffic highway was set years ago when the frequencies used by amateur radio enthusiasts got sold off to private companies. So I agree with the "we need to get these hobbyists out of the skies for commercial operations" comment wholeheartedly.

From the conversations I've had with the individual in question: the emphasis was on autonomous systems geared towards delivery of goods as well as (at a later stage) people. Private use drones (recreational) only cropped up in discussions when the word 'inconvenience' and 'nuisance' were also used. The CAA can make far more money from licensing and controlling commercial drone operating companies than it is ever likely to from those of us who have made it a point of honour to repeatedly pay the drone registration fee renewals... when having a drone registered and tagged with an OP number conveys absolutely no benefits to those of us who do toe the line.

 

[Johnmcl7]

for me personally, now all the changes have been announced ,and in most cases implemented ,and on the statute books ,then for drone flyers in the UK there are only two paths to follow ,if you want to purchase a drone
(1) if you just want to fly only for recreational purposes ,then your only choice of drone ,is one that weighs less than 250g
(2) if you want to be able to fly anything heavier ,with better flight capabilities ,as a recreational flyer ,then you are going to need to go to the expense of completing a GVC course,and flying your drone with the necessary permissions ,and record keeping,that is required, so you can fly in similar places to those enjoyed by sub 250g drones
when you add the cost of a decent drone ,the price of the GVC course and the learning curve ,that needs to be mastered ,there are not many people ,who just want to have the occasional flight ,on a day out, or on holiday ,who will go to all that trouble, and expense ,so will end up just flying a sub 250g drone , the A2 C of C is really of little value,now that the very drones it was designed to be used for ,are basically dead in the water

Which new rules state a GVC is required to fly a drone over 250g?

 

[Cymru]

Depends if you only want to fly 50m becoming 150m+ from any person or building.

 

[Johnmcl7]

Depends if you only want to fly 50m becoming 150m+ from any person or building.

That's not what was posted in the one I was quoting, I've checked through the rules and I can't find anything that matches the claims being made there hence I'm asking which rule that is. For clarity, this is the part I'm referring to:

if you want to be able to fly anything heavier ,with better flight capabilities ,as a recreational flyer ,then you are going to need to go to the expense of completing a GVC course,and flying your drone with the necessary permissions ,and record keeping,that is required, so you can fly in similar places to those enjoyed by sub 250g drones

 

[Cymru]

What he means is post-transition period, due to the failure to recognise class marks it means any drone over 250g is going to be bumped to A3 so 150m from anything which in large parts of the UK makes it legally impossible to fly.

If class marks HAD been accepted as originally claimed that wouldn't be the case.

 

[old man mavic]

Which new rules state a GVC is required to fly a drone over 250g?

well as @Cymru pointed out ,if its over 250g then basically that excludes you from doing any sort of flying ,except for very remote places ,but if you had a GVC you could get permission to fly at a particular location provided ,you had submitted a flight plan ahead of time and written a risk assessment ,which is what is required if you want to fly a heavier that 250g drone ,over people buildings and infrastructure,but that does not mean you are doing it for gain ,that applies even if you are just flying your drone for pleasure ,unless you want to stay more than 150m from everything