Prop Guard Required in the future?

[kjonyou]

So I cant find the video I saw this but the FAA guy was saying that the new regulations will break drones down into 4 categories. The first one being recreational AKA exempt if under 249g. Basically he was saying that even if your drone qualifies for exempt status, they will require prop guards. Which means it will weight more, which will then mean it has to be registered. Which would then kick it into category 2?

Does anyone know if this is true? I mean as the actual law goes. Can Mr. Ranger write me a ticket some day for not having prop guards on my Mini?

"Category 1 small unmanned aircraft are permitted to operate over people, provided..." "Weigh 0.55 pounds or less," "Contain no exposed rotating parts that would cause lacerations"

 

[dirkclod]

First I’ve heard of that

 

[zeusfl]

By coincidence recently I have had a conversation with the FAA and I was asking for the category 1 and 2 things since I am about to take my Part 107 exam soon and here is the FAA response.

Even when actually they should have a list of drones approved for category 1,2,3 at least, they only have approved category 1 (Mavic Mini/Mini2) if you are using the prop guards and a lightweight battery to keep the drone below 249G. This is in order to fly over people following the rules.

For Category 2,3 you can only fly over people with a waiver that they will issue but still, you need always prop guards.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

"Category 1 small unmanned aircraft are permitted to operate over people, provided..." "Weigh 0.55 pounds or less," "Contain no exposed rotating parts that would cause lacerations"

I am sure I’ve seen this para relating to only OOP, operations over people.
As far as I’m aware this isn’t for everyday flight, as with normal sub 250 without prop guards.

 

[BigAl07]

This is relevant ONLY in relation to Operations Over People (OOP).

 

[BigAl07]

I just posted a Sticky Thread to help clear up some of the confusion:

FAA Part 107 - Operations Over People January 2022 USA

Let's get this out there in one neat and tidy package for future reference. This is only relevant for Part 107 Operations under the FAA in the United States of America!! This is from April 2021 so the actual dates might have changed a few days here or there but they are very close. At this...

mavicpilots.com

 

[DoomMeister]

So I cant find the video I saw this but the FAA guy was saying that the new regulations will break drones down into 4 categories. The first one being recreational AKA exempt if under 249g. Basically he was saying that even if your drone qualifies for exempt status, they will require prop guards. Which means it will weight more, which will then mean it has to be registered. Which would then kick it into category 2?

Does anyone know if this is true? I mean as the actual law goes. Can Mr. Ranger write me a ticket some day for not having prop guards on my Mini?

"Category 1 small unmanned aircraft are permitted to operate over people, provided..." "Weigh 0.55 pounds or less," "Contain no exposed rotating parts that would cause lacerations"

You are referring to the video about operation over people. Prop guards will not be necessary for flights NOT over people. This video gives a good explanation of OOP.

 

[Vic Moss]

By coincidence recently I have had a conversation with the FAA and I was asking for the category 1 and 2 things since I am about to take my Part 107 exam soon and here is the FAA response.

Even when actually they should have a list of drones approved for category 1,2,3 at least, they only have approved category 1 (Mavic Mini/Mini2) if you are using the prop guards and a lightweight battery to keep the drone below 249G. This is in order to fly over people following the rules.

Close. For Category 1, the drone has to be below 250g.

For Category 2,3 you can only fly over people with a waiver that they will issue but still, you need always prop guards.

Incorrect reading.

The FAA will not be issuing you a waiver to fly over people. What he's saying is currently the only way to do it is to have a waiver. In the future, Cat 2-4 will be certified by the manufacturers.

@BigAl07 has a great thread explaining it. You should read that. Operations Over People

View attachment 142290

 

[vindibona1]

To simplify this, under the new rules you can fly over people if your drone weight under 250 grams including all attachments, AND must be equipped to insure protection from lacerations. The problem is if you put prop guards on your Mini 2 you will be overweight... though you might be able to get away with it with a lighter battery marketed for Japan.

I just weighed my Mini with and without accessories. My naked Mini 2 weight 239 grams. However my prop guards, which protect on all sides (not a cage) weighs 40 grams (279) which disqualifies it from that category. Adding a strobe to aid visual contact adds another 10g-15 grams boosting the weight to 289 grams. If I add leg extensions and fly with 3 strobe I am still at 300 grams. You would think that safety equipment would allow some sort exception to (what I consider to be) and arbitrary rule regarding gross weight. Perhaps this brings things into some perspective...

300 grams is equal to 10.58 ounces or 0.66 pounds.

• 50 pencils. ...
• 10 slices of bread. ...
• 3 cups of almonds. ...
• 6 Large eggs. ...

Now imagine being struck with that little amount of mass having been spread out 10" across with the prop guards.

 

[Vic Moss]

To simplify this, under the new rules you can fly over people if your drone weight under 250 grams including all attachments, AND must be equipped to insure protection from lacerations. The problem is if you put prop guards on your Mini 2 you will be overweight... though you might be able to get away with it with a lighter battery marketed for Japan.

I just weighed my Mini with and without accessories. My naked Mini 2 weight 239 grams. However my prop guards, which protect on all sides (not a cage) weighs 40 grams (279) which disqualifies it from that category. Adding a strobe to aid visual contact adds another 10g-15 grams boosting the weight to 289 grams. If I add leg extensions and fly with 3 strobe I am still at 300 grams. You would think that safety equipment would allow some sort exception to (what I consider to be) and arbitrary rule regarding gross weight. Perhaps this brings things into some perspective...

300 grams is equal to 10.58 ounces or 0.66 pounds.

• 50 pencils. ...
• 10 slices of bread. ...
• 3 cups of almonds. ...
• 6 Large eggs. ...

Now imagine being struck with that little amount of mass having been spread out 10" across with the prop guards.

The Mini 2 is capable of Category 1 OOP flights. But as you said, it requires the Japanese batteries, as well as a trimmed prop cage.

I know I've posted this before, but here is the article from that conversion.

Category 1-OOP Compliant-DJI Mini 2 - Drone Service Providers Alliance

Can the DJI Mini 2 be Category 1-Operations Over People compliant? We think so. All it takes is the Japanese Mini 2 battery, and a bit of judicious prop cage shaving. A quick disclaimer is in order. As per 14 CFR § 107.110, it is up to the Remote Pilot In Command (RPIC) to […]

dspalliance.org

 

[vindibona1]

The Mini 2 is capable of Category 1 OOP flights. But as you said, it requires the Japanese batteries, as well as a trimmed prop cage.

I know I've posted this before, but here is the article from that conversion.

Category 1-OOP Compliant-DJI Mini 2 - Drone Service Providers Alliance

Can the DJI Mini 2 be Category 1-Operations Over People compliant? We think so. All it takes is the Japanese Mini 2 battery, and a bit of judicious prop cage shaving. A quick disclaimer is in order. As per 14 CFR § 107.110, it is up to the Remote Pilot In Command (RPIC) to […]

dspalliance.org

Below are two similar if not identical prop guards. 40 grams without having to skeletonize a cage. If you could lighten up the Mini 2 by 10 grams alone you might be there at the 350g mark. I can't imagine why DJI hasn't jumped on the lighter weight batteries for the US. BTW... I was surprised when I weighed my Mini 2 with a Mini 1 battery inserted and found it to be 255g while my Mini 1 with the same battery was under 250g. I wonder what DJI did to lighten up the Mini 2 other than batteries?

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

To simplify this, under the new rules you can fly over people if your drone weight under 250 grams including all attachments, AND must be equipped to insure protection from lacerations. The problem is if you put prop guards on your Mini 2 you will be overweight... though you might be able to get away with it with a lighter battery marketed for Japan.

Japanese battery availability aside, I feel the guards designs as possibly not up to the task for OOP.

Prop 'guards' for the mini, and most other DJI designs (apart from the 'cages' they made for the M1P / MPP) just won't cut it (no pun intended).

The props are still able to lacerate.
Current prop guards mostly do not enclose the blades properly, and are only for mild protection from bumping walls, tree trunks, possibly flying up into a ceiling etc.
They won't protect from contact from bushes or branches, so can still lacerate human flesh easily in most circumstances.

The Mini 2 is capable of Category 1 OOP flights. But as you said, it requires the Japanese batteries, as well as a trimmed prop cage.

I know I've posted this before, but here is the article from that conversion.

Category 1-OOP Compliant-DJI Mini 2 - Drone Service Providers Alliance

Can the DJI Mini 2 be Category 1-Operations Over People compliant? We think so. All it takes is the Japanese Mini 2 battery, and a bit of judicious prop cage shaving. A quick disclaimer is in order. As per 14 CFR § 107.110, it is up to the Remote Pilot In Command (RPIC) to […]

dspalliance.org

I respect your industry involvement Vic, but are you sure the guards are up to what the FAA would require ?

Your link says . . .

Can the DJI Mini 2 be Category 1-Operations Over People compliant? ​

We think so.

FAA requires that an aircraft contains no “exposed rotating parts that would lacerate human skin upon impact with a human being”. (From Big Als sticky post, and from reading previous FAA website).

The Mini 2 guards are definitely a better, more enclosed setup (your DSPA link), than the original mini guards.

vs

Not bad top protection now, but still quite open on the underside.


The cages from the M1P / MPP would probably be more acceptable for purpose . . . not doubt someone will start making a similar design for the various drones to ensure compliance as the change comes into mainstream use more . . .

Or possibly a ducted FPV type of setup . . .

I don't think even some ducted props similar to the one above would make the grade, some ducting is deeper than above, others are shallower and could be a human impact issue.

The kind of protection required would (should ?) be either full cage type or full drone enclosure cage like the Flyability Elios 2 etc.

Your thoughts ?

 

[BigAl07]

Japanese battery availability aside, I feel the guards designs as possibly not up to the task for OOP.

Prop 'guards' for the mini, and most other DJI designs (apart from the 'cages' they made for the M1P / MPP) just won't cut it (no pun intended).

The props are still able to lacerate.
Current prop guards mostly do not enclose the blades properly, and are only for mild protection from bumping walls, tree trunks, possibly flying up into a ceiling etc.
They won't protect from contact from bushes or branches, so can still lacerate human flesh easily in most circumstances.



I respect your industry involvement Vic, but are you sure the guards are up to what the FAA would require ?

Your link says . . .

Can the DJI Mini 2 be Category 1-Operations Over People compliant? ​

We think so.

FAA requires that an aircraft contains no “exposed rotating parts that would lacerate human skin upon impact with a human being”. (From Big Als sticky post, and from reading previous FAA website).

The Mini 2 guards are definitely a better, more enclosed setup (your DSPA link), than the original mini guards.

vs

Not bad top protection now, but still quite open on the underside.


The cages from the M1P / MPP would probably be more acceptable for purpose . . . not doubt someone will start making a similar design for the various drones to ensure compliance as the change comes into mainstream use more . . .

Or possibly a ducted FPV type of setup . . .

I don't think even some ducted props similar to the one above would make the grade, some ducting is deeper than above, others are shallower and could be a human impact issue.

The kind of protection required would (should ?) be either full cage type or full drone enclosure cage like the Flyability Elios 2 etc.

Your thoughts ?

I'll agree with you half way.... until the FAA gives any further specs, "Prop Guards" will meet the requirement UNTIL someone ends up getting cut. At that time it will be determined the device did not meet the requirements and then liability could get crazy.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

I'll agree with you half way.... until the FAA gives any further specs, "Prop Guards" will meet the requirement UNTIL someone ends up getting cut. At that time it will be determined the device did not meet the requirements and then liability could get crazy.

Of course bad things can happen, but mostly, a competent pilot, good equipment (as reliable as we know the DJI drones to be), guards of any type would certainly mitigate the risk of injury somewhat.
That's a good thing for OOP.

If the worst happened, and the planets lined up on a bad way, a pilot mistake / drone failure, it happened to fall onto a person below, and someones finger entered a drones props, etc etc . . . yeah a lot has to happen to result in an incident that would cause reflection on the drones suitability for OOP.

Someone will no doubt make better guards (cages) as things ramp up.

 

[Vic Moss]

Below are two similar if not identical prop guards. 40 grams without having to skeletonize a cage. If you could lighten up the Mini 2 by 10 grams alone you might be there at the 350g mark. I can't imagine why DJI hasn't jumped on the lighter weight batteries for the US. BTW... I was surprised when I weighed my Mini 2 with a Mini 1 battery inserted and found it to be 255g while my Mini 1 with the same battery was under 250g. I wonder what DJI did to lighten up the Mini 2 other than batteries?


View attachment 142319

View attachment 142320

I would not consider those safe under my interpretation of § 107.110. There is too much open area. But it's up to each RPIC to determine their level of safety. But you better be right if something happens.

As far as what DJI did to lighten the Japanese Mini2, there are some material differences. I'm not sure exactly what. The vast majority of the weight savings comes from the 1 cell battery.

 

[Vic Moss]

Japanese battery availability aside, I feel the guards designs as possibly not up to the task for OOP.

Prop 'guards' for the mini, and most other DJI designs (apart from the 'cages' they made for the M1P / MPP) just won't cut it (no pun intended).

The props are still able to lacerate.
Current prop guards mostly do not enclose the blades properly, and are only for mild protection from bumping walls, tree trunks, possibly flying up into a ceiling etc.
They won't protect from contact from bushes or branches, so can still lacerate human flesh easily in most circumstances.



I respect your industry involvement Vic, but are you sure the guards are up to what the FAA would require ?

Your link says . . .

Can the DJI Mini 2 be Category 1-Operations Over People compliant? ​

We think so.

FAA requires that an aircraft contains no “exposed rotating parts that would lacerate human skin upon impact with a human being”. (From Big Als sticky post, and from reading previous FAA website).

The Mini 2 guards are definitely a better, more enclosed setup (your DSPA link), than the original mini guards.

vs

Not bad top protection now, but still quite open on the underside.


The cages from the M1P / MPP would probably be more acceptable for purpose . . . not doubt someone will start making a similar design for the various drones to ensure compliance as the change comes into mainstream use more . . .

Or possibly a ducted FPV type of setup . . .

I don't think even some ducted props similar to the one above would make the grade, some ducting is deeper than above, others are shallower and could be a human impact issue.

The kind of protection required would (should ?) be either full cage type or full drone enclosure cage like the Flyability Elios 2 etc.

Your thoughts ?

I am fully comfortable with those cages as OOP Cat 1 mitigation. The FAA leaves this up to the RPIC. So they really don't have a say so. But I will tell you that FAA folks have read that article and like it. Not officially obviously, but they do. They told me do in meetings.

I do have some smaller BETAFPV 95Xv2 with naked GoPros as well, but they're not up to snuff for what I do with my gear. I had those built for me before I got my Mini 2 compliant. They were never used for anything other than practice. I imagine I'll be getting rid of those at some point.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

I am fully comfortable with those cages as OOP Cat 1 mitigation. The FAA leaves this up to the RPIC.

Well, they are certainly the best design for protection in the way of DJI guards to date . . . the chances of something happening are so slim already, these guards would reduce risk again by a good factor.
Hopefully those that go down that path with the mini 2 find they never have an issue.

 

[kjonyou]

It's all this guys fault. Nothing says safety like flying a drone on stage in front of thousands of fans, grabbing it in the air and putting your hands into the whirling blades to take a selfie. The kicker is he drew a bloody heart on his shirt for his fans.

 

[dirkclod]

It's all this guys fault. Nothing says safety like flying a drone on stage in front of thousands of fans, grabbing it in the air and putting your hands into the whirling blades to take a selfie. The kicker is he drew a bloody heart on his shirt for his fans.

That’s old and has nothing to do with what’s going old now.
You could go back way further than that and see way worse
than that.
No doubt that was a dumb move but just saying.
This was from 2015. Toddler's eyeball sliced in half by drone propeller

 

[kjonyou]

I was joking, I am sure there are far worse accidents. But got to admit, probably the one that got the most attention by the general public.