I know many readers will disagree when I say that electric aviation is not the future. But if you further hear me say that electric aviation is the present, you realize I’m not shitting electric aviation, but maybe I’m being too optimistic. The fact is, yes, electric aviation is already here. While we won’t be seeing an electric version of a 747 anytime soon, flights that once went to planes guzzling dirty leaded avgas or kerosene are now often done with battery-electric “drones.”
(Officially they’re Small Unmanned Aerial Systems or sUAS, and they’re not drones because they need a pilot, but that’s all semantics)
Why drones can’t legally fly far from their pilots
While drones have had a major impact on industry and public safety, and have even saved lives, they are largely subject to one huge limitation: by law they are not allowed to travel far from the operator. The FAA rules require them to stay within “visual line of sight,” meaning you can not only see the drone as a tiny speck in the sky, but actually know which way it’s looking. You also cannot use your camera display or other telemetry for this.
The maximum distance that most pilots can legally travel is about a quarter of a mile, but this varies depending on the drone (it’s easier to see larger ones from further away) and the conditions, among other things.
Why is the FAA doing this? It dates back to a 1956 mid-air collision of two planes that took place over the Grand Canyon. Through a series of misunderstandings and mistakes, the planes ended up at the same altitude and flew over the same area and were given no warning that another plane was in the area. By the time the pilots saw each other’s plans, it was too late to intervene (one pilot seems to have tried), and the planes tore each other up in mid-air. Both planes fell into the canyon and no one on either plane survived.
After the accident, a number of important reforms took place. One was the creation of the FAA itself. Another thing was that this accident, the first to kill more than 100 people, led to a much greater awareness of the risks of mid-air collisions. While there were a number of changes to the procedure, the FAA did not want pilots to rely on others for their safety. Among other safety measures, the pilot of any aircraft is required to “see and avoid” other aircraft. This rule applies to all aircraft, even drones.
With a drone you don’t drive in, so you have to be able to see not only other planes, but also the drone. This way you can both see and dodge. So you can’t fly it too far before you really can’t.
This sucks so changes are happening
Not being able to fly drones over long distances makes it difficult to do things that people want to do. Drone delivery, some search and rescue operations and even some types of photography are difficult or impossible to do under current rules.
One way to get around the “see and avoid” rule is to get a waiver from the FAA. To get a waiver, you must be able to let the agency know that you have found adequate other ways to detect other aircraft and avoid collisions. A few different methods of doing this have been approved by the agency, but the approvals are all limited in scope, often by distance or height. Public safety authorities also have a limited legal ability to operate out of line of sight, but only relatively close to the ground.
The agency does want pilots to do more, so they’re working on making rules to allow more people to go further without applying for a waiver. That regulatory process is currently underway and the agency is seeking input from the public. While you can submit comments as you would any other federal regulatory process, they recently held a live event to get input, which you can watch here:
A key point Jay Merkle, the executive director of the UAS Integration Office at the FAA, made was that FAA rules have been built for decades based on assumptions in manned aviation. Regulatory processes are slow and things like the ‘see and avoid’ rule are important, but they weren’t created with unmanned or unmanned aerial vehicles in mind.
To improve the situation for drone pilots, we need to move away from old assumptions and towards a future that keeps things safe and regulated based on the reality of drones. To get there, the FAA first set up a group of people (called ARC) representing various stakeholders in this process, and had them make recommendations. You can read the full report here (it’s long), or you can read a summary here. But the FAA can’t make rules based solely on the opinions of people they’ve chosen, so they opened the process and held an online meeting (video above).
Comments from not only pilots, but the general public can be sent to [email protected] until June 29, 2022, to be included in the regulatory process. So if you have ideas, be sure to send them in!
Some notable comments the agency received in the online meeting
The first man to comment represented ‘cropdusters’ or pilots for dropping aerial applications of chemicals, seeds, flame retardants and more onto crops and land. Cropdusters have been hostile to drone pilots in the past, as they often fly low where drones are allowed to fly. He acted on the importance of his industry and then expressed his concern that the recommendations would create safety concerns for arable farmers.
It’s worth noting that he left out something important: that cropdusters fear that unmanned aerial vehicles will replace manned cropdusting aircraft. So his comments are financial in nature and should be considered in that context, but we need to look in his comments for something motivated that is possible.
Several representatives from industry organizations that want the final rule to reflect the ARC report (linked above) have been positive about the report. As with the cropduster industry representative, we must remember that these views are also motivated by financial considerations. These groups also offer valuable perspectives that should also be considered.
Another commentator representing the helicopter industry disagreed with excluding BVLOS drones only from an area within half a nautical mile of heliports. He thinks the ARC recommendations still pose risks and don’t include many other designated areas for helicopters to land and take off that have not been published, including some heliports that are not on the list for whatever reason. Information is often incorrect and outdated, making it difficult for pilots to align with the heliport.
A representative for experimental pilots wants the FAA to always put manned aircraft first in all regulations, such as the cropduster representative, and had similar ideas to the helicopter pilots’ representative. She also worried that aircraft at low altitudes would have to spend money on equipment to avoid collisions, because ADSB is insufficient or not possible.
A complicated problem
If you’ve listened to the whole thing, it’s clear that this is not an easy problem. There are existing users who have safety needs, people who could lose their livelihood and great benefits that would come from expanding long-haul drone flights. Balancing all of this into a final rule will not be an easy task for the FAA.
Featured Image: A view of construction in El Paso, Texas. Permission was required to fly in this area (airport rules), a helicopter came through while footage was being taken and there are many things in sight that you are not allowed to fly over. Image by Jennifer Sensiba.
Check out our brand new E-BikeGuide† If you’re curious about electric bikes, this is the best place to start your e-mobility journey!
Do you appreciate the originality of CleanTechnica and the coverage of cleantech? Consider becoming a CleanTechnica member, supporter, technician or ambassador – or a patron on Patreon.
