psdj comments on proposed small unmanned aircraft rules
DESCRIPTION
Comments from the Professional Society of Drone Journalists (DroneJournalism.org) on the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) for small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS).TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: PSDJ comments on proposed small unmanned aircraft rules](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022081816/55cf8f23550346703b99449e/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
The Professional Society of Drone Journalists 2001 Sheffield Road Oklahoma City, OK 73210 Dronejournalism.org
April 24, 2014
U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT)
Docket Operations M-30
West Building Ground Floor
Room W12-140
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE
Washington, DC 20590-0001
ATTN: Docket No. FAA-2015-0150
Introduction
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The Professional Society of Drone Journalists (PSDJ) represents the interests of more than 450
reporters, photographers, educators, engineers, and other small unmanned aircraft operators who
currently are or are working to augment free speech rights by using small unmanned aircraft
systems for journalistic purposes. Our organization has members in more than 37 countries,
including Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, and the United Kingdom, all of which
currently have regulations that make news coverage with UAS possible.
Founded in 2011, the bylaws of this organization give the PSDJ the mission of “Fostering the
development and safe operation of unmanned vehicles for journalistic purposes,” “Furthering the
adoption of unmanned vehicles by the press through education, outreach, and promotion,” and
“Advocating freedom of responsible and ethical use of unmanned vehicles by journalists.”
Whereas the FAA’s current policies greatly inhibit the ability for our members in the US to fly
and gather news in the public interest, the PSDJ previously commented on rules regarding hobby
(or “model”) aircraft (docket number FAA-2014-0396). The PSDJ also is internationally
recognized as having expert knowledge on the intersection of unmanned systems and press
freedoms, having been called on by the United Kingdom’s House of Lords Subcommittee on the
EU Internal Market, Infrastructure, and Employment to submit evidence on civilian use of drone
aircraft in the European Union.
Therefore we, the undersigned officer and board members of the PSDJ, are compelled to
comment on the proposed rules for small unmanned aircraft systems in the United States. We
appreciate the opportunity to comment, and thank the Federal Aviation Administration for its
hard work in producing the Notice for Proposed Rulemaking.
Summary
![Page 2: PSDJ comments on proposed small unmanned aircraft rules](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022081816/55cf8f23550346703b99449e/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Broadly, the proposed rules for small unmanned aircraft systems presented by the Federal
Aviation Administration are sensible regulations that will open the skies to small UAS in a
responsible manner, and are a welcomed departure from existing policy.
First and foremost, if this rulemaking is promulgated, small unmanned aircraft operators will no
longer be required to obtain a private pilot’s license, as it is currently required for operators
working under existing Section 333 exemptions. This requirement is unreasonably expensive and
unnecessary, as a private pilot’s license is no indication of proficiency in operating small
unmanned aircraft systems.
Additionally, the regulations avoid expensive and burdensome airworthiness certification of
unmanned aircraft under 55 pounds. At the same time, the FAA holds the operator responsible
for keeping the aircraft in good condition, and for registering the aircraft, thus providing essential
avenues for accountability.
However, there are additional rules contained in the NPRM that are not as reasonable, and may
continue to restrict journalists, other members of the press, and citizens from using small
unmanned aircraft systems to conduct newsgathering on essential public events. Among these
restrictions is the age requirement for operators, which will exclude many young individuals
from educational experiences, or from carrying out invaluable newsgathering.
We note that many of these issues may be resolved by the creation of a micro UAS class, which
would have reduced restrictions but still would not compromise the safety of the NAS or of
people on the ground.
Specific Comments
III Discussion of the proposal
D. Operating rules
1. Micro UAS classification
A micro UAS category, defined as UAS weighing less than 2 kilograms, is proposed in the sUAS
NPRM. The proposed rules for micro UAS are very similar to the small UAS rules in Canada
and Australia, which are widely regarded as having the best balance of rules. PSDJ members in
those countries have reported that the rules there are not overly restrictive, and that existing rules
allow for a wide range of safe journalism operations. But this is only thanks to lighter restrictions
for micro UAS.
The FAA announced intent to set the minimum age for small UAS operators at 18. This
minimum age requirement would prevent a number of young journalists from using UAS, either
in high school or college programs. However the micro UAS classification provides a means for
![Page 3: PSDJ comments on proposed small unmanned aircraft rules](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022081816/55cf8f23550346703b99449e/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
younger operators to both learn about UAS and potentially serve their communities, because it
appears to have no such age requirements.
There is a great difference in the kinetic energy of a 55 pound drone travelling at 100 miles per
hour, and a 4.4 pound drone travelling at 100 miles per hour, and so it is appropriate that there is
a smaller class with fewer restrictions to match the reduced risks of micro aircraft. However, the
requirement that the micro UAS be made out of “frangible material” is confusing and
unnecessary. Firstly, there is no definition provided by the FAA of what constitutes as a
“frangible material,” other than they are made of materials that “break, distort, or yield on impact
so as to present a minimal hazard to any person or object” in the event of collision.
Examples are given such as breakable plastic, paper, wood, and foam. But this is not a very
scientific definition, and no engineering specifications or parameters are provided that would
help in deciphering the real meaning of “frangible.” It is unknown whether materials such as
carbon fiber composites, which may greatly improve the flight dynamics and therefore the safety
of operating micro UAS, would be allowed under this rule. Additionally, banning the use of non-
frangible components on the aircraft could prevent the use of sensors, camera gimbals, power
supplies, solar arrays, and other mission-critical electronic devices.
In Australia, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority conducted its own investigation of sub 2-
kilogram micro UAS, which analyzed risk based on kinetic energy and not frangibility. In an
NPRM for its CASR Part 101 regulations, CASA wrote that the “general consensus is that RPA
with a gross weight of 2 kilograms and below have a very low kinetic energy, pose very little
risk to aviation and have a low potential for harm to people and property on the ground and other
airspace users.”
Thus, frangibility requirement for micro UAS should be removed, as it invites confusion, puts
the US out of step with the international aviation community, and unfairly restricts the use of
more advanced materials that improve operational capabilities and safety of operation.
2. Operator and Visual Observer
The FAA has requested comment on whether visual observers should be required to stand close
enough to the visual operator to allow for unassisted verbal communication. This same section
notes that communication-assisting devices such as radios can facilitate communication over a
distance, thereby extending the range where a visual observer may be placed. Because no units
of measurement are given, and as hearing ability may vary from operator to operator, it may be
difficult for operators to determine whether they are within the regulations.
By allowing radios and similar devices to be used in a sUAS operation, operations can be made
safer, as these devices can ensure communication over distance. For example, if a pilot and a
visual observer were operating in a relatively quiet outdoor space that allowed for verbal
communication, and an unexpected motorcycle, automobile, or industrial process made a loud
noise that suddenly prevented accurate verbal communication, a radio could ensure the sUAS
ground crew were still in compliance with regulations.
![Page 4: PSDJ comments on proposed small unmanned aircraft rules](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022081816/55cf8f23550346703b99449e/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
The FAA is correct in its estimation that certification of visual observers would not result in a
significant safety benefit. Such a requirement would be overly burdensome and expensive, and
would prevent many journalists from providing an important service to the public. The only
requirement for visual observers should be that they are capable of visually observing the sUAS
and are capable of communicating with the pilot in command. As states require visual tests in
order to obtain a driver’s license, a driver’s license should provide evidence that the visual
observer is capable of observing the sUAS at a distance.
3. See-and-Avoid and Visibility Requirements
Additional visibility requirements in the NPRM state that a sUAS must be no less than 500 feet
below clouds and 2,000 feet horizontal from clouds. This would render many types of storm and
weather coverage impossible, along with many research projects that aim to use sUAS to study
atmospheric phenomena (for example the Storm Penetrating Air Vehicles project at Oklahoma
State University).
The FAA has acknowledged in its NPRM that UAS may replace high-risk manned flights, “such
as inspecting towers, bridges, or other structures.” Likewise, storm analysis and coverage also is
recognized as a high-risk activity. UAS could increase the distance between dangerous storms,
and the meteorologists, scientists, and journalists who study and report on them, but only if the
final regulations remove the cloud distance requirements.
4. Containment and Loss of Positive Control
Given the difference in size between a 4.4-pound aircraft and a 55 pound aircraft, it is difficult to
say what would be an appropriate numerical distance to limit sUAS operations. A 55-pound
aircraft may be visible from a much longer range than a 4.4-pound aircraft.
Additionally, it is understood that there currently is an Aviation Rulemaking Advisory
Committee (ARC) dedicated to working on rules for Beyond Visual Line of Sight operations
(BVLOS), which should in time result in an NPRM for UAS flights that go beyond visual range.
Those BVLOS rules should determine the distance at which additional restrictions should follow,
not the general sUAS regulations defined in the NPRM.
With regard to operating the sUAS from a moving vehicle, it is the experience of PSDJ members
that piloting the unmanned aircraft from a car or boat takes additional skill beyond the typical
UAS pilot. There are increased risks when operating from a moving platform, and this type of
operation should not be permitted without special training and safeguards.
The 500-foot ceiling is appropriate for sUAS, because as the FAA has stated, most manned
aircraft operations must fly above 500 feet AGL over uncongested areas. The airspace where
journalists seek to use unmanned aircraft is airspace where manned aircraft are mostly not
allowed to fly. But it is also important to point out that buildings may exceed 500 feet, and in
those instances, pilots of manned aircraft are expected to fly at least 1,000 feet above the tallest
obstacle, and outside of a 2,000-foot radius from the obstacle (14 CFR 91.119). That airspace
![Page 5: PSDJ comments on proposed small unmanned aircraft rules](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022081816/55cf8f23550346703b99449e/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
above and around buildings, too, should be considered to be in the domain of legal sUAS
operations.
E. Operator Certificate
The NPRM outlines what would be contained within the knowledge test that sUAS operators
would be required to pass. There are ten core competencies required to pass the knowledge test:
1) knowledge of the regulations, 2) classification of airspace, 4) flight restrictions, 5) weather
and micrometeorology, 6) calculating weight and balance of sUAS as it relates to aircraft
performance, 7) emergency response, 8) aeronautical decision-making and crew resource
management, 9) understanding of airport operations and radio communications procedures, and
10) understanding the physiological effects of drugs and alcohol.
These are important concepts for a sUAS pilot to understand, and encompasses all the relevant
knowledge to safely operate sUAS. As long as the specific questions are catered towards
operators who seek to use unmanned aircraft under 55 pounds, this should be an appropriate
examination.
Importantly, this is knowledge that can be gained from independent study, which keeps the cost
down for independent journalists and those without large news organizations to support their
professional development. And because this is knowledge that can be gained from independent
study, the FAA should neither mandate nor certify any training program.
Given how reporters and journalists may be situated all over the country, and not always in a
convenient distance from the nearest FAA testing location, the knowledge test should also be
given online. This would reduce the cost of travel for reporters, and also would reduce
scheduling conflicts. The FAA asked for comment on whether any recurrent knowledge test
should also be administered online, and indeed there should be an opportunity for recurrent tests
to be taken online.
IV Regulatory Notices and Analyses 4. Benefit Summary
In its proposed sUAS rules, the FAA notes that many new industries could be created, and that
there are real safety benefits to using sUAS. The FAA mentions aerial photography in the
proposed rules, but one of the new fields that could be created is “drone journalism,” or news
reporting that utilizes small unmanned aircraft to gather images, video, and other type of
information to augment news reporting.
Currently, news stations with the financial means may operate or contract the use of (manned)
helicopters to help inform the public on a number of topics, from ordinary traffic reports, to life-
endangering situations such as natural and man-made disasters. This is not without considerable
risk, as evidenced by the KOMO-TV news helicopter crash in March of 2014, and the midair
collision between two news helicopters above Phoenix, Arizona in 2007. Many more examples
exist of such dangerous incidents, and removing barriers for news stations to use sUAS for
reporting will reduce the need for manned flights in the future.
![Page 6: PSDJ comments on proposed small unmanned aircraft rules](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022081816/55cf8f23550346703b99449e/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
The FAA requested in its NPRM that commenters provide data that could further illustrate the
economic benefits of sUAS. The PSDJ requests that the FAA also consider that many benefits
are not so easily tallied in terms of money – such as the ability of an empowered, professional
press to provide valuable news and information to American citizens, aided by small UAS.
Conclusion
The sUAS NPRM is an important step to opening the United States to small unmanned aircraft
systems. These tools may quickly become essential to news reporting, as they can increase the
distance between reporters and dangerous situations, may reduce the number of manned
helicopters operating in the NAS, and can shed light on essential issues and events in America.
There are some rules contained in the rulemaking, however, that would make certain types of
operations difficult or impossible. For the reasons discussed above, we, the undersigned officer
and board members of the PSDJ, urge the FAA to consider our recommendations involving
micro UAS frangible materials, visual observers, see-and-avoid requirements, and operator
certification.
Thank you for your time, your consideration, and your work towards expanding the opportunities
for journalists to use UAS in the United States.
Respectfully,
Matthew Schroyer
Founder, President
Faine Greenwood
Board Member
Parker Gyokeres
Board Member