A Review of the Legal, Regulatory and Practical Aspects Needed to Unlock Autonomous Beyond Visual Line of Sight Unmanned Aircraft Systems Operations

Abstract

Services that exploit Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) are poised to revolutionise the service industry with a projected value of 71 BUSD by the end of the decade. A key enabler of this technology is the unlocking of autonomous Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) operations. BVLOS operations will depend on a robust Detect and Avoid (D&A) capability. Yet, currently in the UK and EU, BVLOS operations are only allowed in specific cases and scenarios. As a result, the technological landscape for the development of robust D&A faces limitations, and there is little market incentive for development. Furthermore, while automated BVLOS is a future technology, a strong D&A capability is of importance now for all types of UAS operations. As the remote pilot has to deal with information overload from the controller device and the environment. These high-risk UAS operations are becoming more common. In this paper, we discuss the current legal framework in the UK making comparisons to EU countries. We make the case that even when an operation abides by the current framework the remote pilot is exposed to several legal liabilities. We review the roadmaps for UAS adoption (including certification processes for UAS-based products) and highlight that for software-intensive systems, key steps are missing to assure the quality of the product. Finally, we build on these findings to set forwards a path to complement future certification processes to enable autonomous based UAS operations to share the airspace with remotely piloted operations.

Mutable Observation Used by Television Drone Pilots: Efficiency of Aerial Filming Regarding the Quality of Completed Shots

“…Any considerations on the safety of drone flights in the UK, European Union, and the United States of America are related to the legal conditions systematized in articles [13,14].…”

“…The authors of the paper [13] also classified the types of UAV flight operations, i.e., VLOS, EVLOS, BVLOS, and pointed out that drone flight operations require a direct connection between the UAS and the remote pilot. Moreover, the remote pilot is responsible for the safety of all operations.…”

“…TV drone flights, during which the drone pilot or the observer maintains eye contact with an unmanned aerial vehicle, are permitted in many countries around the world after completing specific conditions [13][14][15]. Visual Line of Sight (VLOS) flight is an air operation in which the pilot maintains visual contact with the drone to ensure the safety of flight [16].…”

Regulating Autonomy in Civilian Drones: Towards a Spectral Approach

“…In contrast to these important contributions, this article recommends a way of regulating autonomous feature of drones, at a conceptual level. Somehow closer to this article, Matalonga and others highlight standardization challenges when it comes to the autonomous detect and avoid (DAA) 3 capability of drones [24]. However, they abstain from deeply examining conceptual issues of autonomy.…”

“…According to this taxonomy, human control diminishes from level 3 upwards, whereas a human is involved in an active or supervisory role in levels 0 through 2. In the drone sector too, scholars have tried to replicate this classification [24,42,69]. Lastly, in maritime sector, the International Maritime Organization (IMO)-the United Nations agency responsible for maritime safety-has been trying to bring MASS into sync with the existing framework, somewhat akin to EASA's catch-up with drone technology in the aviation sector.…”