AOPA pushes back on conditional right of way for drones
Seeks overhaul of proposed Part 108
While pilots have sought to maintain maneuverability-based right-of-way rules, along with shared responsibility for see-and-avoid, as drones are integrated into the national airspace system, the nascent drone industry has struggled to develop cost-effective ways to enable uncrewed aircraft to detect other objects around them. The FAA’s FAR Part 108 proposed rule seeks to upend these conventions, by agreeing with drone operators who insist that crewed aircraft equip with technology to facilitate detection, prompting AOPA to push back on this proposed flip of the right-of-way script.
The rulemaking proposal published August 7 drew more than 1 million comments by the October 6 deadline, with the final number yet to be determined because the deadline fell after the U.S. government shut down on October 1. An unknown number of comments, including a 16-page response from AOPA submitted October 3, remained to be added to the official tally days later. AOPA Director of Regulatory Affairs for Airspace, Air Traffic, and Security Jim McClay wrote AOPA's response to the FAA rulemaking proposal and elaborated on concerns voiced (and included in AOPA's submission) by a coalition of co-signatories representing helicopter and fixed-wing pilots who perform firefighting, agriculture, and emergency medical services duties (among others), as well as groups representing balloonists and parachutists, who collectively stand to be most directly affected by the proposed departure from right-of-way rules based on aircraft maneuverability. The proposed scheme grants right of way to drones except in certain controlled airspace, when arriving or departing airports or heliports, or when the aircraft in proximity to the drone is broadcasting ADS-B Out or what the FAA refers to as electronic conspicuity (EC), a low-power, portable version of an ADS-B Out transmitter.
“The ARC’s industry leadership team consisted solely of representatives from the drone community and the input and recommendations from the manned aviation community were routinely minimized or dismissed entirely. It is notable that the manned aviation community objected to the ensuing report,” McClay wrote. “AOPA reiterates its support for the integration of drones, including those operating BVLOS, into the NAS. However, it is critically important that this is done safely and equitably. Unfortunately, numerous items included in the NPRM are directly counter to this objective.”
The FAA proposes to require drone operators to use detect-and-avoid (DAA) technology capable of detecting aircraft that are not broadcasting ADS-B Out or EC only when the drone is operating in Class B or Class C airspace, and would grant drones right-of-way over aircraft with human pilots on board in other airspace, unless the aircraft in question is broadcasting ADS-B Out or EC signals that can be picked up by other aircraft. While EC and ADS-B would provide a useful layer of safety, McClay told the FAA, the technology should not be the sole means of separating aircraft or for determining right-of-way.
“It is both surprising and disappointing that the FAA would propose such a radical departure from traffic deconfliction norms simply because it is too difficult or expensive for BVLOS drone operators to equip themselves in such a way as to take on the same shared responsibility that all other aircraft operators assume,” McClay wrote. “The resulting proposal for a new ROW scheme is fraught with ambiguity and operational unrealities, as laid out in these comments.”
Meanwhile, as comments on the proposed Part 108 rule flooded into the regulatory docket, two Amazon Prime Air MK30 drones offered an object lesson in the challenges of technology-based situational awareness.
Rolled out in late 2024 and equipped with what Amazon billed as “a best-in-class perception system to detect and avoid obstacles,” two MK30 drones crashed in quick succession on October 1 into a construction crane about 2 miles from the Tolleson, Arizona, distribution center where they were based. No injuries resulted. The wreckage was filmed by news helicopters, which zoomed in on the crash site in a paved area between commercial buildings. Amazon resumed Prime Air deliveries two days later, company spokesman Terrence Clark advising the media, “We’ve completed our own internal review of this incident and are confident that there wasn’t an issue with the drones or the technology that supports them. Nonetheless, we’ve introduced additional processes like enhanced visual landscape inspections to better monitor for moving obstructions such as cranes.”
McClay noted the accident in AOPA’s comments:
“AOPA very much understands the need to refrain from speculating on the cause of this event. However, we believe it does raise appropriate questions about the collision avoidance technology being utilized by drone operators in the context of this NPRM.”
The drone industry’s preferred solution to airborne deconfliction is universal equipage with EC or ADS-B Out, broadcasting signals that a drone can detect and maneuver to avoid. While AOPA supports EC as an added layer of safety, McClay noted that even the FAA acknowledges such devices are subject to malfunction, and that ADS-B Out can be unreliable at low altitudes. More than 17,000 aircraft in the United States currently operate without electrical systems, which rules out ADS-B Out installation, and forthcoming portable EC devices should not be counted on "to serve as a stand-alone traffic deconfliction mechanism," McClay wrote. Furthermore, the FAA should not saddle aircraft operators with another unfunded equipment mandate.
“To require GA aircraft to equip with conspicuity technology, which may or may not be reliable enough to serve as a stand-alone deconfliction mechanism, simply because DAA capabilities for drones are too expensive, too heavy, or too power-intensive, is stunningly inequitable and, again, unsafe,” McClay wrote. “There also appears to be a reluctance by the FAA to institute a requirement for BVLOS drones to possess DAA capability, sufficient for deconfliction with both conspicuous and non-conspicuous aircraft, in wider airspace due to the cost burden that would be placed upon the new entrant. While AOPA can appreciate the impact this might have upon drone operators, expensive equipage requirements are sometimes an unfortunate reality of operating in the NAS. Over the past several decades, manned aircraft have been subject to numerous such requirements, many of which have been expensive.”
McClay, on AOPA’s behalf, urged the FAA to submit a revised rulemaking proposal for consideration and comment, rather than moving directly to a final rule.
“We strongly recommend FAA integrate needed changes outlined in these and other comments into a supplemental NPRM,” McClay wrote. “This approach would allow the FAA to have additional time to further coordinate with industry toward more workable solutions.”
