Canada’s airspace regulations are evolving for a new type of airspace user—drone operators. As a relative newcomer, drones (or “unmanned aerial vehicles” UAVs) have quickly become a major component of airspace and now greatly outnumber manned aircraft. In the United States, for example, there are more registered drone operators than there are registered piloted aircrafts.
Similar to other sectors of transportation in Canada, airspace is highly regulated and controlled. With the widespread commercial availability of out-of-the-box consumer drones, access to Canada’s airspace is much more open to novice operators who may or may not be aware of or compliant with the regulations. This has resulted in a number of new safety concerns, regular media reports of drone incidents, and even military action.
How can Transport Canada effectively manage the onslaught of new airspace users, while balancing the opportunities enabled by this emerging technology? What are the real safety issues with drones in Canada? Having used drones extensively in our research from mapping flood damage to detecting methane leaks, we decided to take a deeper look.
It’s a bird, it’s a plane… no, it’s a drone
In our recent paper in the Journal of Unmanned Vehicle Systems, we examined drone incident reports in Canada from the Transport Canada Civil Aviation Daily Occurrence Reporting System (CADORs) database. This publicly accessible database summarizes incidents that occur in the national airspace and provides an empirical portrait of potential safety issues with drones in Canada.
In short, reports reveal a major increase in drone incidents, particularly after 2013. The majority of incidents suggest probable airspace violations, in other words drones are being operated where they should not be.
Classification of CADORS reports involving drones from 05 November 2005 to 31 December 2016.
Narratives within reports provided some alarming details. Nearly 22.3% of all reports involved a “close encounter” (< 500 feet separation) between a drone and piloted aircraft. There is clearly concern about a collision between a large aircraft and a drone, as small drones, much like birds, reportedly have the potential to destroy jet engines. Although separation distances are only estimates, the proportion of incidents involving “close encounters” is a genuine cause for concern.Most reports in the CADORS database were sightings of drones, usually reported by pilots or airport staff, suggesting that the presence of the drone was unexpected. The greater proportion of reports by pilots and airport staff is unsurprising as these individuals are familiar with the CADORS system and have a direct interest in reporting unsafe behaviour.
The reports also revealed concerning information about drone sightings. More than 80% of reports estimated drones to be at altitudes higher than 400 feet above ground level (AGL), which is the maximum altitude for most certified drone operations. Equally troubling was that 62% of incidents were described as exceeding 1000 feet AGL. These results indicate that the majority of drone operators responsible for sightings are flying far too high, with many incidents at altitudes where the operator would have difficulty maintaining line of sight. These individuals are placing other airspace users, notably piloted aircraft, at considerable risk.
Although the reports are constrained somewhat by observer bias (not all legal or illegal drone use is reported), they do provide evidence of several major issues with expanded use of drones in the national airspace.
Reported or estimated altitudes of UAV incidents from the CADORS database.
New approaches to bring regulations to drone users
Hobbyists using radio controlled aircraft have safely operated for decades by following guidelines from the Model Aeronautics Association of Canada (MAAC) and operating at designated flight clubs and airfields. This has been an effective system for managing MAAC members, but is not directly applicable to the influx of new drone operators.
Currently, no license or training is required to fly a drone weighing up to 35 kg. With the ability to purchase a “ready-to-fly” drone online or at retailers and electronics stores worldwide, sales have risen year after year since 2013. We suspect that the majority of these drones are used recreationally and that many operators are not necessarily knowledgeable about the airspace regulations. However, education is vital to maintaining airspace safety.
Drone education does not necessarily need to be formal to be useful. For example, the US Federal Aviation Administration has created new initiatives designed to help new drone operators understand where they can and cannot fly. The B4ufly app provides easy access to airspace information (e.g., aeronautical charts) that was traditionally difficult to obtain and understand. Similarly, Transport Canada has increasingly provided access to information via the Transport Canada website.
Drone manufacturers have also been proactive in preventing airspace violations, as they have a vested interest in decreasing barriers to drone use. Many drones are programmed to include “geofencing” features that prevent users from flying in restricted airspace, like Parliament Hill. These systems hold potential to reduce the number of airspace infractions and increase safety in Canadian airspace, but defiant operators may be able to find a work-around.
Transport Canada recently clarified regulations for drone users and outlined new fines for breaking the rules. However, enforcement is difficult—many reports in our dataset specifically detailed that police were unable to find the operator, and more than half of the reports did not mention contacting the authorities at all.
A new reporting tool has been developed by Transport Canada, allowing anyone to anonymously report unsafe drone incidents. This strategy should produce much more data on drone safety, but the reliability of this system and the quality/accuracy of reports by anonymous individuals are still unknown. There is concern, however, that this strategy could also create a situation where Transport Canada is swamped with reports of legal drone use. A similar system was released in 2016 and quickly withdrawn in the US.
New Canadian regulations are anticipated later this month and some experts expect them to include a variation of the drone licensing regulations (Part 107) recently introduced in the United States. Canadian regulations will realistically undergo several more iterations over the next several decades as drone use catches up with the hype and ambition.
On the whole, we came away from this study with cautious optimism, the majority of reported problems have been recognized and solutions are being established. This noted, use of Canadian airspace is evolving—drones are here to stay—and developing appropriate regulations is no small task for Transport Canada. Suitable infrastructure and regulations for a shared and safe airspace will take time and evolution, but the problem requires considerable thought and study; an already booming drone industry is projected to continue meteoric growth throughout the next decade, and new challenges to airspace safety are likely to continue to emerge.
