A Letter to California Governor Jerry Brown

September 8, 2015

The Honorable Edmund G. Brown, Jr.
Governor of California
The Capitol
Suite 1173
Sacramento, CA 95814

Dear Governor Brown,

As an entrepreneur, small business owner, and lifelong Californian, I strongly urge you to veto SB 142, which was recently introduced by Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson and passed by the California Legislature.  This bill only serves to increase the unfounded fears that people unfamiliar with unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) have, and will not make California safer from the risks associated with UAS technology.  Rather, it will hurt the UAS industry, and suppress small businesses in California.  For the sake of my business, our clients, and all of the people that UAS technology could benefit, I insist that you veto SB 142.

Having spent nearly 2 years working in the UAS industry, and years more flying radio controlled aircraft, I have a great deal of experience that allows me to understand the true impact of SB 142.  By restricting flights below 350 feet, a large number of potential UAS applications, from photography to infrastructure inspection, become much more difficult, if not impossible.  This means that an industry that could employ thousands of photographers, designers, pilots, artists, and students, is restricted before it even has a chance to grow. Soon, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) will finalize its rules on integrating commercial UAS into the national airspace, which could open the door to endless possibilities across the country.  However, if California insists on having the most restrictive rules on UAS technology, then these benefits may never be realized.  

For small businesses like mine, it is bills like this that make the difference success and failure.  I love California and want to grow my business here, hire more employees here, grow the economy, and contribute to a safer, cleaner, and more efficient world.  That is why I so strongly insist that you veto SB 142 and allow the UAS industry to grow to its full potential.  

Sincerely,

Logan Campbell
Founder & CEO
Aerotas

Do You Really Need a Pilot's License for Commercial Drones?

Logan Campbell - Logan@Aerotas.com

We often hear questions from people interested in commercial UAS about what the requirements are to actually be a commercial UAS pilot.  This question carries numerous implications, with the biggest problem that, the more certifications required, the more expensive it is to hire and train a commercial UAS pilot.  So the short answer to the question of whether or not your UAS pilots need an FAA issued pilot's license is: Yes.  To operate commercially right now, commercial UAS pilots need a license to fly manned aircraft from the FAA.  However, the real questions to be asking are: what will the licensing needs be in the future, and when are they going to change,  and how should I adjust my business model to these issues?

It is abundantly clear to the FAA, commercial UAS companies, and even the general public, that all of the safety requirements we put on manned aircraft pilots are not necessary for UAS.  The skills required to pilot UAS safely a few hundred feet above the ground are very different than those required to fly cross-country.  Thankfully, the FAA has acknowledged this, and their proposed rules would eliminate this requirement. According to original deadlines, they are supposed to integrate the final version of these rules by September 2015.  Unfortunately, that is not going to happen.  

The most recent direct communication from the FAA targeted June of 2016 as the target date for releasing the final version of these rules.  However, the FAA has missed deadlines like this in the past, and occasionally by significant margins.  It would be foolishly optimistic to have faith in this deadline, especially if the viability of your UAS business line depends on this changing.  

Realistically, the effective elimination of the pilot license requirement for commercial UAS will happen sometime in 2017, and any businesses involved in commercial operations ought to plan accordingly.  For many operations, this may mean running only a small test program for the next 18 months with the more expensive pilots, and then scaling the business fully once the requirements change.  For others, it may mean holding off on their UAS operations altogether, as the cost structure just doesn't work under the current regulatory system.  

Getting a sport pilot's license, the lowest way to fulfill current requirements, can cost as much as $10,000 per person, enough to crush many business models.  Thankfully this is going to change.  However, it is important to consider when this is going to change, and what the costs will be once it does change.  So although the current requirements are universally acknowledged as being burdensome, ultimately they will change, and a well informed manager can navigate the changing regulations well enough to be successful.  

Are you interested in learning more about how to operate commercial drones safely?  Send us an email at info@aerotas.com.

Logan is the founder and CEO of Aerotas.  He graduated from Harvard Business School in 2015 and brings experience in a broad range of industries, including agriculture, real estate, and finance.  A lifelong tinkerer and avid UAV enthusiast, Logan also has hundreds of hours of flight experience over a broad set of different UAV types. 

The FAA is investigating drone use in the NFL: What can your business learn from this?

According to Bloomberg News, the FAA has begun investigating at least three NFL teams that have started using drones to film their practices.  So far, none of the teams have received any penalties and the investigation is ongoing.  However, given that none of the teams have FAA exemptions either means that they could still be on the hook from penalties.  All of the drone operations appear to be responsible and have never posed a serious threat to either the general public or to the national airspace, yet they are still being investigated.  It is obvious that operating drones legally in a commercial environment has a lot more to do with publicity than it does with just being safe.  

Very visible entities are being held to a much higher standard than those not in the public eye.  For example, small farmers or real estate developers are unlikely to be investigated unless they do something dangerous.  But companies like the NFL are much more public, and the FAA is more willing to target them for breaking the letter of the law.  What this means is that, when considering if a drone is right for your business, it is important to know more than just the law, but also think about how visible your business is.  

The NFL teams here should have known that they are a likely target for investigation.  Just because individuals and hobbyists are flying these drones around with no threat of legal action does not mean that they can.  If they had known about this, it would not have been all that difficult to obtain the proper permits and FAA exemptions, allowing them to fly completely legally.  Given the safe and generally private and contained nature of these operations, it is possible for the NFL to operate drones completely legally, they just didn't know enough about how the industry works in practice.  

All of this merely highlights the need for informed and knowledgable help when using drones in business.  From understanding the legal questions to knowing what your actual risk of FAA investigation is, drones can be used more safely and profitably with professional help, avoiding huge amounts of negative publicity.  The NFL should be allowed to use drones for their practices, and with enough information, they will be.  

Building Around Drone Regulations

Recently, senator Dianne Feinstein introduced the Consumer Drone Safety Act, a proposed law meant to prevent potentially deadly collisions between drones and manned aircraft.  Unfortunately, it would require onerous technological demands on many consumer and commercial drone models, dramatically increasing their cost and feasibility.  Naturally, industry groups have lobbied heavily against this legislation, and its future is uncertain.  Even if the bill were to pass, it would be 18 months before a final rule would be published.  This is merely one more example of how quickly and frequently drone regulation can change, and how difficult it is for businesses to plan around them.  However, planning around regulations that do not yet exist is possible, it just takes a good understanding of the entire industry.  

The first step in building a drone program in an uncertain regulatory environment is to know exactly how you are going to be operating the drone.  There are a lot of relevant factors around knowing the amount of area you plan to cover, altitude you will be operating at, proximity to potential hazards like airports or military installations, size of the aircraft you will need, and how much direct control a pilot will have over the aircraft.  Even the most broad sweeping regulations will have to contain exemptions for certain things, whether it is toys or traditional manned aircraft.  

Once you know the style of drone you are going to fly, you can reasonably guess the likely regulations that will be needed.  For example, if you are flying a fixed-wing aircraft more than 400' above ground level, you will almost certainly need to ensure it is equipped with technology that can detect other aircraft and broadcast its own location to nearby planes and helicopters.  However, if you are flying a multirotor above private land at 200', you will likely need GPS and compass guidance with failsafe software, but it is highly unlikely that you will need full airspace integration.  

Some of these deductions come from common sense, some come from understanding all of the conflicting pressures on the FAA rule makers, and much comes from seeing the development of UAV legislation in foreign countries.  From all of this, it is clear that regulations will be different depending on the weight of the aircraft, the speed it will be flying, its capabilities, and its end usage.  It is not necessary to know what every drone law will be, only the likely rules that your product will have to follow.  

For the vast majority of users, a thorough understanding of the regulatory environment allows for a good enough estimation of what laws will look like in the future.  The minutiae will be different, but only a select few companies will operate on the edges of these regulations.  Clear and concise regulation in a timely manner would be a boon to the drone industry.  However we can't expect that anytime soon.  In the mean time, drone programs can still be profitable for most customers with a strong understanding of what the laws will be.

Autopilot Drones

View fullsize

The Lily Camera drone offers autopilot supposedly so reliable, it doesn't even come with a controller.

There has been a huge amount of hype in recent days about the Lily Camera Drone, a product that flies itself while taking pictures or videos of whatever the user may be doing.  This type of autopilot offers extreme promise, but it is a technology that UAV companies have been struggling with for some time, and no one has quite perfected yet.  Unfortunately, while many advancements have been made in developing a good autopilot, products like the Lily are likely to disappoint real world users.  

A good autopilot system is one of the most useful features of drones.  From inspecting power lines, to surveying crops, to monitoring construction sites, autopilot means that you don't need an experienced operator to use the drone.  However, anyone that has used these autopilots, knows that there are a myriad of problems keeping them from going mainstream.  

Some of the problems are small and good progress has been made in addressing them.  Sometimes the tracking system just has a bad connection and the drone doesn't follow it exactly. Or there is interference in the GPS or compass based guidance system and the drone may fly away.  These can be serious issues, but are ones that current technology, if well executed, is capable of addressing.  

The most serious problem for autopilots, and especially the Lily Camera, is obstacle avoidance.  No mass market drone yet has any reliable form of collision avoidance.  This means that any drone on autopilot, especially those at lower altitudes, can crash into an obstacle with no way of automatically staying safe.  If you are skiing, it is extremely easy for the drone to hit a tree, or potentially another skier, posing a serious safety issue.  It might hit a bridge, power lines, trees, or banners, completely wrecking the drone.  Anyone that has used "return home" features on other drones knows that they suffer the same issue, and the autopilot may confidently fly straight into a  tree on the way home.  In the real world, this may do $1,000 damage or more to the drone itself, making it a very expensive problem.  

The issue with collision avoidance is that it is technologically extremely hard.  A drone has to be aware of obstacles in front of it, behind it, to its sides, as well as above and below.  This means a lot of cameras or sensors.  Added to that, it has to detect things as small as power lines, which are invisible to many available sensors or hard to detect.  It would also need to know about any people that may get too close to the drone, such as another person.  Finally, has to recognize any of these problems this with enough room to stop or change course, which is difficult if the drone is going 30 mph or higher.  

Here, a DJI Phantom under its "return to home" autopilot is unable to avoid a very large and obvious rock.

None of this technology is impossible.  In fact, there are dozens of companies working on extremely promising technologies in this space.  However, they are all still just experimental or prototype products, and none has been demonstrated to be truly reliable.  It will likely be a few years until a reliable obstacle avoidance system can be developed and integrated into off the shelf consumer and business drones.  

The Lily Camera is an exceptional product, and hopefully it can deliver on its promise.  However, the technology still is not the autopilot panacea that many people think it to be.  It will still crash into trees, bother the public, and be more complicated to use than it seems. Despite this, there will be a few people for whom the Lily is the perfect drone.  For the others, you may just need to wait until autopilot becomes more reliable.  

Introducing Aerotas

Welcome to Aerotas, the first small UAV focused consulting firm.  Our only business is to help other companies use small UAVs in a way that is safe, legal, and profitable.  

"Aerotas" is a mix of the words "aero", the greek word for air, and "veritas", latin for truth.  Thus, Aerotas is here to discover truth through the air. We started as a project at Harvard Business School in 2013, and has spent the last two years developing a wealth of knowledge and experience about the entire UAV industry.  This makes us uniquely positioned to help you with all of the challenges associated with making a UAV program work for your business.  

We have worked with farmers, mayors, construction workers, filmmakers, and many others, and have encountered all of the problems that come up with UAV usage.  Sometimes that is having the wrong hardware for the job, experiencing a hardware failure, having the wrong pilot, or even just bothering the public in the surrounding area.  We can help to ensure that all of these issues, and many more, are addressed before they actually become a problem.  And we can make sure that it is all done safely, legally, and profitably.  

There are already hundreds of use cases for UAV technology, and more are being developed every day.  Aerotas is excited to be here to help this technological revolution move along in the most beneficial way possible.