Australia’s Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) has published a summary of its consultation on proposed amendments to rules affecting some drone and rocket operations, remote pilots and training providers.
CASA said respondents broadly supported the objectives of the three proposals, covering a risk-based approach to determine when a NOTAM is required for an area approval, relocating existing record keeping and information requirements, and nationally consistent remote pilot licence examinations.
Feedback highlighted the need for clear and consistent NOTAM decision making and practical implementation arrangements. Respondents considered that this could reduce briefing workload and information overload, helping airspace users identify operationally important information. Submissions also emphasised the importance of maintaining aviation safety. They noted that crewed aircraft can operate at low level, in Class G airspace, in remote areas and at short notice. Examples included emergency services, military activity, aerial work, mustering and other general aviation operations.
Several respondents considered NOTAMs an important situational awareness measure while electronic conspicuity and cooperative surveillance are not universal. Some submissions indicated a preference for NOTAM publication to remain the default, or to continue for all drone and rocket operations.
Respondents consistently emphasised the need for clear and nationally consistent criteria for determining when a NOTAM is required. Suggested factors included operating height and duration, proximity to aerodromes and flight paths, airspace classification, the likelihood of low-level crewed aircraft, the dimensions of the approved area and other available risk controls.
Some respondents also sought greater clarity about how NOTAM decisions would be documented and communicated. Suggestions included recording whether a NOTAM is required in the area approval and maintaining a record of the basis for the decision. Feedback also noted that unclear criteria could lead operators to submit precautionary NOTAM requests, potentially limiting the intended benefits of the proposal.
Respondents sought clarity about who would request or arrange NOTAM publication, applicable lead times, and how changes, cancellations and system outages would be managed. A respondent involved in rocketry asked how CASA would communicate a decision not to publish a NOTAM where an existing approval requires the operator to request one. Others asked whether operators could request a NOTAM as an additional risk control where CASA had not required one.
Other suggestions included better support for short notice operations, clearer presentation of location and height information, radius-based NOTAM formats, and improved visibility of RPAS NOTAMs in flight planning applications and aerodrome briefings. Some respondents also raised electronic conspicuity as a complementary or potential future means of improving situational awareness.
CASA said it will consider the feedback received in finalising the proposal, including the aviation safety factors relevant to determining when a NOTAM is required and the need for clear and consistent decision making. This will include consideration of operations involving low level crewed aircraft and areas where electronic conspicuity is not widely available. CASA will also consider the practical issues raised about how NOTAM decisions are communicated and implemented.
Most respondents did not expect the record keeping proposal to have unintended impacts. For RePL examinations, feedback focused on access, cost, delivery, examination integrity and transition arrangements.
For more information
Image: CASA