Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
By Chipmunk69
#1846300
I gather East/West rail are planning to use drones and would like a TDA between Oxford and Milton Keynes. I'm struggling to find any official reference to this, or where one might raise an objection to the granting of such a thing.

Can anyone point me in the right direction?
User avatar
By russp
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1846305
Chipmunk69 wrote:I gather East/West rail are planning to use drones and would like a TDA between Oxford and Milton Keynes. I'm struggling to find any official reference to this, or where one might raise an objection to the granting of such a thing.

Can anyone point me in the right direction?


@Chipmunk69
The proposal isn't open for comments yet but you can register for email updates - link in original post
#1846306
The whole Drone TDA grab is getting ridiculous and it is quite disgraceful that it is being allowed to happen. Somehow this must be changed in to full GA integration and not TDA's!
It cannot be allowed to continue this way otherwise GA as we know it will be obliterated in the UK in a very small number of years.... :cry:
Stampe liked this
#1846507
Courtesy of the IOAPA Newsletter
The European Commission adopted the U-space package - three regulations that together create the conditions necessary for both drones and manned aircraft to operate safely in section of our airspace known as the U-space.

You can find all the information and documents on the EC website: https://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/air/news/2021-04-22-drones_en
Here are the actual regulations, published officially with reference numbers. The third paragraph is of specific interest:

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/664 of 22 April 2021 on a regulatory framework for the U-space. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32021R066

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/665 of 22 April 2021 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/373 as regards requirements for providers of air traffic management/air navigation services and other air traffic management network functions in the U-space airspace designated in controlled airspace. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32021R0665

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/666 of 22 April 2021 amending Regulation (EU) No 923/2012 as regards requirements for manned aviation operating in U-space airspace, has been published in EUR-Lex.https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32021R0666
#1846515
skydriller wrote:The problem I have with BVLOS drone ops is that the drone operator is not at risk himself, only others he shares the skies with. The day that drones are approved for use in controlled airspace with CAT will be the day that they are safe for use in uncontrolled airspace. Until then they will need segregating.


That’s a fair point, but these UAVs already have the ability to detect and avoid other aircraft, and seem to do so more reliably than humans. Since they also have ADSB-out they are easy for light GA to detect, see and avoid.

What then, is the risk which these “Drone TDAs” purport to address?

Has anyone seen a proper risk assessment?

If so, how does that risk compare to other risks associated with, say, low-level flight in the Galloway hills?

What’s the value of a TDA in a volume of G airspace which is has no FIS/ATC radio coverage or radar surveillance?

If compliance is effectively voluntary, why not just NOTAM the UAV activity and allow GA pilots to manage their own risk by self-segregation or EC, or other means.
#1846516
Cub wrote:which is why we need to keep working to understand how we integrate rather than segregate.


I agree, and GA already has the technical means to integrate safely. Those who choose not to carry a load of EC clobber can self-segregate.

But for an organisation like the UK CAA it may seem bureaucratically “safer” just to keep segregating, as might have been necessary before we had EC.
#1846642
xtophe wrote:TDA (Temporary Danger Area) is different from RA(T) (Restricted Area (Temporary))


And from the yottie RA(T) thread

Moli wrote:Cub is correct, an RA(T) was not established for the unfortunate Oulton Park incident, it was an ERF (Emergency Restriction of Flying).



TDA, RA(T), ERF, WTF?

Rob P
User avatar
By 10W
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1846866
kanga wrote:Since drones flying in 'GA air' (in height agl or horizontally) within or (especially) beyond LoS have to replace 'see and avoid' with 'sense and avoid', I reckon it is incumbent on the drone operator to lay all the responsibilty for both 'sense' and 'avoid' on the technology within the drone itself. I'd like to see trials involving a crewed GA type emitting any of the established EC signals (Mode A/C/S, Flarm, PA, ADSB, .. perhaps even VHF airband voice) flying towards a drone from various aspects, vertical and horizontal, on a planned course via waypoints, so turning/climbing/descending as well as S&L, and ensuring that the drone autonomously senses the emission and takes necessary avoiding action. I'm not volunteering to fly such an 'intercept', though :?

If this means that the drone airframe must be modified to include multiple sensors so as to assess (through baseline) position, track and threat status of the approaching emitter, with consequent cost and weight penalty, so be it.


We have flown an informal trial with the operator of the Oban drones to test their detection of a GA aircraft and the various avoidance solutions available to them.

You can read all about it in the July edition of Flyer Magazine :thumleft:
kanga liked this