OPEN APP
Home >Opinion >Columns >The proof of drone liberalization will lie in their flying

A few weeks ago, I dedicated an entire article to the Unmanned Aircraft Regulations that India’s ministry of civil aviation had issued in March 2021. I argued that these regulations were so draconian that any hope we might have had for a drone renaissance had become vanishingly slim. Last week, in what can only be described as an unprecedented volte face, the ministry repealed the regulations it had issued a scant four months previously, replacing them with a far more progressive framework.

There is much to applaud in the Draft Drone Rules 2021, but if I were to pick just one overarching feature, it has to be how deeply technology has been integrated into the regulatory framework. If implemented as described, this could well be the country’s first working example of ‘regtech’.

Central to this futuristic regulatory framework is the Digital Sky platform, a portal through which almost all compliances relevant to the drone ecosystem are intended to be managed. If you own a drone, you will have to register it on Digital Sky in order to obtain an identification number that will uniquely identify your drone in the territory of India. That identification number will be permanently associated with you; so, if you plan to transfer the drone to anyone else, you will have to return to Digital Sky to record that transfer. Similarly, if the drone is lost or permanently damaged, it is to Digital Sky that you have to go for de-registration.

Digital Sky will also host a detailed airspace map for drone operations that will divide the entire country into red, yellow and green zones. Prior permission will only be required for drone operations in the yellow and red zones, and, because the airspace map for drone operations will be programmatically accessible, drone pilots will be able to load their proposed flight plan directly onto the portal to determine whether the path they intend their drones to traverse will require prior approval.

The new drone regulations also refer to a number of technologies, which, even though unlikely to be in place when the rules come into force, could well be implemented soon. These include geo-fencing (to ensure that a drone only flies within a specified set of geospatial coordinates), real-time tracking beacons (to constantly transmit the live-action speed, location and altitude of a drone) and the no-permission-no-take-off technology I have spoken of before (that will completely automate flight approvals in yellow and red zones).

Also imminent is a framework for drone traffic management that will facilitate the creation of drone corridors—potentially even through red and yellow zones—that can be used by drone delivery companies and emergency services. Once in place, these dedicated corridors will greatly improve the automated delivery of everything, from daily groceries to life-saving medicines, and enable emergency services to rapidly reach people in remote locations.

But as much as these new regulations are an improvement over those they are about to replace, there are still a number of issues that could do with more clarity. For instance, even though the definitions of red and yellow zones have been spelt out in the regulations, we will need to wait till physical areas are actually delineated before we can confirm the extent to which drone operations have actually been liberalized. Red zones are defined as those areas over which drone flight will be permitted only under exceptional circumstances, while yellow zones are those within which drone pilots have to coordinate their operations with a relevant air traffic controller. If these definitions are interpreted so broadly as to have large restricted zones, drone flights in virtually every part of the country will need prior approvals, which would make a mockery of the proposed liberalization.

Ideally, it is only over airports—where drones can interfere with aircraft operations—that drone operations should be prohibited. In real terms, this would mean a restriction over the physical perimeter of the airport and areas around it where planes on their final descent are low enough for drone collision to pose a real risk. Given that the ceiling for drone operations is anyway 400 feet, the yellow zone need not extend any further than 5km from an airport’s boundary wall, as no aircraft will ever be lower than 1,000 feet above ground level beyond that point.

Also of concern are the sweeping penal consequences in the draft drone regulations. According to Rule 33, any failure to comply is punishable under Section 10(2) of the Aircrafts Act, 1934, a provision that stipulates up to three months imprisonment for offenders. Given how broadly it has been worded, even a minor infraction could land a drone operator in jail. This is a risk that is bound to have a chilling effect on the industry.

Finally, while it is indeed commendable that almost all compliance obligations are intended to be fulfilled through a portal, until we actually see Digital Sky in operation, we will not know if the procedures will be automatic and truly presence-less, or still make space for regulatory discretion.

Even with these shortcomings, there isn’t cause for much concern. We must not forget that in framing these rules, the government took the unprecedented step of rescinding its earlier draft, based on public feedback. I have no doubt that it will have no hesitation addressing these remaining few issues once they have been pointed out.

Rahul Matthan is a partner at Trilegal and also has a podcast by the name Ex Machina. His Twitter handle is @matthan

Subscribe to Mint Newsletters
* Enter a valid email
* Thank you for subscribing to our newsletter.

Never miss a story! Stay connected and informed with Mint. Download our App Now!!

Close
×
Edit Profile
My ReadsRedeem a Gift CardLogout