Unmanned aerial vehicles vary considerably in some regions and countries of the world regulatory environment setting the framework for the practical use of Unfortunately, the necessary consensus has not yet been reached within the European Union, which would even allow the development of uniform guidelines for the use of drones alone and promulgation. This shortcoming is a serious obstacle to related developments up to media platforms, sensor systems, software systems, applications, or services, which poses a significant market disadvantage in global competition actors, either against the United States, which has been mentioned several times in the previous analysis, or against actors in the Far East. As a result, however, the use of drone technology also in waiting areas (parcel delivery, agriculture, etc.) with significantly slower expansion can be counted as in countries where the public and market actors involved are common his thinking is in a more advanced state. This is, of course, the state, public service also significantly hampers the introduction and diffusion of targeted applications, which is why in my opinion according to which a paradigm shift will be needed as soon as possible and the two areas problems (market, state) in a unified structure, along unified criteria then remedy, since their intertwining and interacting are only complex solutions allows its application.
Several related databases are available on the World Wide Web (e.g. Global Drone Regulation Database) now provides significant help to those on a global scale. I would like to review the rules for drone use. However, it is precisely this comprehensive due to their nature, the data they provide should be treated with reservations as it is local. The dynamics of regulatory change can also vary significantly geographically or by many. In this case, the availability of national resources is limited and its timeliness is questionable, which makes it difficult to keep related databases up to date. In the second half of 2017, a Google Maps map became widely available application based on the surface “Drone laws in all countries of the world”, Which illustrates the relevant rules of each state, and a contact details of related sources and documents. Marked on the map with four color codes each country is categorized. The color green means that such devices the use of drones is allowed, the use of drones is limited or difficult requires a registration process and is prohibited or otherwise restricted in the red areas. Gray indicates a lack of information or regulation. If we look at a map of Europe, a rather mixed, harmonious one by no means the picture of a regulatory environment that is considered to be outlined, which does not help the EU at all aspirations. The only common point is perhaps that of hobby use of drones only within sight, without endangering life and property, and may be flown with respect for personal and property rights. With the safe integration of RPAs into European airspace, EASA has been around for years deals and has already developed in 2015 a “operational concept” (CONOPS), which can provide a basis for Member States legislators, the market for both actors (eg manufacturers) and users, a single European regulation unfortunately, it has not materialized to this day.
The basic principle of the concept is that future regulation should not hinder market processes, at the same time, support the conditions for the safe integration of drones in aviation system. It strikes a delicate balance between technical innovation efforts and security and the protection of individual rights. On this It would be appropriate to base the 33 proposals for and accordingly – the special needs and aspirations of each government, state taking into account national regulations. In this sense, between the carrier platforms it is not necessary to differentiate according to the purpose of the application, i.e. with the same device for example both commercial and non-commercial tasks can be performed. The basis for categorization is not solely by mass, but by the degree of safety risk posed by the UAV, i.e. the lowest-risk assets are ‘open’, the medium-risk assets are ‘special’, while the the most dangerous can be classified into classified classes. The first case is simple, general current airworthiness or airworthiness requirements are not required license (license) while the last category is traditional the requirements for flights performed by aircraft shall apply.
In the open category, preferably with an automated mechanism should be allowed for the limited protection of airspace (geographically defined areas) and the creation of conditions for remote radio frequency identification of devices. Related to these standards and technical restrictions and procedures for devices (eg kinetic energy, power, loss of connection procedure) by EASA competence. According to the proposal, three subcategories will be created within the open category. CAT0 means toy and minidrones under 1 kg, which provide the automatic altitude (50 m) and airspace restriction. It belongs to the CAT1 category UAVs with an upper limit of 4 kg and 150 m must generally comply with a requirements for minidrones and, in addition, automatic identification they must also have a system. For CAT2 class platforms under 25 kg as above an additional restriction is that they cannot fly in “LIMITED-DRONE-ZONE”.
In the special category, the equipment of the drones and the competence of the operators requirements are also set out. In the case of such devices, the operator must perform a risk analysis covering all factors with the appropriate aviation authority with the assistance of a body and must also obtain an operating license. Results of analyzes Based on this, a manual will be compiled that includes the tool and its application related information, conditions, restrictions, expected operator competencies, a maintenance and review processes, incident reporting procedures and supervision of suppliers. Separate airspace prior to air navigation you also need the permission of the service provider. Restrictions prescribed during the performance of a task may be overridden in so far as the licenses issued cover this and are related thereto procedures are included in the manual. On-board equipment functions from the platform they must operate independently in accordance with the standards and regulations applicable to them, which its use must be authorized separately.
In the case of a classified category, the national aviation authorities shall exercise all related the supervisory authority over the area, such as the issuance of operating licenses, the training, air traffic control and navigation control are also part of the state role, while operators designing and manufacturing devices under the supervision of EASA as in the case of conventional aircraft. It can be listed here at the moment quasi-unrestricted all unmanned aerial vehicles that fall into the previous two categories cannot be classified, so these tools are also the subject of ongoing professional debate. The above proposals have therefore not yet reached the level of uniform European legislation, which, on the one hand, makes it significantly more difficult for some Member States to regulate on the other hand, it puts market players on the continent at a competitive disadvantage. THE most Member States already have their own drone legislation (eg Austria, Sweden), which harmonized with the EASA recommendations in terms of their main directives, but specific parameters such as weight limits or safety distances differ.