NAAA Comments on Petition for Uncrewed R22/R44 Part 137 Operations
On December 29, NAAA submitted comments on an exemption petition from Rotor Technologies to commercially operate the R220 and R550 uncrewed aerial application system (UAAS), with maximum takeoff weights of 1,360 lbs and 2,500 lbs respectively. The R220 is based on the Robinson R22 airframe and the R550 is based on the R44 airframe. The petitioner plans to manufacture new aircraft and offer retrofit conversions for existing R22 and R44 aircraft.
NAAA’s comments began with expressing concerns that these aircraft would not have an airworthiness certificate. The petition instead proposes to allow the pilot to make an airworthiness determination before each flight, in line with how all other uncrewed aircraft are treated in current exemptions. This would create a strange dichotomy wherein an R44 and R550 would be conducting materially similar operations with effectively similar airframes, yet be held to very different airworthiness standards.
Compounding this airworthiness concern is the petitioner’s request for relief from the §137.019(c) requirement of a Commercial Pilot Certificate to instead allow individuals holding a Remote Pilot Certificate with a Small UAS rating to act as pilot in command for Part 137 operations. While it is clear that these are not “Small UAS” by any definition, NAAA expressed concern that this would effectively vest in an individual with a (simply obtained) Remote Pilot Certificate the authority to determine the airworthiness status of an uncrewed R44.
Regarding maintenance, the petition requests that the R220 and R550 maintenance manuals be accepted in lieu of adherence to relevant regulatory requirements for maintenance, inspections and maintenance records. NAAA asserted that maintenance requirements, including maintenance personnel certification, should not be relaxed. In other words, an R550 and R44 should both be held to the same stringent maintenance and inspection standards to ensure the safety of other airspace users and the public.
Finally, since uncrewed aircraft are categorically prohibited from ADS-B Out, this petition requests relief from §91.225(h)(2) to allow operations with ADS-B Out in transmit mode. NAAA expressed full support for this provision in the interest of improving aircraft conspicuity to other aircraft pilots.
It will be of great interest if FAA and petitioner choose to pursue this Part 137 operational exemption or hold out for the yet to be finalized Part 108 regulatory framework. Regardless of the path taken, this does represent a significant juncture in aerial application operations; an uncrewed variant of a currently-in-use crewed aircraft. For this reason, it is also significant from a regulatory perspective; if you have two aircraft of the same weight, characteristics and capabilities except that one has a pilot on the ground rather than in the seat, how much do you relax regulatory oversight for the former?