Airline safety regulators have had nearly a century to craft the rules of the sky.
As the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration and Transport Canada tackled issues such as limiting flight hours for pilots, smoking on board and restricting the use of mobile phones and other electronics, time was on their side.
Not anymore. A law passed last year by President Barack Obama gave U.S. regulators a deadline of September 2015 to cobble together rules and regulations to oversee unmanned flight.
With businesses, drone-makers and consumers on one side, pushing for liberal rules, and pilots and privacy activists on the other, demanding more restrictions for those who operate unmanned aerial vehicles, regulators are scrambling to answer these questions: Who should be allowed to operate a drone? And what should they be allowed to use it for?
The FAA estimates that by 2020, there will be 30,000 drones in the skies above the U.S. Current laws do not address the privacy concerns hanging over an industry that has produced some drones the size of commercial jets, and others smaller than a sparrow.
"It's a crazy, daunting task, trying to write sweeping legislation for a new technology," said Wells Bennett, a visiting fellow in national security at the Brookings Institution who has studied civilian drones.
"You need both people who are steeped in cutting-edged technology at the same time as understanding the arcane regulatory regime."
Bennett said many federal and state agencies, ranging from the Departments of Homeland Security and Justice to NASA, are contributing to the FAA's efforts.
A spokeswoman for the FAA, Alison Duquette, said that out of the agency's total workforce of 49,031, 39 federal employees are currently working on the integration.
The application for a Certificate of Authorization (COA) permitting operation of a drone is about 22 pages. Duquette told the Star the information sought in the application "will enable us make an informed decision on whether to approve the COA application."
But who should be allowed to operate a drone?
It will depend on the type of aircraft and the purpose, Duquette said. In some cases, such as recreational models, no authorization will be required, she said.
"In other cases, the pilots, observers and other personnel may require training and/or certification."
Currently, the FAA allows some law enforcement and government agencies to obtain two-year certificates to operate drones. Corporations aren't allowed to fly drones at all until the new FAA rules are introduced. Model airplane enthusiasts don't face such restrictions, as long as they maintain sight of their toys and don't let them fly higher than 150 metres.
"The FAA just doesn't know what to do; there is an incredible amount of tension," said Ella Atkins, an associate professor at the University of Michigan who owns a small airport and has operated drones.
"The pilots have a very active lobby and argue that the skies will open up after this new legislation and there will be drones everywhere. There is a real level of resistance."
Atkins said pilots' groups want UAVs to be equipped with so-called sense-and-avoid systems, so they will take manoeuvres to avoid manned planes.
"It's just not realistic," she said. "The drones are slower, less manoeuvrable. It's physically not possible to do this. It's like asking a person to try to jump out of the way of a bullet."
In Canada, Transport Canada lets corporations apply for permission to use drones on an ad hoc basis - allowing companies to monitor oil and gas pipelines for leaks and crop fields for moisture, among other uses.
"Canada is actually way ahead of the U.S. with this," said Howard Loewen, president of Manitoba-based MicroPilot, which makes autopilot sensors for drones.
Loewen thinks the FAA should require drone users to obtain licences after taking written tests that are similar to those required for a pilot licence.
"I don't think just anybody should be flying," he said. "It's not like a car. If there's a problem, you can't just pull over to the side and deal with it."
The FAA and Transport Canada might also introduce mandatory transponders for drones and planes alike, Loewen said.
In Canada and the U.S., small planes such as Cessnas aren't required to have transponders or radios, as long as they aren't flown near cities or large airports. Loewen said France and Switzerland recently introduced a system called Flarm, which features electronic devices to selectively alert pilots to possible collisions with other aircraft.
(Flarm was created more than a decade ago and voluntarily adopted by many pilots in Europe; it is becoming available in North America just now.)
"It's a part of the world where they don't have a lot of airspace because of the Alps, and a lot of activity with gliders and large and small planes," Loewen said. "It would make sense for North America."
While the Alps might be chock-a-block with activity, Loewen said North America is different.
"In a sense, 30,000 UAVs in the U.S. and 3,000 in Canada might seem like a lot," Loewen said. "But think about it, how many times do you look up and see an aircraft above you? Not often."
Ryan Calo, an assistant law professor at the University of Washington, compares the growth of the UAV sector to cabs in New York City during the 1930s. With a surplus of roughly 60,000 cabs, New York introduced its medallion system, selling 11,767 licences for $10 each - $150 in today's terms.
A similar system could be used to limit the number of UAVs, Calo said.
Even with the pressures of a 2015 deadline, Calo said it's important for the FAA to take its time and avoid the temptation to rubber-stamp drone applications.
"They have to be careful, even with police (drones)," he said.
"The FAA has historically dealt with safety, not privacy, but this isn't the first time a federal agency has had to adapt and deal with new issues." The National Transportation Safety Board has gone through a similar adjustment, navigating privacy issues related to black-box GPS devices in vehicles, he added.
There are cases that illustrate how cautiously the FAA is proceeding. In Ogden, Utah, for instance, police in 2011 asked for permission to fly a blimp over an area of the city with a high crime rate. The blimp would fly for four hours a night and be equipped with surveillance cameras, police said.
"When you're talking about drones that hover over cities and have facial recognition software, it gets scary really fast," said Rebecca Jeschke, an official with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, an online civil liberties group.
The FAA eventually refused the Ogden request, citing safety concerns.
But Ben Miller, the UAV project director with the Mesa County Sheriff's office in Colorado, says the FAA has been too conservative with drone applications.
"It's a process that's beyond cumbersome," said Miller, whose agency has permission to fly two drones. "It's hard enough getting a user name and password for the FAA online application. Then there's a 17-page form, and all kinds of attachments you have to file, including executive summaries, flight plans, training protocol for the drone operators.
"I think some police look at drones and say that's a great idea, but then they see the application issues and forget it," Miller said.
That might change if officials visited Mesa County, a picturesque stretch of Colorado.
During the summer of 2011, Miller said, there was a fire at a historic building.
"After the firefighters put out the fire, we put up the drone and it showed two hot spots that they had no idea were still there," Miller said. "Then, when they determined it was arson, we were able to use the drone to determine from overhead where the fire started and how it spread."
Copyright 2013 Toronto Star Newspapers Limited
