F38.01 - Airworthiness

SCOPE
1.1 This specification covers the airworthiness requirements for the design of light unmanned aircraft systems. This specification defines the baseline verification requirements for an unmanned aircraft system (UAS).  
1.2 As a minimum, a UAS is defined as a system composed of the unmanned aircraft and all required on-board subsystems, payload, control station, other required off-board subsystems, any required launch and recovery equipment, all required crew members, and command and control (C2) links between UA and the control station.  
1.3 The intent is for this standard of practice for CAA, self- or third-party determinations of airworthiness for UAS. This specification provides the core requirements for airworthiness certification of lightweight (UAS) for certain CAA operational approvals using risk-based categories. Additional requirements are envisioned to address the requirements for expanded operations and characteristics not addressed by this specification.  
1.4 This specification is intended to support UAS operations. It is assumed that the risk of UAS will vary based on concept of operations, environment, and other variables. The fact that there are no human beings onboard the UAS may reduce or eliminate some hazards and risks. However, at the discretion of the CAA, this specification may be applied to other UAS operations.  
1.5 Units—The values in Imperial units are to be regarded as the standard. The values in SI are for information only.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SCOPE
1.1 This specification defines minimum performance requirements for Surveillance supplemental data service providers (SDSPs) and associated equipment and services. This specification also defines requirements on users of the Surveillance SDSP’s services. Surveillance SDSPs may provide aircraft track information to Detect and Avoid (DAA) systems and situational awareness tools to enable beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS) UAS operations and support VLOS operations.
FIG. 1 Scope of Standard and Flow of Data  
1.2 The expected operating environment is low- to medium-risk airspace (equivalent to Joint Authorities for Rulemaking of Unmanned Systems Specific Operations Risk Assessment (JARUS SORA) ARC-b and ARC-c airspace, respectively). It is generally intended to cover operations below 10 000 ft AGL, and specifically operations below 1200 ft AGL.  
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SCOPE
1.1 This specification applies to uncrewed aircraft (UA) with a maximum dimension (for example, wingspan, disc diameter) ≤25 ft, operating at airspeeds below 100 kts, and of any configuration or category. It is meant to be applied in a “lower risk” [low- and medium-risk airspace as described by Joint Authorities for Rulemaking on Unmanned Systems (JARUS)] airspace environment with assumed infrequent encounters with crewed aircraft; this is typically in classes G and E airspace [below about 1200 ft above ground level (AGL)], Class B, C, D (below approximately 400 ft to 500 ft AGL) below obstacle clearance surface (FAA Order 8260.3, as amended) or within low altitude authorization and notification capability (LAANC) designated areas below the altitude specified in the facility map.  
1.1.1 Traffic encountered is expected to be mixed cooperative and non-cooperative traffic, instrument flight rules (IFR) and visual flight rules (VFR), and to mostly include low-altitude aircraft—including rotorcraft, small general aviation, crop dusters, ultralights, and light sport aircraft, but not transport category aircraft.  
1.1.2 This includes, but is not limited to, airspace where nearly all aircraft are required2 to be cooperative (for example, within the Mode C veil in the United States).  
1.2 Ultimate determination of applicability will be governed by the appropriate civil aviation authority (CAA).  
1.3 This specification assumes no air traffic control (ATC) separation services are provided to the UA.  
1.4 While some architectures may have limitations due to external conditions, this specification applies to daytime and nighttime, as well as visual meteorological conditions (VMC) and instrument meteorological conditions (IMC). The system integrator shall document system limitation (that is, due to operating environments and/or minimum altitudes at which the air picture is no longer valid).  
1.5 This specification is applicable to the avoidance of crewed aircraft by uncrewed aircraft systems (UAS), not UA-to-UA or terrain/obstacle/airspace avoidance (both to be addressed in future efforts). Likewise, birds or natural hazard (for example, weather, clouds) avoidance requirements are not addressed.  
1.6 This specification does not define a specific detect and avoid (DAA) architecture3 and is architecture agnostic. It will, however, define specific safety performance thresholds for a DAA system to meet in order to ensure safe operation.  
1.7 This specification addresses the definitions and methods for demonstrating compliance to this specification, and the many considerations (for example, detection range, required timeline to meet well clear, and near mid-air collision (NMAC) safety targets) affecting DAA system integration.  
1.8 The specification highlights how different aspects of the system are designed and interrelated, and how they affect the greater UAS system-of-systems to enable a developer to make informed decisions within the context of their specific UAS application(s).  
1.9 It is expected this specification will be used by diverse contributors or actors including, but not limited to:  
1.9.1 DAA system designers and integrators,  
1.9.2 Sensor suppliers,  
1.9.3 UA developers,  
1.9.4 Control Station designers,  
1.9.5 UAS service suppliers, and  
1.9.6 Flight control designers.  
1.10 Except for DAA system integrators for whom all the “shalls” in this specification apply, not all aspects of this specification are relevant to all actors/contributors. In some instances, the actor most likely to satisfy a requirement has been identified in brackets after the requirement; this is for informative purposes only and does not indicate that only that actor may fulfill that requirement. Where not specified, the system integrator/applicant is assumed to be the primary actor; in all cases, the system integrator/applicant is responsible for all requirements and may choose to delegate requirements as ...

ABSTRACT
This specification establishes the design, construction, and test requirements for a small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS). It is intended for all sUAS that are permitted to operate over a defined area and in airspace authorized by a nation's governing aviation authority (GAA). Unless otherwise specified by a nation’s GAA, this specification applies only to UA that have a maximum takeoff gross weight of 55 lb/25 kg or less.
SCOPE
1.1 This specification defines the design, construction, and test requirements for a small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS).  
1.2 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.3 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

ABSTRACT
This specification provides a consensus standard for an application to a nation's governing aviation authority (GAA) for a permit to operate a small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS) for commercial or public use purposes. It is intended for all sUAS that are allowed to operate over a defined area and in airspace authorized by a nation's GAA. Unless otherwise specified by a nation's GAA, this specification applies only to UA that have a maximum gross takeoff weight of 25 kg (55 lb) or less. This specification covers general command and control (C2) requirements, C2 system spectrum requirements, C2 link requirements, UA requirements, and fly-away functionality.
SCOPE
1.1 This specification is provided as a consensus standard in support of an application to a nation’s governing aviation authority (GAA) for a permit to operate a small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS) for commercial or public use purposes.  
1.2 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.3 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

ABSTRACT
This standard specifies the requirements for batteries used in small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS). It covers the standard terminology for sUAS as well as the requirements with respect to cells, mechanical design and assembly, electrical design, and maintenance of the pack and the recording of maintenance data.
SCOPE
1.1 This standard defines the requirements for batteries used in small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS).  
1.2 This standard does not define requirements for the systems in which sUAS battery packs may be utilized.  
1.3 This standard is subordinate to Specification F2910.  
1.4 If allowed by a nation’s GAA, certain sUAS may be exempt from this standard and may use commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) batteries in non-safety-critical payloads (lithium chemistries may not be exempted). Air transport regulations still shall be adhered to when air transport is used for COTS cells or batteries in bulk.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SCOPE
1.1 This specification covers the design and manufacture requirements for deployable parachutes of small unmanned aircraft (sUA). This specification defines the design, fabrication, and test requirements of installable, deployable parachute recovery systems (PRS) that are designed to be integrated into an sUA to lessen the impact energy of the system should the sUA fail to sustain normal, stable safe flight.  
1.1.1 Compliance with this specification is intended to support an applicant in obtaining permission from a civil aviation authority (CAA) to fly an sUA over people.  
1.1.2 Parachute recovery systems that do not include all the minimum requirements of Section 5 and Section 6 of this specification shall not be referred to as meeting this specification.  
1.2 This specification is applicable to the design, construction, and test of deployable parachute recovery systems that may be incorporated into the system or structure, or both, of sUA seeking civil aviation authority (CAA) approval in the form of technical standard orders (TSO), flight certificates, flight waivers, flight permits, or other like documentation.  
1.3 Units—The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SCOPE
1.1 Applicability:  
1.1.1 This specification identifies the industry standards that have been determined by consensus to demonstrate compliance to the requirements (“the Rules”) for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS).  
1.1.2 This specification does not apply to UAS carrying passengers or crew.  
1.1.3 The following are outside the scope of this Design and Construction Specification: Vertical Takeoff and Landing (VTOL) or Hybrid Aircraft, Passenger or Crew Carrying UAS, Seaplanes or Amphibians, UAS Certified for Acrobatic Flight, Lightweight UAS that fall under Specification F3298, Recreational UAS (Model Aircraft), Detect and Avoid Systems, Control Station Specifics to Human Factors, Building Codes that apply to Ground Control Stations, and Command and Control Link.  
1.1.4 Only standards that are considered mature enough for general application to certification projects and have been found acceptable by committee consensus to propose to the civil aviation authorities (CAAs) for acceptance as a Means of Compliance (MoC) to their Rules are included.  
1.1.5 In the event that a particular CAA’s requirements are not harmonized with the other CAA’s requirements, the standards will be written to include the non-harmonized requirements as well as the harmonized requirements with the applicability defined in the standard.  
1.2 Civil Aviation Authorities—CAAs may accept a specific revision of this specification as an acceptable MoC to their requirements. Acceptance and applicability as an MoC to the CAA’s airworthiness rules remains the decision of the respective CAAs. CAAs may accept this specification, with or without limitations as defined in their specification acceptance document. For information on which CAAs have accepted these standards (in whole or in part) as an acceptable MoC to their Rules, refer to the ASTM Committee F44 (General Aviation), ASTM Committee F38 (Unmanned Aerial Systems) or ASTM Committee F39 (Aircraft Systems) webpages (www.astm.org/COMMITTEE/F44.htm, www.astm.org/COMMITTEE/F38.htm, www.astm.org/COMMITTEE/F39.htm), which include CAA website links.  
1.3 Applicant Responsibility—The applicant must seek individual guidance from their respective CAA concerning the use of this specification and any referenced Specifications, Practices, Test Methods, or Guides to show compliance to the CAA rules. Alternatively, an applicant may propose an MoC other than those included in this specification, but it is their responsibility to obtain acceptance of their proposed MoC from their CAA.  
1.4 This specification is based heavily on the ASTM Committee F44 General Aviation means of compliance guidelines. Unmanned Aircraft System specific guidance is provided below for areas where considerations specific to the unmanned application of aircraft differs from traditional manned aircraft specification or certification requirements. ASTM F3264–18b, Standard Specification for Normal Category Aeroplanes Certification, from the Committee F44 General Aviation group was used as the starting point with referenced ASTM F44 MoC Specification referenced throughout. The referenced F44 standard is to be used as is except in the areas where UAS-specific changes to standard MoC practices have been identified. These changes are identified in the following manner:  
1.4.1 Unique Addition for UAS—New UAS-specific MoC added in addition to standard MoC in areas where new UAS functionality is introduced.  
1.4.2 Substitutions for UAS—Modification of standard MoC to create similar UAS-specific MoCs.  
1.4.3 Not Applicable for UAS—MoCs not needed for Unmanned Aircraft or Remote Pilot Station.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.6 This international sta...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The test method is intended to be used by sUAS manufacturers, sUAS operators, and CAAs to assess the safety of sUA impacts to people on the ground during operations involving flight over people.  
5.2 The test method provides a framework for creating new designs and evaluating existing designs to determine the sUA’s blunt force trauma injury potential to the head or neck, or both, during a collision with a person on the ground.  
5.3 Applicants can determine whether to use Methods A, B, C, or D based upon their specific sUA characteristics, flight operations, and CAA requirements. In some cases, sUA with low impact KE below 54 ft-lbf [73 J] may not require rigorous testing to ensure safety to the nonparticipating public and can use Method A. Vehicles with higher impact KEs should conduct impact testing using Method B, Method C, or Method D. Method B is simpler than Method C and, therefore, less costly for the applicant. Method B results may be more conservative since the test setup is more rigid and can result in an increase in the amount of energy transferred during the impact than the injury metrics established using a full ATD. Method C testing is costlier and schedule-intensive, but provides a higher level of certainty of the injury potential of the sUA and is more directly comparable to established automotive injury metrics and injury metrics derived from ATD testing and used by the governing CAA. Method D allows for the direct comparison to energy-based requirement of some CAAs.  
5.4 The output of Method A is a verification that the sUA or sUA with mitigation does not exceed the 54 ft-lbf impact KE throughout its flight envelope based upon flight test data as means of obtaining approval for flight over people for Category 2 or 3 operations for the FAA. Other governing CAAs may only require a weight metric or other impact energy metric in lieu of the 54 ft-lbf impact KE.  
5.5 The output from Methods B and C is a characterization of the forces (measure...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is applicable to small unmanned aircraft (sUA) that are limited in the United States in accordance with 14 CFR § 107.3 to be less than 55 lbf. The test method provides a standardized method for assessing the safety of sUA impacts with a person on the ground. Results from testing using Methods A, B, C, or D are intended to be used to support an applicant in obtaining permission from the governing Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) for flight over people. Approval of reports for the conduct of tests and the decision to grant permission rests with the governing CAA based upon adherence to the methodologies outlined in this test method.  
1.2 This test method is based on methods researched by the FAA Center of Excellence for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) supported by the Alliance for System Safety of UAS through Research Excellence (ASSURE). These methods expand on extensive research and testing conducted by the automotive industry to support quantitative automotive passenger safety standards and testing and test data on sUA collected by ASSURE.  
1.3 The purpose of this test method is to define a method to establish confidence in the overall injury potential of a particular sUA configuration under probable failure conditions. This testing is not meant to simulate the worst possible impact for the most conservative set of the population. It is expected that CAAs should determine what injury thresholds are acceptable under their public policy and determine operational limitations for various operations by using the data from this testing in conjunction with the specific concept of operations proposed by the applicant.  
1.4 The test method provides four methods for evaluating the potential for impact injury: a simple analytical method, a simplified test, a more rigorous test, and a test method normed to approximate energy transfer values with appropriate safety margins applied to each approach to address...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 This practice provides an architectural framework for developing an RTA system, which provides run-time assurance as an alternative to design-time assurance to fulfill safety requirements for an unassured or complex function. The standard provides best practices and guidelines to assist in the RTA system’s development. Further, it describes the architectural components and requirements for designing the RTA system. Compliance to this practice is achieved by deriving RTA System requirements from the standard and capturing them in the Larger System Specification. The system design requirements can then be validated and verified using acceptable engineering practices. It is anticipated that this practice will provide a means to accept complex automation/autonomy aircraft functions that have been difficult to certify using traditional methods.  
4.2 The following three-step process is used to derive verifiable design requirements using this architecture standard:  
4.2.1 Create RTA System requirements using the guidance provided by this architecture standard.  
4.2.2 Capture RTA System requirements in the Larger System Specification.  
4.2.3 Perform verification and validation on the RTA System requirements in the Larger System Specification.  
4.3 The RTA architecture can be applied to all sizes, levels, and classes of UAS. Using run-time assurance can provide systems with the following benefits:  
4.3.1 The ability to mitigate hazards related to nondeterministic or unexpected behavior from unassured functions that employ advanced software methods or algorithmic complexity that cannot be certified using traditional certification practices.  
4.3.2 The ability to use functions for which it may not be possible to obtain artifacts of conventional DO-178 or DO-254 assurance processes.  
4.3.3 The ability to use COTS hardware or software, or both, for the unassured function.
4.3.3.1 For example, automotive components, thereby leveraging mature software with ex...
SCOPE
1.1 The scope of this practice includes the following:  
1.1.1 A set of components that comprise an RTA system.  
1.1.2 Requirements and best practices to determine safe boundaries and RTA system coverage.  
1.1.3 Requirements and best practices for an RTA system and RTA components, as applicable.  
1.1.4 Appendixes with examples that demonstrate key RTA system concepts.  
1.2 RTA components are required to meet the design assurance level dictated by a safety assessment process. Guidance for the safety assessment process may be found in references appropriate for the intended operations (ARP4754A, ARP4761, Practice F3178, etc.).  
1.3 This practice was developed with UAS in mind. It may be applicable for aspects of manned aircraft certification/approval, as well as aviation ground systems. The scope of this practice is also envisioned to allow a variety of aircraft implementations where a human may perform the role of either the Complex Function or a Recovery Function.  
1.4 The scope of this practice does not cover aspects of hardware/software integration. These should be considered separately during the development process.
Note 1: This practice does not suggest a one-size-fits-all strategy knowing that not all use cases may fit well into this architecture. There may exist additional components required to satisfy specific applications to the practice.  
1.5 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.  
1.6 Table of Contents:    
Title  
Section  
Introduction  
Background  
Scope  
1  
Referenced Documents  
2  
ASTM Standards  
2.1  
FAA Advisory Circular  
2.2  
RTCA Standards  
2.3  
SAE Standards  
2.4  
Terminology  
3  
Unique and Common Terminology  
3.3  
Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard  
3.4  
Abbreviations  
3.5  
...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 Demonstration plans developed in accordance with this practice will include all necessary content and key considerations to support an effective flight demonstration program aimed at approval or certification of UAS by the FAA through D&R demonstration.  
4.2 This practice does not address planning requirements for UAS development testing. It is assumed that a manufacturer has completed all UAS design and development and is preparing demonstration programs to support compliance demonstration on a stable and controlled system configuration. Manufacturers who wish to prepare a detailed design and development program should review Specification F3298 for programmatic examples.  
4.3 This practice is intended to be used on low-risk UAS that meet the following design criteria and operating limitations.  
4.3.1 The UAS has a command and control link that enables the pilot-in-command to take contingency action.  
4.3.2 The unmanned aircraft (UA) has a kinetic energy of ≤25 000 ft-lb calculated in accordance with methods specified within the MOC.  
4.3.3 The UA is operated ≤400 ft above ground level (AGL).  
4.3.4 No operations over open-air assemblies (operations over people are acceptable).  
4.3.5 No flight into known icing.  
4.3.6 Maximum of 20:1 aircraft to pilot ratio.  
4.3.7 The UA is electrically powered (excludes internal combustion engines and fuel cells).
SCOPE
1.1 This standard practice is intended for low-risk UAS seeking type certification by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) under 14 CFR Part 21.17(b) in accordance with the FAA durability and reliability (D&R) means of compliance (MOC). The definition of “low-risk UAS” does not necessarily align with other definitions found within corresponding ASTM standards (F3442/F3442M) or other UAS-related standards. For the purposes of this practice, “low-risk” is defined as a UAS operated in accordance with the concept of operations (CONOPs), eligibility criteria, and kinetic energy threshold specified in the G-1 Issue Paper (which will be provided to the applicant by the FAA). See 4.3 for design criteria and operating limitations for low-risk UAS.  
1.2 This standard practice establishes a common methodology and key considerations for the development of minimum flight plans for low-risk UAS that demonstrate aircraft reliability as part of a D&R MOC.  
1.3 The scope of this standard practice encompasses D&R planning, data collection, and reporting.  
1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. This is not intended to limit the systems of units used for design, development testing, or demonstration testing. However, the units of measurement used on pilot-facing placards and markings and manuals must be the same as those used on the corresponding equipment with recognition that international aviation utilizes feet for altitude and knots for airspeed as operational parameters.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

ABSTRACT
This specification establishes the airworthiness requirements for the design of fixed-wing unmanned aircraft systems. It defines the baseline design, construction, and verification requirements for an unmanned aircraft system (UAS), defined as a system composed of the unmanned aircraft and all required on-board subsystems, payload, control station, other required off-board subsystems, any required launch and recovery equipment, all required crew members, and command and control (C2) links between UA and the control station. This specification applies to fixed wing UAS with permission to operate over a defined area and in airspace authorized by a nation's civil aviation authority (CAA) with a fully interactive ground-based person as ”Remote Pilot in Command.”
This specification covers requirements for flight (e.g., proof of compliance, load distribution limits, propeller speed and pitch limits); performance (stalling speed, takeoff, climb, landing, multi-engine); design (equipment, systems, and installation, workmanship, airframe, airspeed limitations, loads and dynamics); construction (fabrication methods, fasteners); structure (loads, flight loads, limit load factors, design airspeeds); command and control system (flight and navigations instruments, automatic flight control system, datalinks, teleoperated flight controls); other required off-board subsystems (required launch and recovery equipment, tethering systems); miscellaneous equipment (payloads, digital flight data recording system); operating limitations and information (weight and center of gravity, propulsion system limitations, electromagnetic environmental effects); documentation (design control, aircraft flight manual, maintenance manual); verification (system verification, methods of verification); and best practices (performance verification, airframe, propulsion system, propeller, miscellaneous equipment such as payloads and high-intensity radiated fields [HIRF] protection).
SCOPE
1.1 This specification covers the airworthiness requirements for the design of light unmanned aircraft systems. This specification defines the baseline design, construction, and verification requirements for an unmanned aircraft system (UAS).  
1.2 As a minimum, a UAS is defined as a system composed of the unmanned aircraft and all required on-board subsystems, payload, control station, other required off-board subsystems, any required launch and recovery equipment, all required crew members, and command and control (C2) links between UA and the control station.  
1.3 The intent is for this standard of practice for CAA, self- or third-party determinations of airworthiness for UAS. This specification provides the core requirements for airworthiness certification of lightweight (UAS) (not necessarily limited to UAs under 55 lb GTOW) or for certain CAA operational approvals using risk-based categories. Additional requirements are envisioned to address the requirements for expanded operations and characteristics not addressed by this specification.  
1.4 This specification is intended to support UAS operations. It is assumed that the risk of UAS will vary based on concept of operations, environment, and other variables. The fact that there are no human beings onboard the UAS may reduce or eliminate some hazards and risks. However, at the discretion of the CAA, this specification may be applied to other UAS operations.  
1.5 The values in Imperial units are to be regarded as the standard. The values in SI are for information only.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization establi...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 Aircraft flying in national airspace are required by the ICAO Chicago Convention and national regulatory rules to have visible markings to determine nationality and registration. UAS shall comply with these rules, although small UAS will have unique rules or exemptions from existing rules due to their small size. This standard is designed to allow UAS to comply with these marking requirements in Annex 7 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation as amended by state regulatory rules.  
4.2 Many ICAO states are assigning UAS to different classes and categories to define the rules UAS must operate under. The ICAO Annex 7 Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPS) apply to UAS Aircraft with the exception of small UAS. The classification of what constitutes a small UAS (sUAS) has been left to ICAO states and the rules under which sUAS operate are dictated by each state.  
4.3 This practice follows ICAO Annex 7 SARPS except in areas where the unique aspects of UAS may not allow compliance. In these cases, this document will address the issue and recommend the need for an alternate compliance method.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice prescribes guidelines for the display of marks to indicate appropriate UAS registration and ownership for all Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) except those categorized as small UAS (sUAS) by regulatory authorities. The FAA is developing a Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) to define the term small UAS and provide regulations for these aircraft.  
1.2 This practice will allow determination of nationality in cases where UAS may cross international boundaries.  
1.3 This practice does not apply to sUAS. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has left the designation of sUAS to each state and the states will develop rules and regulations for sUAS.  
1.4 This practice does not apply to model aircraft.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SCOPE
1.1 This standard practice intends to ensure the dependability of UAS software. Dependability includes both the safety and security aspects of the software.  
1.2 This practice will focus on the following areas: (a) Organizational controls (for example, management, training) in place during software development. (b) Use of the software in the system, including its architecture and contribution to overall system safety and security. (c) Metrics and design analysis related to assessing the code. (d) Techniques and tools related to code review. (e) Quality assurance. (f) Testing of the software.  
1.3 There is interest from industry and some parts of the CAAs to pursue an alternate means of compliance for software assurance for small UAS (sUAS).  
1.4 This practice is intended to support sUAS operations. It is assumed that the risk of sUAS will vary based on concept of operations, environment, and other variables. The fact that there are no souls onboard the UAS may reduce or eliminate some hazards and risks. However, at the discretion of the CAA, this practice may be applied to other UAS operations.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SCOPE
1.1 This specification applies to unmanned aircraft (UA) with a maximum dimension (for example, wingspan, disc diameter) ≤25 ft, operating at airspeeds below 100 kts, and of any configuration or category. It is meant to be applied in a “lower risk” (low- and medium-risk airspace as described by Joint Authorities for Rulemaking on Unmanned Systems (JARUS)) airspace environment with assumed infrequent encounters with manned aircraft; this is typically in classes G and E airspace (below about 1200 ft above ground level (AGL)), Class B, C, D (below about 400 to 500 ft AGL), below obstacle clearance surface (FAA Order 8260.3, as amended), or within low altitude authorization and notification capability (LAANC) designated areas below the altitude specified in the facility map.  
1.1.1 Traffic encountered is expected to be mixed cooperative and non-cooperative traffic, instrument flight rules (IFR) and visual flight rules (VFR), and to mostly include low-altitude aircraft—including rotorcraft, small general aviation, crop dusters, ultralights, and light sport aircraft, but not transport category aircraft.  
1.1.2 This includes, but is not limited to, airspace where all aircraft are required2 to be cooperative (for example, within the Mode C veil in the U.S.).  
1.2 Ultimate determination of applicability will be governed by the appropriate civil aviation authority (CAA).  
1.3 This specification assumes no air traffic control (ATC) separation services are provided to the UA.  
1.4 While some architectures may have limitations due to external conditions, this specification applies to daytime and nighttime, as well as visual meteorological conditions (VMC) and instrument meteorological conditions (IMC).  
1.5 This specification is applicable to the avoidance of manned aircraft by unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), not UA-to-UA or terrain/obstacle/airspace avoidance (both to be addressed in future efforts). Likewise, birds or natural hazard (for example, weather, clouds) avoidance requirements are not addressed.  
1.6 This specification does not define a specific detect and avoid (DAA) architecture3 and is architecture agnostic. It will, however, define specific safety performance thresholds for a DAA system to meet to ensure safe operation.  
1.7 This specification addresses the definitions and methods for demonstrating compliance to this specification, and the many considerations (for example, detection range, required timeline to meet well-clear, and near mid-air collision (NMAC) safety targets) affecting DAA system integration.  
1.8 The specification highlights how different aspects of the system are designed and interrelated, and how they affect the greater UAS system to enable a developer to make informed decisions within the context of their specific UAS application(s).  
1.9 It is expected this specification will be used by diverse contributors or actors including, but not limited to:  
1.9.1 DAA system designers and integrators,  
1.9.2 Sensor suppliers,  
1.9.3 UA developers,  
1.9.4 Ground control station (GCS) designers,  
1.9.5 UAS service suppliers, and  
1.9.6 Flight control designers.  
1.10 Except for DAA system integrators for whom all the “shalls” in this specification apply, not all aspects of this specification are universally relevant. Nonetheless, familiarity with the entire specification will inform all actors/contributors of how their contributions affect the overall DAA capability and is strongly recommended.  
1.11 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system are not necessarily exact equivalents; therefore, to ensure conformance with the standard, each system shall be used independently of the other, and values from the two systems shall not be combined.  
1.12 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility o...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The test method is intended to be used by sUAS manufacturers, sUAS operators, and CAAs to assess the safety of sUA impacts to people on the ground during operations involving flight over people.  
5.2 The test method provides a framework for creating new designs and evaluating existing designs to determine the sUA’s blunt force trauma injury potential to the head or neck, or both, during a collision with a person on the ground.  
5.3 Applicants can determine whether to use Methods A, B, or C based upon their specific sUA characteristics and flight operations. In many cases, sUA with impact KE below 54 ft-lbf [73 J] (see Appendix X1) do not require rigorous testing to ensure safety to the nonparticipating public and can use Method A. Vehicles with higher impact KEs should conduct impact testing using Method B or Method C. Method B is simpler than Method C and, therefore, less costly for the applicant. Method B results may be more conservative since the test setup is more rigid and can result in an increase in the amount of energy transferred during the impact than the injury metrics established using a full ATD. Method C testing is costlier and schedule-intensive, but provides a higher level of certainty of the injury potential of the sUA and is more directly comparable to established automotive injury metrics and injury metrics derived from ATD testing and used by the governing CAA.  
5.4 The output of Method A is a verification that the sUA or sUA with mitigation does not exceed the 54 ft-lbf impact KE throughout its flight envelope based upon flight test data as means of obtaining approval for flight over people for Category 2 or 3 operations for the FAA. Other governing CAAs may only require a weight metric or other impact energy metric in lieu of the 54 ft-lbf impact KE.  
5.5 The output from Methods B and C is a characterization of the forces (measured in acceleration of the head form or ATD) expected during an MPWC head impact as a function of sUA KE. ...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is applicable to small unmanned aircraft (sUA) that are limited in the United States in accordance with 14 CFR § 107.3 to be less than 55 lbf. The test method provides a standardized method for assessing the safety of sUA impacts with a person on the ground. Results from testing using Methods A, B, or C are intended to be used to support an applicant in obtaining permission from the governing Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) for flight over people. Approval of reports for the conduct of tests and the decision to grant permission rests with the governing CAA based upon adherence to the methodologies outlined in this test method.  
1.2 This test method is based on methods researched by the FAA Center of Excellence for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) supported by the Alliance for System Safety of UAS through Research Excellence (ASSURE). These methods expand on extensive research and testing conducted by the automotive industry to support quantitative automotive passenger safety standards and testing and test data on sUA collected by ASSURE.  
1.3 The purpose of this test method is to define a method to establish confidence in the overall injury potential of a particular sUA configuration under probable failure conditions. This testing is not meant to simulate the worst possible impact for the most conservative set of the population. It is expected that CAAs should determine what injury thresholds are acceptable under their public policy and determine operational limitations for various operations by using the data from this testing in conjunction with the specific concept of operations proposed by the applicant.  
1.4 The test method provides three methods for evaluating the potential for impact injury: a simple analytical method, a simplified test, and a more rigorous test with appropriate safety margins applied to each approach to address uncertainty in each of the approaches.  
1.5 The applicant s...

SCOPE
1.1 This specification covers the design and manufacture requirements for deployable parachutes of small unmanned aircraft (sUA). This specification defines the design, fabrication, and test requirements of installable, deployable parachute recovery systems (PRS) that are designed to be integrated into a sUA to lessen the impact energy of the system should the sUA fail to sustain normal stable safe flight. Compliance with this specification is intended to support an applicant in obtaining permission from a civil aviation authority (CAA) to fly a sUA over people.  
1.2 This specification is applicable to the design, construction, and test of deployable parachute recovery systems that may be incorporated into the system or structure, or both, of sUA seeking civil aviation authority (CAA) approval in the form of technical standard orders (TSO), flight certificates, flight waivers, flight permits, or other like documentation.  
1.3 Units—The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SCOPE
1.1 This specification covers the airworthiness requirements for the design of fixed-wing unmanned aircraft systems. This specification defines the baseline design, construction, and verification requirements for an unmanned aircraft system (UAS).  
1.2 As a minimum, a UAS is defined as a system composed of the unmanned aircraft and all required on-board subsystems, payload, control station, other required off-board subsystems, any required launch and recovery equipment, all required crew members, and command and control (C2) links between UA and the control station.  
1.3 The intent is for this standard of practice for CAA, self- or third-party determinations of airworthiness for UAS. This specification provides the core requirements for airworthiness certification of lightweight (UAS) (not necessarily limited to UAs under 55 lb GTOW) or for certain CAA operational approvals using risk-based categories. Additional requirements are envisioned to address the requirements for expanded operations and characteristics not addressed by this specification.  
1.4 This specification is intended to support UAS operations. It is assumed that the risk of UAS will vary based on concept of operations, environment, and other variables. The fact that there are no human beings onboard the UAS may reduce or eliminate some hazards and risks. However, at the discretion of the CAA, this specification may be applied to other UAS operations.  
1.5 The values in Imperial units are to be regarded as the standard. The values in SI are for information only.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SCOPE
1.1 This standard practice defines design and test best practices that if followed, would provide guidance to an applicant for providing evidence to the civil aviation authority (CAA) that the flight behavior of an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) containing complex function(s) is constrained through a run-time assurance (RTA) architecture to maintain an acceptable level of flight safety.  
1.2 This practice will have the benefit of enabling highly automated UAS operations. It is envisioned that applicants will use this practice as a means of compliance for safe implementation of complex functions for routine operations.  
1.3 Verification of complex functions is considered too challenging to use conventional software assurance methods such as RTCA DO-178C or IEC 61508. Certification challenges under these standards include generating required artifacts, such as requirements, elimination of unintended functionality, traceability/coverage, and test cases required for verification.  
1.4 There is significant interest from industry and CAAs to have a standard practice to enable flight operations for UAS containing complex functions. Developing a certification path for these UAS technologies could also advance safety in General Aviation.  
1.5 The following design tenets are offered to provide guidance to the UAS manufacturer as to the intended application of this standard.  
1.5.1 The RTA Architecture is intended to be used for Complex Functions that would require an amount of effort that is beyond reasonably practicable to pass CAA conventional certification requirements.  
1.5.2 The UAS manufacturer should engage in appropriate design, test, and validation activities to enable the Complex Function to perform as intended.  
1.5.3 The complexity of the Recovery Control Function (RCF) deterministic commands should be minimized insofar as practicable.  
1.5.4 Repeated invocation of an RCF during a single mission may be considered an indication of improper Complex Function performance.  
1.5.5 An RTA design with multiple RCFs should consider the aircraft state, relative outcomes, and differences in RTA recovery times in prioritizing the recovery actions in the safety monitor.  
1.5.6 The UAS manufacturer should strive to minimize false or nuisance triggers of one or more RCFs as these false alarms undermine user confidence in the system and impact operational efficiency.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

ABSTRACT
This standard specifies the requirements for batteries used in small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS). It covers the standard terminology for sUAS as well as the requirements with respect to cells, mechanical design and assembly, electrical design, and maintenance of the pack and the recording of maintenance data.
SCOPE
1.1 This standard defines the requirements for batteries used in small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS).  
1.2 This standard does not define requirements for the systems in which sUAS battery packs may be utilized.  
1.3 This standard is subordinate to Specification F2910.  
1.4 If allowed by a nation’s GAA, certain sUAS may be exempt from this standard and may use commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) batteries in non-safety-critical payloads (lithium chemistries may not be exempted). Air transport regulations still shall be adhered to when air transport is used for COTS cells or batteries in bulk.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

ABSTRACT
This specification provides a consensus standard for an application to a nation's governing aviation authority (GAA) for a permit to operate a small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS) for commercial or public use purposes. It is intended for all sUAS that are allowed to operate over a defined area and in airspace authorized by a nation's GAA. Unless otherwise specified by a nation's GAA, this specification applies only to UA that have a maximum gross takeoff weight of 25 kg (55 lb) or less. This specification covers general command and control (C2) requirements, C2 system spectrum requirements, C2 link requirements, UA requirements, and fly-away functionality.
SCOPE
1.1 This specification is provided as a consensus standard in support of an application to a nation’s governing aviation authority (GAA) for a permit to operate a small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS) for commercial or public use purposes.  
1.2 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

ABSTRACT
This standard specifies the requirements for batteries used in small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS). It covers the standard terminology for sUAS as well as the requirements with respect to cells, mechanical design and assembly, electrical design, and maintenance of the pack and the recording of maintenance data.
SCOPE
1.1 This standard defines the requirements for batteries used in small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS).  
1.2 This standard does not define requirements for the systems in which sUAS battery packs may be utilized.  
1.3 This standard is subordinate to Specification F2910.  
1.4 If allowed by a nation’s GAA, certain sUAS may be exempt from this standard and may use commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) batteries. Air transport regulations still shall be adhered to when air transport is used for COTS cells or batteries in bulk.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

ABSTRACT
This specification establishes the design, construction, and test requirements for a small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS). It is intended for all sUAS that are permitted to operate over a defined area and in airspace authorized by a nation's governing aviation authority (GAA). Unless otherwise specified by a nation’s GAA, this specification applies only to UA that have a maximum takeoff gross weight of 55 lb/25 kg or less.
SCOPE
1.1 This specification defines the design, construction, and test requirements for a small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS).  
1.2 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SCOPE
1.1 This standard defines the production acceptance requirements for a small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS).  
1.2 This standard is applicable to sUAS that comply with design, construction, and test requirements identified in Specification F2910. No sUAS may enter production until such compliance is demonstrated.  
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

ABSTRACT
This specification provides a consensus standard for an application to a nation's governing aviation authority (GAA) for a permit to operate a small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS) for commercial or public use purposes. It is intended for all sUAS that are allowed to operate over a defined area and in airspace authorized by a nation's GAA. Unless otherwise specified by a nation's GAA, this specification applies only to UA that have a maximum gross takeoff weight of 25 kg (55 lb) or less. This specification covers general command and control (C2) requirements, C2 system spectrum requirements, C2 link requirements, UA requirements, and fly-away functionality.
SCOPE
1.1 This specification is provided as a consensus standard in support of an application to a nation’s governing aviation authority (GAA) for a permit to operate a small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS) for commercial or public use purposes.  
1.2 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
Aircraft flying in national airspace are required by the ICAO Chicago Convention and national regulatory rules to have visible markings to determine nationality and registration. UAS shall comply with these rules, although small UAS will have unique rules or exemptions from existing rules due to their small size. This standard is designed to allow UAS to comply with these marking requirements in Annex 7 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation as amended by state regulatory rules.
Many ICAO states are assigning UAS to different classes and categories to define the rules UAS must operate under. The ICAO Annex 7 Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPS) apply to UAS Aircraft with the exception of small UAS. The classification of what constitutes a small UAS (sUAS) has been left to ICAO states and the rules under which sUAS operate are dictated by each state.
This practice follows ICAO Annex 7 SARPS except in areas where the unique aspects of UAS may not allow compliance. In these cases, this document will address the issue and recommend the need for an alternate compliance method.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice prescribes guidelines for the display of marks to indicate appropriate UAS registration and ownership for all Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) except those categorized as small UAS (sUAS) by regulatory authorities. The FAA is developing a Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) to define the term small UAS and provide regulations for these aircraft.
1.2 This practice will allow determination of nationality in cases where UAS may cross international boundaries.
1.3 This practice does not apply to sUAS. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has left the designation of sUAS to each state and the states will develop rules and regulations for sUAS.
1.4 This practice does not apply to model aircraft.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SCOPE
1.1 This specification covers the design and performance of unmanned aircraft system (UAS) launch system operating via a closed-loop pressurized hydraulic or pneumatic system with a hydraulic recovery, or both.
1.2 In instances where the launcher and UAS manufacturer are the same entity, compliance with this specification is the responsibility of the UAS manufacturer where applicable.
This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SCOPE
1.1 In this practice, certification procedures are provided for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in the Light UAS Class and in the Remotely Operated Aircraft (ROA) UAS Classes. Unmanned Aircraft Systems in the Mini UAS and Micro UAS Classes are not considered in this practice, since they do not undergo airworthiness certification.
1.2 Citations of Federal Aviation RegulationsWhen citing U.S. Federal Aviation Regulations in this practice, the citation references are based on the following Federal Aviation Regulation structure:
1.2.1 The Code of Federal Regulations, Title 14 (14 CFR) comprises Aeronautics and Space Regulations. Chapter 1 of 14 CFR contains the regulations of the Federal Aviation Administration and is subdivided into subchapters and parts:
The Parts are further subdivided into Subparts and sections.
1.2.2 This practice uses Part 21 as a template. Within the text of the practice:
14 CFR Chapter 1 means the whole of Chapter 1 of 14 CFR; and
Subchapter C means all of the Parts of Subchapter C of 14 CFR.
1.2.3 In compact notation, citation of section 1309 of Part 23, for example, may be designated as "section 23.1309."
1.3 Unmanned Aircraft SystemsAn Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) comprises an unmanned air vehicle, the remote control ground station that provides for the mission management and piloting of the air vehicle, data-links for the exchange of control and sensor payload data and all related interfaces. Any part of the overall system that could affect the airworthiness and safety of the aircraft is subject to the requirements of Part 21.
1.4 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SCOPE
1.1 The following requirements apply to the design and performance of airborne sense-and-avoid (S&A) systems. This specification includes requirements to support detection of, and safe separation from, airborne objects such as manned or unmanned aircraft and air vehicles.
1.2. This specification applies to the manufacturer of an appliance seeking civil aviation authority approval, in the form of flight certificates, flight permits, or other like documentation, as providing an equivalent level of safety to the see-and-avoid capability of a manned aircraft.
1.3 This specification is not intended to apply to the design and performance of cooperative S&A systems. Existing standards and guidance should be referenced for specifications describing these transponder or broadcast-based systems (examples of existing guidance and standards for cooperative S&A systems include FAA 20-131A, RTCA DO-289, and TSO-C119B
1.4 This specification is not intended to apply to multiple airborne objects flying in formation flight.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory requirements prior to use.

SCOPE
1.1 The following requirements cover the design and performance of airborne sense-and-avoid (SA) systems. This specification includes requirements to support detection of, and safe separation from, airborne objects such as manned or unmanned aircraft and air vehicles.
1.2 This specification applies to the manufacturer of an appliance seeking civil aviation authority approval, in the form of flight certificates, flight permits, or other like documentation, as providing an equivalent level of safety to the see-and-avoid capability of a manned aircraft.
1.3 This specification is not intended to apply to the design and performance of cooperative SA systems. Existing standards and guidance should be referenced for specifications describing these transponder or broadcast-based systems (examples of existing guidance and standards for cooperative SA systems include FAA 20-131A, RTCA DO-289, and TSO-C119B).
1.4 This specification is not intended to apply to multiple airborne objects flying in formation flight.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SCOPE
1.1 This standard defines the production acceptance requirements for a small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS).  
1.2 This standard is applicable to sUAS that comply with design, construction, and test requirements identified in Specification F2910. No sUAS may enter production until such compliance is demonstrated.  
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
WITHDRAWN RATIONALE
This standard defines the production acceptance requirements for a small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS).
Formerly under the jurisdiction of Committee F38 on Unmanned Aircraft Systems, this practice was withdrawn in January 2023 in accordance with Section 10.6.3 of the Regulations Governing ASTM Technical Committees, which requires that standards shall be updated by the end of the eighth year since the last approval date.

ABSTRACT
This specification establishes the quality assurance requirements for the design, manufacture, and production of a small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS). It is intended for all sUAS that are permitted to operate over a defined area and in airspace defined by a nation’s governing aviation authority (GAA). Unless otherwise specified by a nation’s GAA, this specification applies only to UA that have a maximum takeoff gross weight of 55 lb/25 kg or less.
SCOPE
1.1 This standard defines the quality assurance requirements for the design, manufacture, and production of a small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS).  
1.2 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
WITHDRAWN RATIONALE
This standard defines the quality assurance requirements for the design, manufacture, and production of a small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS).
Formerly under the jurisdiction of Committee F38 on Unmanned Aircraft Systems, this specification was withdrawn in January 2023 in accordance with Section 10.6.3 of the Regulations Governing ASTM Technical Committees, which requires that standards shall be updated by the end of the eighth year since the last approval date.

ABSTRACT
This specification covers the design and performance requirements for unmanned aircraft system (UAS) launch systems operating via a closed-loop pressurized hydraulic, or pneumatic system with a hydraulic recovery, or both, which shall include, but not be limited to, the following main components: pre-launch accumulator(s), launch actuator(s), shuttle assembly, launch rail, and launch lock. Each launcher shall undergo developmental, acceptance, and operational tests, which will be documented and presented to the UAS manufacturer upon delivery. Proper training, operations, safety precautions, and maintenance and reliability practices are detailed thoroughly herein.
SCOPE
1.1 This specification covers the design and performance of unmanned aircraft system (UAS) launch system operating via a closed-loop pressurized hydraulic or pneumatic system with a hydraulic recovery, or both.
1.2 In instances where the launcher and UAS manufacturer are the same entity, compliance with this specification is the responsibility of the UAS manufacturer where applicable.
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns associated with the USA launch system and its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
WITHDRAWN RATIONALE
This specification covered the design and performance of unmanned aircraft system (UAS) launch system operating via a closed-loop pressurized hydraulic or pneumatic system with a hydraulic recovery, or both.
Formerly under the jurisdiction of Committee F38 on Unmanned Aircraft Systems, this specification was withdrawn in July 2017 in accordance with section 10.5.3.1 of the Regulations Governing ASTM Technical Committees, which requires that standards shall be updated by the end of the eighth year since the last approval date.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
The purpose of this practice is to provide the minimum requirements necessary for the establishment of a quality assurance and production acceptance program for a manufacturer of light airplane UAS.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice establishes the minimum requirements for the development of a Quality Assurance and Production Acceptance Program, to be used for the manufacture of Light Airplane Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS).
1.2 Other documents relevant to this practice include Practice F 2279, 14 CFR Part 21, 14 CFR Part 23, and 14 CFR Part 43.
1.3 This standard does not purport to address the quality assurance of the data-links, autopilot functions, and control stations.
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
WITHDRAWN RATIONALE
This practice established the minimum requirements for the development of a Quality Assurance and Production Acceptance Program, to be used for the manufacture of Light Airplane Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS).
Formerly under the jurisdiction of Committee F38 on Unmanned Aircraft Systems, this practice was withdrawn in July 2016 in accordance with section 10.5.3.1 of the Regulations Governing ASTM Technical Committees, which requires that standards shall be updated by the end of the eighth year since the last approval date.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
The purpose of this practice is to provide guidance to owners, mechanics, airports, regulatory officials, and aircraft and component manufacturers who may accomplish maintenance, repairs, and alterations on a light unmanned aircraft system (UAS). In addition, this practice covers the format and content of maintenance manuals and instructions for the maintenance, repair, and alteration of light UAS. The light UAS can be operated as a commercial aircraft or as a sport aircraft. This practice states the requirements for the maintenance of light commercial UAS. These same requirements may be used for the sport light UAS with the provisions shown. The maintenance requirements are divided between the aircraft and the ground equipment. The aircraft contains the air data terminal and the ground station controls the nearby ground data terminal. Therefore, the data link is not listed as a separate component, but has elements in the aircraft and near the ground station that is called the ground data terminal.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice provides guidelines for the qualifications to accomplish the various levels of maintenance on certificated light unmanned aircraft system (UAS). In addition, it provides the content and structure of maintenance manuals for aircraft, ground control station, and data links that are operated as a light unmanned aircraft system (UAS).
This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
WITHDRAWN RATIONALE
This practice provides guidelines for the qualifications to accomplish the various levels of maintenance on certificated light unmanned aircraft system (UAS). In addition, it provides the content and structure of maintenance manuals for aircraft, ground control station, and data links that are operated as a light unmanned aircraft system (UAS).
Formerly under the jurisdiction of Committee F38 on Unmanned Aircraft Systems, this practice was withdrawn in January 2015 in accordance with section 10.6.3 of the Regulations Governing ASTM Technical Committees, which requires that standards shall be updated by the end of the eighth year since the last approval date.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
Designing, manufacturing, testing, and maintaining an unmanned aircraft system to comply with industry standards and recommended practices supports development of a certification package that helps ensure its reliability and can lead to its airworthiness certification. Government aviation authorities’ airworthiness certification processes exist to provide some level of assurance that critical systems will operate reliably and pose minimal risk to persons and property. The use of proven standards and practices in the design, manufacture, and test of these systems, especially for the mission critical components, contributes to this goal, as well as streamlining the certification process and simplifying the system test requirements. While developing to a set of standards and practices will not guarantee certification, the ability to show compliance with established standards provides the basis for a well-documented certification approval package.
Compliance with established standards and practices also provides assurance that a given component will function as intended in the specified environment and conditions. The standards cited in these practices have been developed by recognized standards-developing agencies; some are accepted by government aviation authorities as an acceptable means of compliance with airworthiness requirements. By their inclusion in these practices, they are considered to be consensus-based for unmanned aircraft-related purposes.
SCOPE
1.1 These practices identify existing regulations, standards, specifications, and handbooks to guide the design, manufacture, test, repair, and maintenance of unmanned aircraft systems and their components.
1.2 ApplicabilityThese practices apply to unmanned, powered, fixed wing aircraft and rotorcraft systems seeking government aviation authority approval in the form of airworthiness certificates, flight permits, or other like documentation. It is intended to be used as a reference by unmanned aircraft system designers and manufacturers, as well as by procurement authorities, to help ensure the airworthiness of these systems.
1.3 These practices provide a starting point for developing a standards-based airworthiness certification package for consideration by regulatory authorities. It lists those top-level standards applicable to the major subsystems and components of an unmanned aircraft system. It assumes that Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM)-provided subsystems and components, purchased and installed as a unit (for example, Global Positioning Systems), are themselves built to applicable standards that are not necessarily listed in these practices. These practices include standards for technologies that are currently in use in unmanned aircraft, as well as those that are not yet, but could be used in the future (for example, radioisotope thermoelectric generators).
1.4 Suggested changes, corrections, or updates should be forwarded to Committee F38.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
WITHDRAWN RATIONALE
These practices identify existing regulations, standards, specifications, and handbooks to guide the design, manufacture, test, repair, and maintenance of unmanned aircraft systems and their components.
Formerly under the jurisdiction of Committee F38 on Unmanned Aircraft Systems, these practices were withdrawn in January 2015 in accordance with section 10.6.3 of the Regulations Governing ASTM Technical Committees, which requires that standards shall be updated by the end of the eighth year since the last approval date.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
This practice provides designers and manufacturers of engines for unmanned aircraft systems design requirements and criteria to use in designing and manufacturing engines.
Declaration of compliance is based on testing and documentation during the design and testing or flight testing of the engine type by the manufacturer or under the manufacturers' guidance.
Compliance with this specification is intended to demonstrate an adequate level of reliability in accordance with the UAS safety objectives.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers minimum requirements for the design and manufacture of reciprocating spark ignition engines for unmanned aircraft systems.
1.2 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
WITHDRAWN RATIONALE
This practice covers minimum requirements for the design and manufacture of reciprocating spark ignition engines for unmanned aircraft systems.
Formerly under the jurisdiction of Committee F38 on Unmanned Aircraft Systems, this practice was withdrawn without replacement in May 2014 due to its being too general for practical application.

SCOPE
1.1 This document is provided as an introductory guide to assist developers in interactions with CAAs. Part I provides guidance for obtaining a FA for experimental and developmental work, while Part II describes some of the issues to be addressed when seeking a Type Certificate. Many readers will not need to read Part II as it relates to a much more rigorous and structured procedure that is expected to be applied when the developer wishes to have the UAS used in commercial operations. The material presented here is primarily based on existing practices, procedures and regulations of the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration. Many countries adopt FAA procedures directly, while others, such as the European authorities, Australia and Canada, work with the FAA to ensure that regulatory practices are harmonized to the maximum extent practical. The guidance presented here is anticipatory, since it is likely that new regulations specific to UAS will be issued in due course; the contents of this document builds on existing regulations while looking forward to future changes.
1.2 The FAA requires that a civil UAS, with the exception of those that are Public aircraft, must obtain an Experimental Certificate before operating in the National Airspace System (NAS). The procedures for obtaining a civil Certificate of Airworthiness (CofA) are contained in 14 CFR Part 21 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR Part 21). Civil UAS that expect substantially routine access to the NAS, operating for compensation and hire, will need to undergo a full FAR Part 21 Type Certification, followed by the issuance of an FAA standard CofA. The existing procedures for Type Certification are discussed in Part II of this Guide. Based on experience with conventional civil aircraft certifications, the procedures and requirements associated with the type certification process and issuance of a standard CofA are demanding, costly and time-consuming. Since UAS represent a new class of aircraft, the procedure will no doubt be rigorous.
1.3 Many of the regulations and standards required for full application of standard airworthiness certification to UAS have not yet been developed. For an interim period, as the FAA and others develop and implement a civil UAS regulatory framework, the FAA is allowing individual civil UAS to have limited access to the NAS when they satisfy requirements for a FAR Part 21 Experimental Certificate. With an Experimental Certificate, operational use of the UAS is strictly defined and substantially limited, and the associated airworthiness requirements are less demanding than they would be for full, standard certification, consistent with the operational limits.
1.4 This is clearly a time of transition for civil UAS regulation. It is also a time of transition for the communities of users and manufacturers of civil UAS, many of whom have relatively little experience in the regulated civil aviation domains. This document is meant to provide a bridge for these UAS practitioners, as the era of regulated commercial UAS emerges.
1.5 ObjectivesThe objectives of this recommended practice document are to:
1.5.1 Present, in a single, manageable document, an overview of the aircraft certification procedures that will be adapted to the needs of UAS as the civil UAS regulatory framework takes shape. The procedures will be based largely on the procedures presently applied by the U.S. FAA;
1.5.2 Describe the procedures and requirements, based on currently available policy information, that govern the issuing of a FAR Part 21 Experimental Certificate for a UAS; and
1.5.3 Describe, in some detail, the processes that are anticipated for achieving Type Certification of a UAS.
1.6 OutlineThis document will begin with an overview of the regulatory structure as it currently is applied, followed by a discussion of some specific issues that relate to acquiring approval for operation of a UAS. This discussion includes a general description...

SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers minimum requirements for the design and manufacture of reciprocating compression ignition engines for unmanned aircraft systems use.
This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
WITHDRAWN RATIONALE
This practice covers minimum requirements for the design and manufacture of reciprocating compression ignition engines for unmanned aircraft systems use.
Formerly under the jurisdiction of Committee F38 on Unmanned Aircraft Systems, this practice was withdrawn without replacement in May 2014 due to its being too general for practical application.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
This practice is intended for guidance and instruction of the aircraft and unmanned aircraft systems industries when addressing the requirements of Part 21.
SCOPE
1.1 In this practice, certification procedures are provided for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in the Light UAS Class and in the Remotely Operated Aircraft (ROA) UAS Classes. Unmanned Aircraft Systems in the Mini UAS and Micro UAS Classes are not considered in this practice, since they do not undergo airworthiness certification.
1.2 Citations of Federal Aviation RegulationsWhen citing U.S. Federal Aviation Regulations in this practice, the citation references are based on the following Federal Aviation Regulation structure:
1.2.1 The Code of Federal Regulations, Title 14 (14 CFR) comprises Aeronautics and Space Regulations. Chapter 1 of 14 CFR contains the regulations of the Federal Aviation Administration and is subdivided into subchapters and parts:
The Parts are further subdivided into Subparts and sections.
1.2.2 This practice uses Part 21 as a template. Within the text of the practice:
14 CFR Chapter 1 means the whole of Chapter 1 of 14 CFR; and
Subchapter C means all of the Parts of Subchapter C of 14 CFR.
1.2.3 In compact notation, citation of section 1309 of Part 23, for example, may be designated as "section 23.1309."
1.3 Unmanned Aircraft SystemsAn Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) comprises an unmanned air vehicle, the remote control ground station that provides for the mission management and piloting of the air vehicle, data-links for the exchange of control and sensor payload data and all related interfaces. Any part of the overall system that could affect the airworthiness and safety of the aircraft is subject to the requirements of Part 21.
1.4 &inch-pound-units;
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
WITHDRAWN RATIONALE
In this practice, certification procedures are provided for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in the Light UAS Class and in the Remotely Operated Aircraft (ROA) UAS Classes. Unmanned Aircraft Systems in the Mini UAS and Micro UAS Classes are not considered in this practice, since they do not undergo airworthiness certification.
Formerly under the jurisdiction of Committee F38 on Unmanned Aircraft Systems, this practice was withdrawn without replacement in May 2014 because the information contained in the standard is available in industry regulations.

SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers minimum requirements for the design and manufacture of turbine engines for unmanned aircraft systems.
1.2 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
WITHDRAWN RATIONALE
This practice covers minimum requirements for the design and manufacture of turbine engines for unmanned aircraft systems.
Formerly under the jurisdiction of Committee F38 on Unmanned Aircraft Systems, this practice was withdrawn without replacement in May 2014 due to its limited practicality.

ABSTRACT
This specification establishes the design, construction, and performance requirements necessary for the technical reliability of airborne sense-and-avoid (S&A) systems that support the detection of, and safe separation from, airborne objects such as manned or unmanned aircrafts and air vehicles. It specifically applies to the manufacturer or component supplier of such systems seeking civil aviation authority approval, in the form of flight certificates, flight permits, or other like documentation, as providing an equivalent level of safety to the see-and-avoid capability of a human pilot. This specification does not cover transponder or broadcast-based cooperative S&A systems, as well as appliances on-board one or more airborne objects flying in formation flight.
SCOPE
1.1 This specification covers requirements for the design and performance of airborne sense-and-avoid (SA) systems. This specification includes requirements to support detection of, and safe separation from, airborne objects such as manned or unmanned aircraft and air vehicles.
1.2 This specification applies to the manufacturer of an appliance seeking civil aviation authority approval, in the form of flight certificates, flight permits, or other like documentation, as providing an equivalent level of safety to the see-and-avoid capability of a human pilot.
1.3 This specification is not intended to apply to the design and performance of cooperative SA systems. Existing standards and guidance should be referenced for specifications describing these transponder or broadcast-based systems (examples of existing guidance and standards for cooperative SA systems include FAA 20-131A, RTCA DO-289, and TSO-C119B).
1.4 This specification does not apply to appliances on-board one or more airborne objects flying in formation flight.
This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
WITHDRAWN RATIONALE
This specification covers requirements for the design and performance of airborne sense-and-avoid (S&A) systems. This specification includes requirements to support detection of, and safe separation from, airborne objects such as manned or unmanned aircraft and air vehicles.
Formerly under the jurisdiction of Committee F38 on Unmanned Aircraft Systems, this specification was withdrawn without replacement in May 2014 because it is no longer relevant to the industry.