HIsight, LLC. Petition for Exemption for

the 3DR Aero

FAA Rules Docket: _

Submitted on September 2, 2015

Stephen Ambagis

Iam Bouret

HIsight, LLC

PO BOX 492230

Keaau, HI

96749

Phone: 808­756­5265

Email: iambouret@gmail.com stephen@remaphawaii.com
Manager, Flight Standards Service

Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration Office

Federal Aviation Administration

800 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20591

U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20590

Dear Sir or Madam,

HIsight, LLC. respectfully wishes to be exempted from

several provisions of Title 14 of the Code of Federal

Regulations permitting the commercial use of small unmanned

aerial systems (sUAS) in the National Airspace System.

HIsight, LLC wishes to employ sUAS for image data

acquisition in applications of natural resource and

environment management in areas difficult to reach with

conventional aircraft and increase the safety of our

airmen.

By following the procedures outlined in this document and

attached appendices or established by the FAA, HIsight

believes an equivalent level of safety can be achieved to

current Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs).

Because the sUAS HIsight plans to operate (3DR Aero) weighs

less than 10 lbs, is made of foam, and is electric powered,

operations produce less noise, less air pollution and

congestion in the National Airspace (NAS). These reasons

are all in the well being of the general public.
The Operator

HIsight, LLC is a newly founded partnership between

Resource Mapping Hawaii, LLC, and Captain Iam Bouret.

HIsight will be primarily focused on supporting operations

as they pertain to land management in conservation areas.

Resource Mapping Hawaii (RMH) has had as its primary

clients for the past 7 years predominantly large scale land

management agencies such as DLNR, Fish and Wildlife, The

Nature Conservancy, and various watershed partnerships.

The areas of interest are largely unpopulated remote access

areas owned or managed by these agencies, allowing for both

overflight access and ground access when necessary. UAS

operations are planned to continue to support this client

base and work in unpopulated remote access areas. Flight

operations in the back valleys of most Hawaiian islands

presents significant dangers including wind shear, extreme

terrain, persistent cloud cover, and a lack of landing

options in the event of an engine failure. UAS operations

in these areas will greatly reduce the risk to human life

compared to the risks assumed with manned operations.

RMH has managed FAR Part 91 commercial operations for the

past 7 years, utilizing a C­206. We have experience with

all FAA regulations and advisories as they pertain to

commercial aerial survey operations, both inside and

outside of controlled airspace. RMH has maintained a

consistent maintenance record that exceeds FAA requirements

including regular 50 hour, 100 hour, in addition to annual

inspections. RMH has a perfect safety record, with no

incidents or accidents. We have implemented and maintain a

consistent training program for competency and currency to

support aerial survey operations at the highest level of

safety.

Iam Bouret is currently an A330 Captain who has been flying

professionally for over 20 years. He has an extensive and

diverse aviation background including hang gliding,

experimental aircraft, single and multi­engine GA aircraft,
and type ratings in B757/767 and A330. Iam has been

building and flying RC models recreationally for over 30

years. He has been designing, building, and flying

autonomous and semi­autonomous model aircraft since 2012.

He has volunteered his skills as an expert UAS builder and

operator for mapping projects with the University of Hawaii

and California State University, Long Beach. In the wake of

typhoon Yolanda, Iam was brought to the Philippines to

train a UAS team at Aklan University for the disaster

relief effort. Today, Captain Bouret continues to

incorporate his airline operations knowledge to develop and

train safe and redundant procedures for UAS.

Aircraft Characteristics

HIsight will operate the Aero fixed wing sUAS, which is

manufactured by 3DRobotics of San Diego, California. The

principal construction material for the Aero airframe is

EPO foam, carbon fiber tail boom with an all up weight

(AUW) no greater than 10 lbs. The Aero is powered by a

lithium polymer battery that drives a single brushless

motor. The Aero has a maximum flight time of 60 minutes

with operating speed of 29 mph. The pilot in command (PIC)

will communicate with the Aero with a 2.4 ghz remote

control radio and a 915 mhz data telemetry radio connected

to a ground control (GCS) computer.

The Aero aircraft has several failsafe systems in place:

In the event of the loss of remote control (unlikely due to

visual line of sight (VLOS) operations under 400ft) the

Aero will perform a "return to home" command, and then

execute an automatic landing. In the event of a low battery

(less than 20%) the Aero will perform the same failsafe

behavior.

In addition to the above failsafes, a gps guided "Geofence"

will prevent the Aero from flying beyond its intended area

of operation.
Regulatory Provisions from which HIsight seeks an Exemption

HIsight believes it will need an exemption from the

following provisions to conduct the contemplated

operations. In some instances, relief is needed because

relief from another provision renders compliance with the

regulation at hand not feasible.

14 C.F.R. §61.113(a) and (b)

14 C.F.R. §91.7(a)

14 C.F.R. §91.9(b)(2)

14 C.F.R. §91.119

14 C.F.R. §91.151

14 C.F.R. §91.405(a)

14 C.F.R. §91.407(a)

14 C.F.R. §91.409(a)

14 C.F.R. ​§91.417

HIsight, LCC believesanexemptionisonlyneededfromthe

above­listed regulatory provisions. To the extent that the

FAA believesthatadditionalreliefisrequiredforHIsight

to conduct the operations described here, we request an

exemption from any such regulatory provisions as well.

The Extent of Requested Relief and the Reasons Relief is

Needed

14 C.F.R. §61.113(a) and (b)

§61.113 Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in

Command.

(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) through

(h) of this section, no person who holds a private

pilot certificate may act as pilot in command of

an aircraft that is carrying passengers or

property for compensation or hire; nor may that

person, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in
command of an aircraft.

(b) A private pilot may, for compensation or hire,

act as pilot in command of an aircraft in

connection with any business or employment if:

(1) The flight is only incidental to that business or

employment; and

(2) The aircraft does not carry passengers or property

for compensation or hire.

HIsight specially trained and certified pilots will conduct

the sUAS operations. While our Chief Pilot is an ATP, other

individuals will have at least a private pilot license.

HIsight pilots will hold no less than a class three medical

certificate. The sUAS will not carry “property for

compensation or hire” since they will be used predominantly

to acquire image data for natural resources and

environmental management. Without an exemption, the pilot

would be required to hold a commercial pilot certificate

under §61.133. However, the risk associated with the

contemplated operations is less than the risk posed by a

traditional manned aircraft. The sUAS will fly at altitudes

well below the permissible limits for other civil aircraft,

eliminating the risk to other aircraft, and within a

geographical envelope under the sole control of HIsight.

Accordingly, the risk would be limited to HIsight

personnel. Requiring a commercial pilot certificate would

provide no appreciable safety benefit and would needlessly

impose additional costs on HIsight and its customers.

Because the contemplated operations would not comply with

§61.113(b)(1) and none of the other exceptions to paragraph

(a) apply, relief is needed from both paragraphs (a) and

(b).
14 C.F.R. 91.7(a)

§91.7 Civil aircraft airworthiness​.

(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is

in an airworthy condition.

(b) The pilot in command of a civil aircraft is

responsible for determining whether that aircraft

is in condition for safe flight. The pilot in

command shall discontinue the flight when

unairworthy mechanical, electrical, or structural

conditions occur.

There is no clear definition of “airworthy” as applied to

the proposedsUAS,andthetermhasbeendefinedinvarious

ways depending on the applied circumstances. In all

instances, it appears that the concept includes a

requirement thattheairplane1)conformstotheaircraft’s

documented typedesignoritstypecertificate,asmodified

by supplemental type certificates and airworthiness

directives, and2)beinconditionforsafeoperations.The

sUAS will not have a type design or type certificate, as

the FAA has not developed standards applicable to sUAS. As

discussed later in this document, the types of operations

contemplated by HIsight will not qualify the sUAS for an

experimental airworthinesscertificate.Accordingly,relief

from §91.7(a) is requested. Should the FAA include

airworthiness requirementsasaconditionofexercisingthe

exemption, HIsight will assure the continued airworthiness

of the sUAS. Regardless, HIsight believes that it can meet

the requirements of §91.7(b), and is not requesting an

exemption from that provision.

14 C.F.R. 91.9(b)(2)

§91.9 Civil aircraft flight manual, marking, and placard

requirements.

(b) No person may operate a U.S. registered civil
aircraft for which an Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight

Manual is not required by §21.5 of this chapter unless

there is available in the aircraft a current, approved

manual material, markings, and placards, or any

combination thereof.

The sUAS comes with access to online manuals that provide

instructions for the safe operation and maintenance of the

aircraft. Compliance with this regulatory provision is not

possible because this information has not been, and cannot

be, approved by the FAA since there are no applicable

standards established by the FAA against which to evaluate

it. Additionally, the sUAS is too small to carry a printed

manual. Since, by definition, there will never be a person

aboard the sUAS, HIsight submits that there is no need to

require the manual to be placed on the sUAS and an

exemption is appropriate. Safety will be maintained by

keeping printed copies the flight manuals at the ground

control point where the PIC will have immediate access to

it. Since the sUAS cannot be operated without the Ground

Control Station containing the manuals, there is minimal

risk that the manuals will become separated from the sUAS,

and HIsight will be able to immediately locate the manuals

to effectuate any needed repairs or preventative

maintenance on the sUAS detailed in the flight manual.

14 C.F.R. 91.119

§91.119 Minimum safe altitudes: General.

Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person

may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes:

(a) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of

500 feet above the surface,except over open water or

sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the

aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to

any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.

HIsight submits that the only relief it requires from

§91.119 is from the minimum altitudes listed in paragraph
(c). Relief is required from paragraph (c) for fixed wing

operations because asset evaluation conducted at 500 feet

or higher is insufficiently distinct to be meaningful.

Since operations at this altitude also pose a heightened

risk of collisionwithanotheraircraft,safetycanonlybe

assured through the grant of an exemption. The anticipated

aircraft operations should be adequately addressed by

paragraph (d)(1). Additionally,reliefshouldnotbeneeded

from paragraph (a) because an emergency landing of the

aircraft due to a power failure will not create an undue

hazard to persons or property on the surface, as noted in

the explanation of why an exemption will not adversely

affect safety.

HIsight does not contemplate conducting operations over

congested areas, so relief is not requested from paragraph

(b).

14 C.F.R. 91.151

§91.151 Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions.

(a) No person may begin a flight in an airplane

under VFR conditions unless (considering wind and

forecast weather conditions) there is enough fuel

to fly to the first point of intended landing

and, assuming normal cruising speed –

(1) During the day, to fly after that for at least 30

minutes.

(b) No person may begin a flight in a rotorcraft

under VFR conditions unless (considering wind and

forecast weather conditions) there is enough fuel

to fly to the first point of intended landing

and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after

that for at least 20 minutes.

Operating the sUAS in a pre­defined area with less than 30

minutes of reserve fuel does not raise the type of risk

contemplated by §91.151, i.e., that an aircraft could run

out of fuelintheeventithastobeflowntoanalternate
airport or circle the planned airport in the event of

unanticipated conditions. HIsight does not intend to use

the sUAS for point­to­point flights and will not operate

the sUAS beyond visual line of sight. Nor will the sUAS

require an airport in order to land. Rather, HIsight will

operate the sUAS using pre­planned flight paths (taking

into account weatherconditions)designedtoallowthesUAS

to fly to the point of intended landing.

As such, there is no need for a time­based excess fuel

requirement. Ratheritshouldbesufficienttorequireonly

as much additional excess flight capacity as necessary to

safely land the sUAS. We believe that a 20% energy reserve

is more than sufficient to meet this objective.

14 C.F.R. 91.405(a), 91.407(a) (1) and 14 C.F.R. 91.409(a)

91.417

§91.405 Maintenance required.

Each owner or operator of an aircraft –

(a) Shall have that aircraft inspected as

prescribed in subpart E of this part and shall

between required inspections, except as provided

in paragraph (c) of this section, have

discrepanciesrepairedasprescribedinpart43of

this chapter;

...

§91.407 Operation after maintenance, preventive

maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration.

(a) No person may operate any aircraft that has

undergone maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration

unless:

(1) It has been approved for return to service by a

person authorized under §43.7 of this chapter;

...
§91.409 Inspections.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this

section, no person may operate an aircraft unless,

within the preceding 12 calendar months, it has

had

(1) An annual inspection in accordance with part 43

of this chapter and has been approved for return

to service by a person authorized by §43.7 of

this chapter; or

(2) An inspection for the issuance of an

airworthiness certificate in accordance with part

21 of this chapter....

HIsight believes that an exemption from these three

maintenance requirementsisappropriatebecausetheFAAhas

not developed maintenance standards for sUAS that would

allow an operator to meet the part 91 maintenance

requirements. In particular, there are no individuals

authorized by the FAA to approve a sUAS for return to

service under §91.407(a) or to conduct the initial

airworthiness and annual return to service inspections

required by §91.409(a). HIsight will maintain the aircraft

as instructed in the owner’s manual and ASTM F2909

(Attached as Appendix C), where applicable, and will not

operate the aircraft until it has reasonably determined

that anyneededrepairshavebeenmade.However,becauseof

the technical impossibility of meeting the requirements of

§§91.405(a), 407(a) and 409(a), we believe an exemption

from these provisions is appropriate.

§91.417 Maintenance, Preventive Maintenance, and

Alterations

Section 91.417(a) requires the owner or operator to keep

records showing certain maintenance work that has been

accomplished by certificated mechanics, under Part 43, or
licensed pilotsandrecordsofapprovaloftheaircraftfor

return toservice.HIsightproposesthatthemaintenanceof

the Aero will be accomplished by the owner/operator

according to the maintenance manual provided by 3D

Robotics. An equivalent level of safety will be achieved

because the Aero is small in size, carries no persons, and

will operate only in remote areas. Moreover, the operator

is the person best suited to maintain the aircraft in an

airworthy condition and to ensure an equivalent level of

safety. Additionally, prior to each flight, the Aero

automatically runs a sequence of pre­flight checks to

verify the functionality of the autopilot system and all

sensors. If a problem is detected, the Aero’s propulsion

system will not be able to be armed and a error messageis

displayed onthemainscreenoftheGroundControlStation.

The operator will then refer to the manufacturer’s

documentation to troubleshoot this issue. The Aero is

designed tobefieldserviceablebytheanoperatorwithout

extensive specialized training.
Summary

The petitioner,HIsight,LLC.isseekingexemptionfromthe

following sections of Title 14 of the C.F.R.:

14 C.F.R. §61.113(a) and (b)

14 C.F.R. §91.7(a)

14 C.F.R. §91.9(b) (2)

14 C.F.R. §91.119

14 C.F.R. §91.151

14 C.F.R. §91.405(a)

14 C.F.R. §91.407(a)

14 C.F.R. §91.409(a)

14 C.F.R. ​§91.417

HIsight, LLC will maintain safe operating altitudes not

exceeding 400 feet AGL and will maintain a minimum safe

distance fromcongestedareasandairports. Hence,HIsight

operations will have minimal impact to other aircraft as

well as to the public. Aircraft operations will be

executed by a certified airmen possessing no less than a

private pilotlicenseandwillholdataminimum,aClass3

Medical. HIsight,LLC is confident that an equivalent level

of safety can be maintained in all areas that require an

exemption.

Thank you for your consideration and dedication to this

process.

See similar operations that have been granted exemptions: #11062,

#11109, #11112, #11213, #11379, #11285, #12057