EUSurvey       
Login | |
system message icon

Published Results: 2014-civil-drones

Export
For performance reasons you can only set a maximum of 3 filters
Please note that the questionnaire will only use your full contribution if your name, organisation (if you answer on behalf of an organisation or institution) and contact details are provided. If you choose to not provide your name, organisation and contact details, you have the option of submitting a general comment only. If you do choose to provide us with your name, organisation and contact details, you can still opt for your answers to remain anonymous when results are published.([ID1])
General comment([ID89])
1. Please specify your main field of activity or how you are mainly linked to the RPAS sector([ID34])
1a. Please specify([ID28])
2. If you work for a company, please give an indication of its size([ID29])
3. If answering as an individual, please provide your place of residence. If answering on behalf of an organisation/institution, please provide the place of establishment of the organisation/institution.([ID12])
3a. Please specify "Other"([ID2])
Please specify your main field of activity or how you are mainly linked to the RPAS sector([ID17])
11. Please indicate if your organisation is registered in the Transparency Register of the European Commission.([ID21])
12. Contributions received from this survey may be published on the European Commission's website, with the identity of the contributor. Do you agree to your contribution being published under your name?([ID13])
1. How do you see the civil RPAS market developing? : RPAS technologies are already mature enough to allow for various civil applications in the next years ([ID20])
1. How do you see the civil RPAS market developing? : There are substantial business opportunities and commercial benefits for the EU business from the development and use of RPAS ([ID22])
1. How do you see the civil RPAS market developing? : The EU market for RPAS applications is developing slower than in other parts of the world ([ID24])
1. How do you see the civil RPAS market developing? : The EU RPAS manufacturing industry is not very competitive at the moment ([ID30])
1. How do you see the civil RPAS market developing? : A strong, integrated EU market is an effective means to make the EU RPAS industry globally competitive ([ID31])
1. How do you see the civil RPAS market developing? : I see a potential in RPAS for professional activities in the next five years ([ID32])
1. How do you see the civil RPAS market developing? : I see a potential in RPAS for daily life activities in the next five years ([ID33])
1. How do you see the civil RPAS market developing? : The potential for RPAS applications in the EU is lower than in other parts of the world ([ID35])
1. How do you see the civil RPAS market developing? : Demand for small RPAS with light weight and short flight distance will increase rapidly in the near future ([ID36])
1. How do you see the civil RPAS market developing? : Demand for large RPAS with heavy weight and long flight distance will increase rapidly in the near future ([ID37])
1a. Please elaborate on your answers to the above statements([ID38])
1. Overall, what is your opinion on the main problems affecting the development of the RPAS market? : The fragmentation of the RPAS market in the EU create entry barriers and negatively affect the competitiveness of EU companies ([ID47])
1. Overall, what is your opinion on the main problems affecting the development of the RPAS market? : Uncertainty about the future rules governing the development and use of RPAS hinders investment decisions ([ID57])
1. Overall, what is your opinion on the main problems affecting the development of the RPAS market? : The use of RPAS poses a threat to safety and could lead to fatal accidents ([ID58])
1. Overall, what is your opinion on the main problems affecting the development of the RPAS market? : The use of RPAS poses a threat to security because they could be used for unlawful actions ([ID59])
1. Overall, what is your opinion on the main problems affecting the development of the RPAS market? : The use of RPAS poses a threat to privacy or protection of personal data ([ID60])
1. Overall, what is your opinion on the main problems affecting the development of the RPAS market? : The current legislation does not provide effective protection against the safety, security and privacy risks linked to RPAS operations ([ID61])
1. Overall, what is your opinion on the main problems affecting the development of the RPAS market? : The current insurance regime does not sufficiently cover liability issues in case of accidents with RPAS ([ID62])
1a. Please elaborate on your answers to the above statements([ID63])
2. What is your opinion on the following concerns related to RPAS operations? : RPAS are dangerous and should not be allowed in the EU airspace ([ID54])
2. What is your opinion on the following concerns related to RPAS operations? : RPAS should only fly if remotely piloted by a certified operator ([ID69])
2. What is your opinion on the following concerns related to RPAS operations? : RPAS should not be allowed to fly over city centres at low altitude ([ID70])
2. What is your opinion on the following concerns related to RPAS operations? : The potential benefits of the RPAS applications outweigh the risks and threats they might pose ([ID71])
2. What is your opinion on the following concerns related to RPAS operations? : The widespread use of RPAS will create a threat to safety of EU citizens on the ground ([ID72])
2. What is your opinion on the following concerns related to RPAS operations? : The widespread use of RPAS will facilitate anonymous surveillance ([ID73])
2. What is your opinion on the following concerns related to RPAS operations? : The widespread use of RPAS will make it difficult to ensure effective protection of privacy ([ID74])
2. What is your opinion on the following concerns related to RPAS operations? : In order to ensure security the development of RPAS operations should be prohibited ([ID75])
2. What is your opinion on the following concerns related to RPAS operations? : RPAS will become an additional source of emissions and noise ([ID76])
2. What is your opinion on the following concerns related to RPAS operations? : There is a substantial risk that RPAS operators are not (sufficiently) insured ([ID77])
2a. Please elaborate on your answers to the above statements([ID68])
1a. Access barriers and fragmentation of the RPAS market are the result of: : The need to obtain national authorisations in individual Member States ([ID80])
1a. Access barriers and fragmentation of the RPAS market are the result of: : Differences in national rules in various EU Member States ([ID90])
1a. Access barriers and fragmentation of the RPAS market are the result of: : Lack of common EU rules covering all types of RPAS ([ID91])
1a. Access barriers and fragmentation of the RPAS market are the result of: : Lack of mutual recognition for national certificates ([ID92])
1a. Access barriers and fragmentation of the RPAS market are the result of: : Gaps in the current EU legislation, which does not cover new concepts related to RPAS ([ID93])
1b. Legal and technological uncertainty are a result of: : Missing key technologies that need to be validated ([ID100])
1b. Legal and technological uncertainty are a result of: : Emerging and fast evolving RPAS sector cannot be rigidly regulated ([ID105])
1b. Legal and technological uncertainty are a result of: : Lack of EU or international standards ([ID106])
1c. RPAS pose a serious threat to safety, security and privacy, because: : RPAS will increase the traffic in the EU airspace ([ID113])
1c. RPAS pose a serious threat to safety, security and privacy, because: : RPAS are not able to communicate effectively with 'manned' air traffic ([ID116])
1c. RPAS pose a serious threat to safety, security and privacy, because: : RPAS are cheap and can be misused very easily even if the operations are controlled effectively ([ID117])
1c. RPAS pose a serious threat to safety, security and privacy, because: : RPAS are prone to accidents and are a danger for citizens on the ground ([ID118])
1c. RPAS pose a serious threat to safety, security and privacy, because: : There is a lack of credible information on the magnitude of the risks ([ID119])
1c. RPAS pose a serious threat to safety, security and privacy, because: : Everybody can potentially buy and use an RPAS, even if that person is not aware of aviation rules ([ID120])
1d. The ineffective protection against safety, security and privacy risks related to RPAS operations is a result of: : New threats arising from RPAS operations that cannot be easily prevented by regulations ([ID127])
1d. The ineffective protection against safety, security and privacy risks related to RPAS operations is a result of: : The absence of regulations which properly and sufficiently cover RPAS activities and related threats ([ID133])
1d. The ineffective protection against safety, security and privacy risks related to RPAS operations is a result of: : The difficulty to actually implement and enforce current regulations ([ID134])
1e. Inadequate insurance regime is a result of: : The current rules were conceived for manned aircraft ([ID141])
1e. Inadequate insurance regime is a result of: : The lack of harmonised operational rules ([ID144])
1e. Inadequate insurance regime is a result of: : There is not sufficient evidence to calculate the risk and hence the cost of insurance ([ID145])
1f. Please elaborate on your answers to the above statements([ID146])
1. What should be the main EU policy objectives in relation to RPAS? : RPAS should be promoted at the EU level because they are a promising source for jobs and growth and will offer new services to citizens and businesses ([ID154])
1. What should be the main EU policy objectives in relation to RPAS? : Citizens should be protected from risks and concerns related to safety, security or privacy of RPAS ([ID157])
1a. Please elaborate on your answers to the above statements([ID158])
1. To what extent do you agree with the following options to address the problems affecting the EU RPAS market? : Option 1: No additional action is needed at the EU level at this moment of time ([ID167])
1. To what extent do you agree with the following options to address the problems affecting the EU RPAS market? : Option 2: EU should regulate RPAS where it has already competences (i.e. above 150 kg) and leave smaller RPAS for Member State legislation ([ID169])
1. To what extent do you agree with the following options to address the problems affecting the EU RPAS market? : Option 3: EU should amend the safety legislation to cover all RPAS regardless of weight, but proportional to the risk associated with the specific RPAS operations. The implementation of the common rules would mostly remain at the Member State level ([ID170])
1. To what extent do you agree with the following options to address the problems affecting the EU RPAS market? : Option 4: EU should amend the safety legislation to cover all RPAS regardless of weight, and EASA would manage the certification of RPAS, not the national authorities ([ID171])
1a. Please elaborate on your replies and/or suggest any additional options to be considered (including proposals for different packaging of measures in the options)([ID172])
2a. Rulemaking and division of competencies : The market is still not mature enough and should not be regulated yet ([ID179])
2a. Rulemaking and division of competencies : The rules should be developed at international level (i.e. by ICAO) and not by the EU ([ID184])
2a. Rulemaking and division of competencies : EU rules should reflect international developments and standards ([ID185])
2a. Rulemaking and division of competencies : Before any regulation is proposed there is a need for validation of technologies and development of recognised standards ([ID186])
2a. Rulemaking and division of competencies : Current EASA safety rules sufficiently cover larger RPAS (above 150kg) and do not need to be changed ([ID187])
2a. Rulemaking and division of competencies : EU should only propose safety rules for heavy RPAS (above 150kg), while small RPAS should remain under a national competence ([ID188])
2a. Rulemaking and division of competencies : Safety rules should be harmonized at the EU level, but need to be implemented by national authorities ([ID189])
2a. Rulemaking and division of competencies : EASA should become the central institution for certification and implementation ([ID190])
2a. Rulemaking and division of competencies : Too detailed rules should not be proposed as they would suffocate the newly emerging industry ([ID191])
2a. Rulemaking and division of competencies : Certification and licencing of lighter RPAS operations is best performed at local level ([ID192])
2a. Rulemaking and division of competencies : Companies should have the possibility to choose the certificating authority which may be European or national ([ID193])
2a. Rulemaking and division of competencies : All types of RPAS, regardless of weight, should require airworthiness certification, operator certification and (remote) pilot licensing ([ID194])
2a. Rulemaking and division of competencies : Certificates and licenses delivered somewhere in the EU should be recognised throughout the EU ([ID195])
2b. Mitigation of safety risks : RPAS should only be allowed to fly when separated from manned air traffic (i.e. in segregated airspace) ([ID202])
2b. Mitigation of safety risks : The risk of an operation depends besides the weight also on the speed of the aircraft ([ID215])
2b. Mitigation of safety risks : The risk of an operation depends besides the weight of the aircraft also on the reliability of the system ([ID216])
2b. Mitigation of safety risks : The risk of an operation depends besides the weight of the aircraft also on the place where operations take place ([ID217])
2b. Mitigation of safety risks : The risk of an operation depends besides the weight of the aircraft also on the type of operation ([ID218])
2b. Mitigation of safety risks : The risk of an operation depends besides the weight of the aircraft also on the quality of the RPAS operator ([ID219])
2b. Mitigation of safety risks : The focus of safety rules, at least for lighter RPAS below 150 kg, should lie upon the operator and to a lesser extent the aircraft ([ID220])
2b. Mitigation of safety risks : A strong safety management system of the operator should be introduced as the most effective tool to guarantee safety ([ID221])
2b. Mitigation of safety risks : RPAS operations should be authorised at a local level, taking into account local circumstances. ([ID222])
2b. Mitigation of safety risks : The level of regulatory control of RPAS vehicles and operations should be proportionate to risk ([ID223])
2b. Mitigation of safety risks : EASA should develop a common risk classification scheme ([ID224])
2c. Mitigation of security risks : Security can be effectively enforced under the current rules ([ID232])
2c. Mitigation of security risks : Eliminating gaps in the safety regulation will also allow better control of security risks and no additional security specific changes would be needed ([ID243])
2c. Mitigation of security risks : EASA should integrate security considerations in its rules on RPAS ([ID244])
2d. Mitigation of privacy risks : The experience with Google Street View demonstrates that the existing data protection legislation should sufficiently protect data, derived from RPAS operations ([ID251])
2d. Mitigation of privacy risks : New specific measures are necessary to ensure privacy protection in the case of commercial use of RPAS ([ID254])
2d. Mitigation of privacy risks : New specific measures are necessary to ensure privacy protection in the case of use of RPAS by police or security forces ([ID255])
2d. Mitigation of privacy risks : Data protection legislation needs to be strengthened at the EU level if civil use of RPAS is allowed ([ID256])
2d. Mitigation of privacy risks : National data protection authorities should identify privacy threats related to the applications of RPAS and develop adequate protection measures where necessary ([ID257])
2d. Mitigation of privacy risks : National civil aviation authorities should share information with data protection authorities in order to ensure privacy protection ([ID258])
2d. Mitigation of privacy risks : The ability to identify an operator of an RPAS is a key aspect of ensuring privacy protection ([ID259])
2f. Would you like to comment or add any other measure that could improve the current regulatory system for RPAS?([ID274])
1. How do you assess the possible impacts of the first policy option (no new actions)? : Compliance and administrative costs for EU businesses ([ID88])
1. How do you assess the possible impacts of the first policy option (no new actions)? : Compliance and administrative costs for national administrations ([ID101])
1. How do you assess the possible impacts of the first policy option (no new actions)? : Compliance and administrative costs for EASA ([ID102])
1. How do you assess the possible impacts of the first policy option (no new actions)? : Employment ([ID103])
1. How do you assess the possible impacts of the first policy option (no new actions)? : RPAS market growth ([ID104])
1. How do you assess the possible impacts of the first policy option (no new actions)? : Competitiveness of the EU RPAS operators globally ([ID114])
1. How do you assess the possible impacts of the first policy option (no new actions)? : Competitiveness of the EU RPAS manufacturers globally ([ID115])
1. How do you assess the possible impacts of the first policy option (no new actions)? : Innovation in the RPAS sector ([ID128])
1. How do you assess the possible impacts of the first policy option (no new actions)? : Security of the EU airspace ([ID129])
1. How do you assess the possible impacts of the first policy option (no new actions)? : Safety in the EU airspace ([ID130])
1. How do you assess the possible impacts of the first policy option (no new actions)? : Safety of citizens on the ground ([ID131])
1. How do you assess the possible impacts of the first policy option (no new actions)? : Privacy protection ([ID132])
1. How do you assess the possible impacts of the first policy option (no new actions)? : Citizens' trust in RPAS operations ([ID142])
1. How do you assess the possible impacts of the first policy option (no new actions)? : Natural environment ([ID143])
2. How do you assess the possible impacts of the second policy option (adopting EU safety rules above 150 kg)? : Compliance and administrative costs for EU businesses ([ID240])
2. How do you assess the possible impacts of the second policy option (adopting EU safety rules above 150 kg)? : Compliance and administrative costs for national administrations ([ID241])
2. How do you assess the possible impacts of the second policy option (adopting EU safety rules above 150 kg)? : Compliance and administrative costs for EASA ([ID242])
2. How do you assess the possible impacts of the second policy option (adopting EU safety rules above 150 kg)? : Employment ([ID252])
2. How do you assess the possible impacts of the second policy option (adopting EU safety rules above 150 kg)? : RPAS market growth ([ID253])
2. How do you assess the possible impacts of the second policy option (adopting EU safety rules above 150 kg)? : Competitiveness of the EU RPAS operators globally ([ID267])
2. How do you assess the possible impacts of the second policy option (adopting EU safety rules above 150 kg)? : Competitiveness of the EU RPAS manufacturers globally ([ID268])
2. How do you assess the possible impacts of the second policy option (adopting EU safety rules above 150 kg)? : Innovation in the RPAS sector ([ID269])
2. How do you assess the possible impacts of the second policy option (adopting EU safety rules above 150 kg)? : Security of the EU airspace ([ID270])
2. How do you assess the possible impacts of the second policy option (adopting EU safety rules above 150 kg)? : Safety in the EU airspace ([ID271])
2. How do you assess the possible impacts of the second policy option (adopting EU safety rules above 150 kg)? : Safety of citizens on the ground ([ID272])
2. How do you assess the possible impacts of the second policy option (adopting EU safety rules above 150 kg)? : Privacy protection ([ID276])
2. How do you assess the possible impacts of the second policy option (adopting EU safety rules above 150 kg)? : Citizens' trust in RPAS operations ([ID277])
2. How do you assess the possible impacts of the second policy option (adopting EU safety rules above 150 kg)? : Natural environment ([ID278])
3. How do you assess the possible impacts of the third policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS)? : Compliance and administrative costs for EU businesses ([ID285])
3. How do you assess the possible impacts of the third policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS)? : Compliance and administrative costs for national administrations ([ID286])
3. How do you assess the possible impacts of the third policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS)? : Compliance and administrative costs for EASA ([ID287])
3. How do you assess the possible impacts of the third policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS)? : Employment ([ID288])
3. How do you assess the possible impacts of the third policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS)? : RPAS market growth ([ID289])
3. How do you assess the possible impacts of the third policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS)? : Competitiveness of the EU RPAS operators globally ([ID290])
3. How do you assess the possible impacts of the third policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS)? : Competitiveness of the EU RPAS manufacturers globally ([ID291])
3. How do you assess the possible impacts of the third policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS)? : Innovation in the RPAS sector ([ID292])
3. How do you assess the possible impacts of the third policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS)? : Security of the EU airspace ([ID293])
3. How do you assess the possible impacts of the third policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS)? : Safety in the EU airspace ([ID294])
3. How do you assess the possible impacts of the third policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS)? : Safety of citizens on the ground ([ID295])
3. How do you assess the possible impacts of the third policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS)? : Privacy protection ([ID296])
3. How do you assess the possible impacts of the third policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS)? : Citizens' trust in RPAS operations ([ID297])
3. How do you assess the possible impacts of the third policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS)? : Natural environment ([ID298])
4. How do you assess the possible impacts of the fourth policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS, giving new certification competences to EASA and central oversight)? : Compliance and administrative costs for EU businesses ([ID305])
4. How do you assess the possible impacts of the fourth policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS, giving new certification competences to EASA and central oversight)? : Compliance and administrative costs for national administrations ([ID306])
4. How do you assess the possible impacts of the fourth policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS, giving new certification competences to EASA and central oversight)? : Compliance and administrative costs for EASA ([ID307])
4. How do you assess the possible impacts of the fourth policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS, giving new certification competences to EASA and central oversight)? : Employment ([ID308])
4. How do you assess the possible impacts of the fourth policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS, giving new certification competences to EASA and central oversight)? : RPAS market growth ([ID309])
4. How do you assess the possible impacts of the fourth policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS, giving new certification competences to EASA and central oversight)? : Competitiveness of the EU RPAS operators globally ([ID310])
4. How do you assess the possible impacts of the fourth policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS, giving new certification competences to EASA and central oversight)? : Competitiveness of the EU RPAS manufacturers globally ([ID311])
4. How do you assess the possible impacts of the fourth policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS, giving new certification competences to EASA and central oversight)? : Innovation in the RPAS sector ([ID312])
4. How do you assess the possible impacts of the fourth policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS, giving new certification competences to EASA and central oversight)? : Security of the EU airspace ([ID313])
4. How do you assess the possible impacts of the fourth policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS, giving new certification competences to EASA and central oversight)? : Safety in the EU airspace ([ID314])
4. How do you assess the possible impacts of the fourth policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS, giving new certification competences to EASA and central oversight)? : Safety of citizens on the ground ([ID315])
4. How do you assess the possible impacts of the fourth policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS, giving new certification competences to EASA and central oversight)? : Privacy protection ([ID316])
4. How do you assess the possible impacts of the fourth policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS, giving new certification competences to EASA and central oversight)? : Citizens' trust in RPAS operations ([ID317])
4. How do you assess the possible impacts of the fourth policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS, giving new certification competences to EASA and central oversight)? : Natural environment ([ID318])
5. Please describe in more details any of the identified impacts and/or indicate any other impacts of the policy options or their measures. Please provide your assessment of these impacts.([ID319])
1. Are there any other issues you would like to highlight in relation to this initiative?([ID321])
2. Please give reference to any studies or documents that you think are of relevance for this consultation, with links for online download where possible([ID322])
3. You may also upload any document relevant for this consultation([ID323])
All Values
Apply Filter
Yes, I will provide my name and contact details
No, I prefer to provide a general comment only (and questionnaire ends here)
All Values
Apply Filter
An individual
Aviation professional (working in the aviation industry as a pilot, crew member, controller, etc.)
RPAS operator
Commercial Air Transport operator
Business Aviation operator
Recreational aviation operator
Aerial work operator
Aircraft design, manufacturing, or maintenance
Air navigation service provider
Aerodrome operator
National regulator
Qualified entity, or other organisation officially recognized by the national authority
Training organisation for aviation professionals
EU institution/body
Stakeholder/industry association
Research organisation/university/consultancy
Other (please specify)
All Values
Apply Filter
micro-enterprise (employs fewer than 10 persons and whose annual turnover and/or annual balance sheet total does not exceed EUR 2 million)
small enterprise (employs fewer than 50 persons and whose annual turnover and/or annual balance sheet total does not exceed EUR 10 million)
medium-sized enterprise (employs fewer than 250 persons and whose annual turnover does not exceed EUR 50 million or whose annual balance sheet total does not exceed EUR 43 million)
large enterprise
All Values
Apply Filter
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Croatia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Malta
Netherlands
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Slovakia
Switzerland
United Kingdom
Other
All Values
Apply Filter
An individual
Aviation professional (working in the aviation industry as a pilot, crew member, controller, etc.)
RPAS operator
Commercial Air Transport operator
Business Aviation operator
Recreational aviation operator
Aerial work operator
Aircraft design, manufacturing, or maintenance
Air navigation service provider
Aerodrome operator
National regulator
Qualified entity, or other organisation officially recognized by the national authority
Training organisation for aviation professionals
EU institution/body
Stakeholder/industry association
Research organisation/university/consultancy
Other (please specify)
All Values
Apply Filter
My contribution may be published under the name indicated
My contribution may be published but should be kept anonymous
I do not wish any of my contributions to be published
All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Agree

Strongly agree

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

All Values
Apply Filter
No impact
Negative impact
Mixed impact
Positive impact

No opinion

No contribution to display no data

Rows per Page 
1
Please note that the questionnaire will only use your full contribution if your name, organisation (if you answer on behalf of an organisation or institution) and contact details are provided. If you choose to not provide your name, organisation and contact details, you have the option of submitting a general comment only.
If you do choose to provide us with your name, organisation and contact details, you can still opt for your answers to remain anonymous when results are published.
General comment
1. Please specify your main field of activity or how you are mainly linked to the RPAS sector
1a. Please specify
2. If you work for a company, please give an indication of its size
3. If answering as an individual, please provide your place of residence.
If answering on behalf of an organisation/institution, please provide the place of establishment of the organisation/institution.
3a. Please specify "Other"
Please specify your main field of activity or how you are mainly linked to the RPAS sector
11. Please indicate if your organisation is registered in the Transparency Register of the European Commission.
12. Contributions received from this survey may be published on the European Commission's website, with the identity of the contributor. Do you agree to your contribution being published under your name?
1. How do you see the civil RPAS market developing?
RPAS technologies are already mature enough to allow for various civil applications in the next years
There are substantial business opportunities and commercial benefits for the EU business from the development and use of RPAS
The EU market for RPAS applications is developing slower than in other parts of the world
The EU RPAS manufacturing industry is not very competitive at the moment
A strong, integrated EU market is an effective means to make the EU RPAS industry globally competitive
I see a potential in RPAS for professional activities in the next five years
I see a potential in RPAS for daily life activities in the next five years
The potential for RPAS applications in the EU is lower than in other parts of the world
Demand for small RPAS with light weight and short flight distance will increase rapidly in the near future
Demand for large RPAS with heavy weight and long flight distance will increase rapidly in the near future
1a. Please elaborate on your answers to the above statements
1. Overall, what is your opinion on the main problems affecting the development of the RPAS market?
The fragmentation of the RPAS market in the EU create entry barriers and negatively affect the competitiveness of EU companies
Uncertainty about the future rules governing the development and use of RPAS hinders investment decisions
The use of RPAS poses a threat to safety and could lead to fatal accidents
The use of RPAS poses a threat to security because they could be used for unlawful actions
The use of RPAS poses a threat to privacy or protection of personal data
The current legislation does not provide effective protection against the safety, security and privacy risks linked to RPAS operations
The current insurance regime does not sufficiently cover liability issues in case of accidents with RPAS
1a. Please elaborate on your answers to the above statements
2. What is your opinion on the following concerns related to RPAS operations?
RPAS are dangerous and should not be allowed in the EU airspace
RPAS should only fly if remotely piloted by a certified operator
RPAS should not be allowed to fly over city centres at low altitude
The potential benefits of the RPAS applications outweigh the risks and threats they might pose
The widespread use of RPAS will create a threat to safety of EU citizens on the ground
The widespread use of RPAS will facilitate anonymous surveillance
The widespread use of RPAS will make it difficult to ensure effective protection of privacy
In order to ensure security the development of RPAS operations should be prohibited
RPAS will become an additional source of emissions and noise
There is a substantial risk that RPAS operators are not (sufficiently) insured
2a. Please elaborate on your answers to the above statements
1a. Access barriers and fragmentation of the RPAS market are the result of:
The need to obtain national authorisations in individual Member States
Differences in national rules in various EU Member States
Lack of common EU rules covering all types of RPAS
Lack of mutual recognition for national certificates
Gaps in the current EU legislation, which does not cover new concepts related to RPAS
1b. Legal and technological uncertainty are a result of:
Missing key technologies that need to be validated
Emerging and fast evolving RPAS sector cannot be rigidly regulated
Lack of EU or international standards
1c. RPAS pose a serious threat to safety, security and privacy, because:
RPAS will increase the traffic in the EU airspace
RPAS are not able to communicate effectively with 'manned' air traffic
RPAS are cheap and can be misused very easily even if the operations are controlled effectively
RPAS are prone to accidents and are a danger for citizens on the ground
There is a lack of credible information on the magnitude of the risks
Everybody can potentially buy and use an RPAS, even if that person is not aware of aviation rules
1d. The ineffective protection against safety, security and privacy risks related to RPAS operations is a result of:
New threats arising from RPAS operations that cannot be easily prevented by regulations
The absence of regulations which properly and sufficiently cover RPAS activities and related threats
The difficulty to actually implement and enforce current regulations
1e. Inadequate insurance regime is a result of:
The current rules were conceived for manned aircraft
The lack of harmonised operational rules
There is not sufficient evidence to calculate the risk and hence the cost of insurance
1f. Please elaborate on your answers to the above statements
1. What should be the main EU policy objectives in relation to RPAS?
RPAS should be promoted at the EU level because they are a promising source for jobs and growth and will offer new services to citizens and businesses
Citizens should be protected from risks and concerns related to safety, security or privacy of RPAS
1a. Please elaborate on your answers to the above statements
1. To what extent do you agree with the following options to address the problems affecting the EU RPAS market?
Option 1: No additional action is needed at the EU level at this moment of time
Option 2: EU should regulate RPAS where it has already competences (i.e. above 150 kg) and leave smaller RPAS for Member State legislation
Option 3: EU should amend the safety legislation to cover all RPAS regardless of weight, but proportional to the risk associated with the specific RPAS operations. The implementation of the common rules would mostly remain at the Member State level
Option 4: EU should amend the safety legislation to cover all RPAS regardless of weight, and EASA would manage the certification of RPAS, not the national authorities
1a. Please elaborate on your replies and/or suggest any additional options to be considered (including proposals for different packaging of measures in the options)
2a. Rulemaking and division of competencies
The market is still not mature enough and should not be regulated yet
The rules should be developed at international level (i.e. by ICAO) and not by the EU
EU rules should reflect international developments and standards
Before any regulation is proposed there is a need for validation of technologies and development of recognised standards
Current EASA safety rules sufficiently cover larger RPAS (above 150kg) and do not need to be changed
EU should only propose safety rules for heavy RPAS (above 150kg), while small RPAS should remain under a national competence
Safety rules should be harmonized at the EU level, but need to be implemented by national authorities
EASA should become the central institution for certification and implementation
Too detailed rules should not be proposed as they would suffocate the newly emerging industry
Certification and licencing of lighter RPAS operations is best performed at local level
Companies should have the possibility to choose the certificating authority which may be European or national
All types of RPAS, regardless of weight, should require airworthiness certification, operator certification and (remote) pilot licensing
Certificates and licenses delivered somewhere in the EU should be recognised throughout the EU
2b. Mitigation of safety risks
RPAS should only be allowed to fly when separated from manned air traffic (i.e. in segregated airspace)
The risk of an operation depends besides the weight also on the speed of the aircraft
The risk of an operation depends besides the weight of the aircraft also on the reliability of the system
The risk of an operation depends besides the weight of the aircraft also on the place where operations take place
The risk of an operation depends besides the weight of the aircraft also on the type of operation
The risk of an operation depends besides the weight of the aircraft also on the quality of the RPAS operator
The focus of safety rules, at least for lighter RPAS below 150 kg, should lie upon the operator and to a lesser extent the aircraft
A strong safety management system of the operator should be introduced as the most effective tool to guarantee safety

RPAS operations should be authorised at a local level, taking into account local circumstances.

The level of regulatory control of RPAS vehicles and operations should be proportionate to risk
EASA should develop a common risk classification scheme
2c. Mitigation of security risks
Security can be effectively enforced under the current rules
Eliminating gaps in the safety regulation will also allow better control of security risks and no additional security specific changes would be needed
EASA should integrate security considerations in its rules on RPAS
2d. Mitigation of privacy risks
The experience with Google Street View demonstrates that the existing data protection legislation should sufficiently protect data, derived from RPAS operations
New specific measures are necessary to ensure privacy protection in the case of commercial use of RPAS
New specific measures are necessary to ensure privacy protection in the case of use of RPAS by police or security forces
Data protection legislation needs to be strengthened at the EU level if civil use of RPAS is allowed
National data protection authorities should identify privacy threats related to the applications of RPAS and develop adequate protection measures where necessary
National civil aviation authorities should share information with data protection authorities in order to ensure privacy protection
The ability to identify an operator of an RPAS is a key aspect of ensuring privacy protection
2f. Would you like to comment or add any other measure that could improve the current regulatory system for RPAS?
1. How do you assess the possible impacts of the first policy option (no new actions)?
Compliance and administrative costs for EU businesses
Compliance and administrative costs for national administrations
Compliance and administrative costs for EASA
Employment
RPAS market growth
Competitiveness of the EU RPAS operators globally
Competitiveness of the EU RPAS manufacturers globally
Innovation in the RPAS sector
Security of the EU airspace
Safety in the EU airspace
Safety of citizens on the ground
Privacy protection
Citizens' trust in RPAS operations
Natural environment
2. How do you assess the possible impacts of the second policy option (adopting EU safety rules above 150 kg)?
Compliance and administrative costs for EU businesses
Compliance and administrative costs for national administrations
Compliance and administrative costs for EASA
Employment
RPAS market growth
Competitiveness of the EU RPAS operators globally
Competitiveness of the EU RPAS manufacturers globally
Innovation in the RPAS sector
Security of the EU airspace
Safety in the EU airspace
Safety of citizens on the ground
Privacy protection
Citizens' trust in RPAS operations
Natural environment
3. How do you assess the possible impacts of the third policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS)?
Compliance and administrative costs for EU businesses
Compliance and administrative costs for national administrations
Compliance and administrative costs for EASA
Employment
RPAS market growth
Competitiveness of the EU RPAS operators globally
Competitiveness of the EU RPAS manufacturers globally
Innovation in the RPAS sector
Security of the EU airspace
Safety in the EU airspace
Safety of citizens on the ground
Privacy protection
Citizens' trust in RPAS operations
Natural environment
4. How do you assess the possible impacts of the fourth policy option (adopting EU safety rules for all RPAS, giving new certification competences to EASA and central oversight)?
Compliance and administrative costs for EU businesses
Compliance and administrative costs for national administrations
Compliance and administrative costs for EASA
Employment
RPAS market growth
Competitiveness of the EU RPAS operators globally
Competitiveness of the EU RPAS manufacturers globally
Innovation in the RPAS sector
Security of the EU airspace
Safety in the EU airspace
Safety of citizens on the ground
Privacy protection
Citizens' trust in RPAS operations
Natural environment
5. Please describe in more details any of the identified impacts and/or indicate any other impacts of the policy options or their measures.
Please provide your assessment of these impacts.
1. Are there any other issues you would like to highlight in relation to this initiative?
2. Please give reference to any studies or documents that you think are of relevance for this consultation, with links for online download where possible
3. You may also upload any document relevant for this consultation
1
Export