ENAC rules explained in plain words

Common questions and very direct answers on the ENAC regulations for the use of SAPR (RPAS)

The first convention of the Italian APR Federation ended a few days ago, and among the most important speeches was that of Deputy Commissioner Luca Tagliagambe, representing the State Police, who is circulating a handbook on how to act when violations of the rules governing the use of SAPR are detected. Many industry insiders consider the regulation very strict and a bit excessive.

At Aerialclick, as industry insiders, we prefer to acknowledge that these are the rules at the moment and that they must be respected, above all to protect the enthusiasts and customers who are approaching the wonderful world of drones.

In this article we will try to explain in very plain, simple words the reasons behind such strict regulation, and also to explain the penalties faced by those who do not comply.

Why set (strict) rules?

Until a year ago, before the civil aviation authority's regulation on drone use came into force in Italy too, many people were worried that the 'drone craze' could turn the skies of the Bel Paese into a melting pot of swarming aircraft, used by filmmakers, photographers and young pranksters in the mood for jokes and unauthorised filming.

Then someone wondered: what if one of those things fell on my head?

In reality the regulation that came into force also addresses these concerns, but it mainly aims to ensure that

• aircraft in flight are identifiable and identified;
• anyone flying a device at considerable height (and therefore with a considerable impact range in case of failure) knows the laws and rules and truly knows what they are doing;
• a distinction can be made between different types of areas to be overflown (those where the dangers to property and people are very few, those with medium danger, and those where there is a risk of killing or injuring someone, destroying valuable objects, including historic ones, and violating property rights);
• Anyone operating a SAPR (an object of high technical value and enormous potential) truly knows what they have in their hands.

You might also be interested in the article
3 reasons to bring your drone into compliance (and how to do it)

Practical examples

#1 - a boy plays with a small drone or model aircraft and loses control of it because he flies it without taking into account the moderate wind gusts forecast. The drone drifts out of his sight and control and falls on a car, damaging the bodywork.

#2 - a beach club wants to promote its afternoons with aperitifs and club music online; it does so by flying a drone that, besides filming without asking anyone's permission, lands badly and scratches the leg of a boy from the neighbouring beach club.
In these two cases no one would be responsible for anything. The owner of the drone could disappear and be neither traced nor answer for anything (neither for damage to property and people nor for the possible online publication of a video showing people who might have valid reasons not to let anyone know about it).

Obviously, in the beach club case, the manager says he turned to third parties, that the model aircraft is not his and that, however sorry he is, he does not consider himself responsible for what happened. (In reality no one is authorised to request services involving the use of a SAPR if it is not compliant, because it would be like paying an unlicensed, uninsured taxi driver to pick someone up at the station).

By contrast, for those who operate in compliance with the law, every machine is registered and tracked, just like every recognised pilot, so every incident has the name and surname of the person responsible and the number of the vehicle involved.

Many point out that it is excessive to treat model aircraft under the same rules as helicopters, but for the moment that is how it is and this is the regulation to follow.

After all, number plates are required on cars as well as on mopeds, even though they are different vehicles with different levels of danger and user responsibility. And the highway code and vehicle registration rules are the same for someone driving a large-engined car as for someone driving a small city car, a three-wheeler or a moped.

#3 – the night between 23 and 24 February. Five drones fly around sensitive targets in a Paris still shaken by terrorist attacks. These are obviously neither recognised SAPR nor drones authorised to fly in those areas.

With regulations that are also in force for security reasons, if a SAPR flies over at-risk areas the army is authorised to intervene, and the authorities are informed of every authorised flight. In times of international terrorism this is not a trivial matter.

If you think the Italian ENAC rules are excessive read the comparison with foreign regulations

Yes, but many people do it (they fly without authorisation)

Many ask: so why, for at least two years now, do I see every summer some drone flying over people on the beach, videos showing city centres full of tourists, videos filming concerts? Are they all authorised?

Answer: no, they are by no means all authorised or recognised. They do it for the same reason that some people drive uninsured cars, others drive without a licence, and still others run unlicensed taxis: they have no interest in the law or have not bothered to learn it. And they take on the responsibility for it, in both civil and criminal matters.

What should manufacturers/sellers do?

The tightening of regulations, even for those who use drones for work regularly and with all the necessary permits, is due precisely to the aerial wild west created by those who, for sales interests, try to downplay to customers both the extent of the penalties for those who break the rules and the extent of the damage that loss of control of one of these beautiful, delicate and technically complex work tools can cause.

In short, in our view, if a company that makes and sells drones gives customers the idea that anyone can operate or "play" with a drone without any consequences, it is perhaps acting a little in bad faith. But this is obviously only our point of view as SAPR manufacturers and designers, and the concern of those who want to spare the good-faith customer from 'minor unpleasant situations' such as those listed below:

• ARREST UP TO ONE YEAR or FINE UP TO €1,032, again under criminal law for anyone using a SAPR without a declaration of compliance submitted to ENAC for non-critical operations, or without adequate authorisation when carrying out critical/mixed operations (pursuant to art. 1216 of the Navigation Code, applying to the operator and the pilot)
• IMPRISONMENT FROM 1 TO 5 YEARS for SAPR pilots who conduct operations without the appropriate qualification or with an expired qualification.
  (pursuant to art. 1117 of the Navigation Code)
• ARREST UP TO 3 MONTHS or FINE UP TO €206 for SAPR pilots with an expired medical fitness certificate.
  (pursuant to art. 1331 of the Navigation Code)
• SAPR without insurance coverage / expired coverage. Art. 1234 administrative penalty from €56,664 to €113,338
• Administrative penalty from €16,999 to €33,999 for anyone using a SAPR without carrying the insurance policy.