If you’ve been keeping even one propeller in the drone world, you’ve probably heard whispers — or let’s be real, full-on buzz — about Part 108. Part 108 is an expected piece of Federal Aviation Administration regulation. And experts expect it to be a potential game-changer that could finally bring widespread Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) drone flights to U.S. skies.

So what exactly is Part 108? What does it mean for hobbyists, commercial pilots and enterprise drone operators? And how should you prep for its rollout?

Let’s break it all down.

What is Part 108?

Part 108 is a proposed FAA rule that aims to standardize BVLOS operations, which currently require a waiver under Part 107. BVLOS operations allow drones to cover much larger areas without being tethered to a visual observer. That’s critical for tasks like long-distance inspections, infrastructure monitoring and drone delivery.

Part 108 aims to standardize and streamline how these operations happen, making BVLOS more widely accessible for commercial and governmental drone use.

“When Part 108 get approved, you’re going to see a lot of growth in the use of drones and UAS systems across the whole U.S. airspace, said Bill Irby, CEO of AgEagle Aerial Systems Inc. AgEagle is an American drone company based in Kansas that builds hardware, high-precision sensors and ground control and analytics software for drones. One of its key products is the eBee X drone.

“The great part about it is that Part 108 will enable not only drone operations like the missions we do, but also AAM, drone delivery and a whole bunch of other drone uses. There are whole a bunch of innovators out there who have really advanced platforms that they’re investing in just to be ready for that market.“

While the rule is still in development, the FAA’s Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC) released recommendations in early 2022. That document laid the groundwork for what Part 108 could look like—though the final rule may differ.

What will Part 108 likely include?

While the final FAA rule hasn’t dropped yet, here’s what we expect based on ARC recommendations and industry buzz:

1. Operator qualifications

Pilots may need advanced training or certifications beyond Part 107. Think of it like getting your drone “commercial driver’s license.”

2. Aircraft and equipment standards

You’ll likely need:

• Detect-and-avoid (DAA) tech
• Secure command and control links
• Possibly Remote ID compliance

3. Operational risk-based categories

Similar to EASA’s model in Europe, flights may fall into different categories (low-, medium-, high-risk) depending on:

• Where you’re flying (urban vs rural)
• Who/what is below
• Your drone’s capabilities

4. Shielded and corridored operations

Shielded operations (within 100 feet of vertical structures) and corridor flights (like along powerlines or railways) might get special allowances.

Who benefits from BVLOS?

Irby predicts a wide range of verticals will be positively affected by Part 108. Think sectors like:

• Infrastructure inspection: Railways, highways, and powerlines
• Event security: Monitoring crowds from the sky at large venues
• Law enforcement: Improved situational awareness in active scenarios
• Environmental monitoring: Especially across hard-to-reach terrain
• Drone delivery and AAM (Advanced Air Mobility): Particularly in rural or suburban regions

And of course, those businesses benefit, but customers do too. For example, drone deliveries right now are largely limited to very specific areas. Often, drone deliveries don’t span more than a mile, which sort of defeats the purpose of a drone delivery. After all, walking that mile might be easier. Finally, a broader swath of residents might be eligible for drone deliveries.

And it extends beyond that too. Costs will come down as paperwork is presumably reduced, and timelines will speed up as Part 108 unlocks more efficiencies. For example, police departments (funded by tax payers) that use drones should see costs come down as work is streamlined.

How drone companies should prepare for Part 108

Even though Part 108 isn’t here yet, savvy drone pilots can start preparing now. Here’s what you can do:

1. Stay plugged in

Bookmark the FAA’s UAS page, subscribe to industry newsletters, and follow trusted voices (cough cough) like The Drone Girl.

2. Know Part 107 inside out

Understanding the existing rulebook is crucial for adapting to whatever Part 108 brings. If you’re not certified yet, get your Part 107 Remote Pilot Certificate.

3. Evaluate your gear and mission planning software

Part 108 may require higher-grade safety systems, especially detect-and-avoid. Keep tabs on drones that are likely to be compliant, like those from U.S.-based Skydio or Swiss-manufactured AgEagle units.

AgEagle, which sells both complete drone systems and payload components like U.S.-made multispectral cameras, is working proactively to align its ground control software, eMotion, with the anticipated requirements of Part 108.

“Our systems already allow for pre-programmed and autonomous flight profiles,” Irby said. “We may need to tweak altitude limits, but it’s not a heavy lift for us.”

His advice to other operators? Stay plugged into FAA communications and industry consortiums, and ensure mission planning software can adapt to new regulatory boundaries.

What are the potential drawbacks of Part 108?

Irby’s main concern isn’t the regulation itself, but the assumptions some may make.

“It’s not going to be free and open airspace,” he said. “There will be constraints. But that’s okay, because it’s all in the interest of safety.

It’s a familiar balancing act in the drone world: opening the skies without compromising the safety of people or crewed aircraft. Still, most companies — including AgEagle — are bullish.

“The growth is going to come,” he said. “We don’t know the full boundaries yet, but it’s going to enable a lot.”

The post Part 108 set to change future of BVLOS drone operations: here’s what’s coming appeared first on The Drone Girl.

Florida lawmakers are advancing a controversial new bill that could give property owners the right to use “reasonable force” to take down drones flying over their land. Florida Senate Bill 1422, which recently cleared a state Senate committee, is drawing intense scrutiny from drone industry professionals, legal scholars and federal aviation advocates — and for good reason.

While the bill may be marketed as a privacy protection measure, critics argue it sets up a dangerous legal collision between state and federal authority. It could also put drone pilots — many of whom fly legally and commercially — in harm’s way.

Florida Senate Bill 1422: what it says

The bill does a few things, but namely it seeks to protect the people of Florida from certain types of surveillance.

More specifically, property owners would have the right to use “reasonable force” to stop drones from conducting surveillance over their private property. There are a few stipulations, such as that the drone must be flying under 500 feet. It also must be violating “a reasonable expectation of privacy.”

The bill also has a few other drone-related actions, such as that it amends multiple sections of Florida law to expand definitions of “critical infrastructure,” increases criminal penalties for operating drones in prohibited areas, and cracks down on tampering with FAA-mandated Remote ID systems.

If passed, the law would take effect on October 1, 2025.

Aren’t there already privacy laws?

Yes, there are already laws — both federal and state — that address the “reasonable expectation of privacy.” Though not necessarily specific to drones, these form the legal backbone of most surveillance and privacy-related court decisions in the U.S. For example, we have already ruled that people have a reasonable expectation of privacy in a hotel room or a bathroom.

Specific to Florida and drones, the state already has a relatively strict drone privacy law under Section 934.50 of the Florida Statutes, enacted in 2015. That law “prohibits using drones with imaging technology to surveil private property without written consent.”

SB 1422 builds on that by explicitly allowing property owners to use “reasonable force” to stop such drone surveillance.

So why the controversy? While there are already privacy protections in place, SB 1422 shifts enforcement from legal remedies (like lawsuits or police reports) to potential physical confrontation—introducing more risk and potential conflict. That’s why many experts, like James McDanolds of Sonoran Desert Institute, argue that such bills should be approached cautiously.

“Everyone deserves privacy, but letting people physically attack drones isn’t the answer,” McDanolds told The Drone Girl. “Protecting rights on the ground doesn’t mean ignoring safety and the bigger rules that keep our skies safe for everyone.”

A collision course between state law and federal airspace regulations

That’s not the only concern that experts have with the law. There’s also the fact that federal laws also heavily regulate drones. In fact, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) (not individual states) governs all airspace in the U.S. — even the air just a few inches above your backyard.

“While states can make rules about privacy or trespassing, letting people physically take down drones could clash with the FAA’s authority and restrictions on taking down drones and interfering with the operation of an aircraft, and that’s a big legal gray area,” McDanolds said.

In fact, under federal law 18 U.S.C. § 32, damaging or destroying an aircraft — including a drone — is a felony. That federal rule alone (dubbed the Aircraft Sabotage rule) makes Florida’s proposed law incredibly risky to enforce.

What does “reasonable force” even mean?

The bill is especially controversial because it leaves the phrase “reasonable force” open to interpretation — and that vagueness could be dangerous.

“Reasonable force could mean anything from throwing rocks to trying to jam a drone’s signal, and neither is a good idea,” McDanolds said. “It’s dangerous and could land someone in legal trouble with the FAA.”

Besides the legal implications, there are serious safety concerns. A falling drone could cause property damage or injure someone nearby — even a bystander.

“Using the term reasonable force leaves it open to interpretation and can cause additional risk,” he said.

A patchwork of state laws could cause national chaos

One of the greatest fears among drone professionals is what happens if other states follow Florida’s lead. A patchwork of conflicting laws could make it nearly impossible for pilots to know what’s legal as they cross state lines.

“If every state starts making its own airspace rules, it could create a confusing mess for pilots and non-pilots and even risk safety,” McDanolds warned. “The FAA’s job is to keep the skies organized and safe nationwide, and patchwork state laws could seriously get in the way of that.”

He painted a scenario where a neighborhood hires a drone pilot for infrastructure inspection, but a neighbor unaware of the arrangement decides to take matters into their own hands — even if the flight is fully legal.

The broader implications of Florida Senate Bill 1422 for the drone industry

Florida’s bill comes at a precarious time for the drone industry. Venture capital investment in drones has plummeted in recent years, and uncertainty around regulations — especially with the FAA’s long-delayed BVLOS (beyond visual line of sight) rule — has left many companies in limbo. Layering on vague and potentially unconstitutional state laws could chill commercial drone operations even further.

“If Florida moves forward, it might open the door for other states to pass similar ‘drone defense’ laws,” McDanolds said. “It could also trigger court battles over where state authority ends and federal law begins.”

How drone pilots and property owners can protect both privacy and safety

Experts argue that the answer to cracking down on rogue drones isn’t backyard vigilante justice — it’s clear communication, smart tech, and the rule of law.

“Drone pilots should be mindful about flying over private property and stick to FAA rules, while property owners should report bad behavior instead of taking matters into their own hands,” McDanolds said.

Remote ID rules have sought to make it easier for law enforcement to track drones. Assuming the drone is Remote ID compliant and is equipped with a built-in remote ID module (or an external Remote ID module like DroneTag), law enforcement could more easily track the operator.

“Everyone deserves privacy, but letting people physically attack drones isn’t the answer,” McDanolds said. “Protecting rights on the ground doesn’t mean ignoring safety and the bigger rules that keep our skies safe for everyone.”

Florida Senate Bill 1422: what happens next?

Florida’s drone bill, Florida Senate Bill 1422, is still moving through the legislative process, and it remains unclear whether it will pass into law. For what it’s worth, many bills never move past the proposal stage. But regardless of its outcome, it has already raised a bigger conversation about how we regulate drones — and who has the right to control the skies above our homes.

“There may be some larger-level conversations at the federal level between industry professionals, the FAA, and state legislators that would need to take place if many states want a law that would enable combating UAVs that might be invading privacy with nefarious intent,” McDanolds said.

The post Controversial Florida Senate Bill 1422 could let homeowners shoot down drones. Experts warn against it appeared first on The Drone Girl.