Will passenger drones exist in our lifetime? For now, operations are severely limited to mostly one-off media stunts. But in these four cities, U.S. passenger drones are more likely to become a reality.

The Lufthansa Innovation Hub, which is an arm of the German airline of the same name, teamed up with V2Air, Roland Berger and Unisphere to study the most viable global cities for launching Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) operations. AAM refers to a broad category of innovative aircraft that includes passenger drones which could be used for situations including intra-city travel or transit between intercity routes that would be too short for a full airplane to cover but too long to drive.

Using June 2024 data, the team analyzed 16 major U.S. cities. From there, it ranked those cities based on factors critical in launching viable operations of U.S. passenger drones. Those factors included:

• Geographical terrain (tall structures and natural obstacles could present greater hazards)
• Airspace
• Authority (including regional aviation legislation and local initiatives supporting technological development)
• Weather
• Aviation infrastructure and area impact
• Time savings (how efficient ground-based vehicles and public transport currently are)

Cities were then given a feasibility score, which consists of:

• 25% terrain
• 25% airspace
• 50% authority

They also received a viability score, consisting of:

• 25% weather
• 25% area impact
• 50% time savings

Of the U.S. cities that had high feasibility but low viability were:

• San Francisco
• New York
• Miami
• San Diego
• Dallas
• Miami
• Detroit

Of the U.S. cities that had high viability but low feasibility were:

• Washington, D.C.
• Seattle

Meanwhile, Denver, Houston and Philadelphia didn’t score particularly well on either metric — so don’t expect passenger drones in those cities anytime soon.

The cities best suited for U.S. passenger drones

But which cities scored well in both feasibility and viability? Four cities stand out: Charlotte, Chicago, Los Angeles and Orlando. Here’s why:

Charlotte: Charlotte stood out for its favorable terrain. Given how flat it is, there are fewer vertical ascents and descents, which in turn reduces energy consumption. More energy-efficient aircraft means aircraft can run longer or turnaround faster without frequent recharges. This makes operations more efficient for passengers and also saves money for operators.

Charlotte also scored highly on the time savings metric, which calculated how much time flying through the skies could save versus sitting on a bus or train. Charlotte has poor public transportation infrastructure coupled with high traffic congestion. Without better public trains and buses, Charlotte could at least be positioned to benefit massively from small aircraft overhead to get people quickly from place to place.

Chicago: Chicago didn’t dominate one category in particular, but it got generally high marks all around. Aside from the skyscrapers, the terrain around Chicago is flat. And while public transportation within Chicago is good, it’s weaker to the surrounding suburbs. Perhaps a small aircraft could pickup passengers on the shores of Lake Michigan in downtown Chicago and fly over the water, quickly funneling people to cities on the other side that would otherwise necessitate an hour or more drive around the lake, such as Michigan City in Indiana, or Milwaukee.

Orlando: Orlando also scored especially-high marks in terrain feasibility. After all, it’s quite flat with no mountains (unless you’re counting Walt Disney World’s Big Thunder Mountain as one). Orlando also scored relatively high on the time savings metric as, again, its public transit is pretty weak.

Los Angeles: Los Angeles has already made some headwinds in the AAM department. For example, it’s already initiated a partnership with a group called Urban Movement Labs, which works with another company called Skyroads, which is based in Germany. Together, they’re exploring the potential benefits of AAM specific to the sprawling SoCal city. That includes some exploratory efforts on developing the necessary infrastructure and regulations for safe and equitable AAM implementation. 

And with Los Angeles hosting the Olympics in 2028, it has some incentive to offer even more innovative transit solutions.

Other standout contenders for U.S. passenger drones

Though the following cities didn’t score highly on both the feasibility and viability metrics, some cities did still stand out for dominating certain categories. Some of those highlights are:

Miami: Miami gets high points in the authority category. That’s because the Florida Department of Transportation already has its own AAM working group that works with other stakeholders, including those from the private sector, to develop an AAM integration plan. It also scored relatively high marks on weather — though watch out for rains and hurricane season.

San Diego: Speaking of rain, San Diego has very little of it. The sunny, SoCal city has very little rain. San Diego scored the highest of any U.S. city in terms of weather. According to Lufthansa’s report, it has excellent weather conditions for more than 95% of the year, which enables more frequent service availability (and more days for AAM companies to generate revenue).

Here’s how all those U.S. cities (coupled with some European cities) all look laid out on both the viability and feasibility scales, in a graphic from the Lufthansa Innovation Hub:

What’s the latest in Advanced Air Mobility?

There are lots of developments in the AAM world. Lufthansa’s conducted a separate analysis earlier this year and found that innovation has been surging, especially over the past couple years. In 2024, a record 760 patents were filed related to AAM, as well as the similar fields of UAM and RAM.

The world of AAM sometimes feels like a confusing alphabet soup of related terms such as UAM (Urban Air Mobility) and RAM (Regional Air Mobility). Another German-based group, Drone Industry Insights, laid it all out in a post earlier this year explaining those terms and their differences.

Perhaps the biggest name in AAM is Joby. It’s eyeing a takeoff of air taxis in Dubai by 2025. They would be piloted by humans, but would operate in a manner similar to the visions for pilotless taxis that would tote people around the congested city through Skyports (sometimes called Vertiports).

Which U.S. city would you most like to see passenger drones operate in? Leave a comment below!

The post These 4 U.S. cities are best suited for passenger drones appeared first on The Drone Girl.

Fly drones over people without a waiver? With what’s considered a monumental approval granted by the Federal Aviation Administration (and the right equipment), it’s possible. The most standout piece of equipment you’ll need? A drone parachute.

The FAA approved issued a Category 2 and Category 3 Declaration of Compliance (DOC) for some specific hardware used for a specific scenario (flying drones over people). The hardware at hand? A parachute made by Aerial Vehicle Safety Solutions Inc. (AVSS), a DJI drone and a DJI Dock, which is a drone-in-a-box type solution designed for enterprise applications. And it signals a future where it’s easier to fly drones over people without having to file a bunch of paperwork.

That paperwork is the FAA 107.39 flight over people waiver. It can be complicated for folks with non-legal backgrounds to fill out. Many companies hire lawyers specifically to fill it out. That can often be prohibitively expensive, especially for startups with small teams.

The approval was initiated by AVSS, the Canadian company that’s been working on aerial technology including drone parachutes since 2017. Unsurprisingly, thee manufacture the approved parachute.

Through the new approval, drone operators who use the DJI Dock 2 in tandem with a specific drone parachute made by AVSS can now fly over people without needing to submit an FAA 107.39 flight over people waiver. In addition, that FAA DOC also allows for higher wind limitations for the DJI Dock 2 when operating under certain conditions.

To be able to legally fly drones over people without FAA approval under this specific ‘Declaration of Compliance,’ you’ll need to following equipment:

• The AVSS PRS-M3DT (a drone parachute for the DJI Dock 2). 
• DJI Dock 2
• DJI M3D or DJI M3TD drones (these are drone platforms for the Dock 2)

What to know about the AVSS parachute

 in the event of a mid-air drone malfunction, advanced drone parachute systems (like those from AVSS) can automatically cut power to the drone. From there, they can deploy a parachute and allow the drone to descend slowly from the sky. In theory, that minimizes harm risk to not just the drone itself, but people or property that the drone could otherwise crash on. 

AVSS makes a range of parachutes designed for popular drones, including the DJI M200, DJI Mavic 3 Enterprise and the DJI M300 RTK. It also works directly with big names in the DJI alternative space, including Skydio for its X10 drone, and Brinc for its Brinc Responder drone. It sells the parachutes to drone manufacturers, as well as through a network of about 50 authorized dealers.

The specific parachute named here, the PRS-M3DT, works with the DJI Dock 2 alongside the DJI M3D or M3TD drones.

How does it work? In short, a special attachment bracket secures the parachute to the drone in a fairly seamless “plug and play” system. An electronic module powers what’s called a “Parachute Pod.” An automatic triggering device in the onboard system can deploy the drone parachute in less than a half a second if needed. 

The whole kit adds just 145 grams (0.32 pounds) to the weight of the drone.

The system also satisfies EASA MOC 2511 (Enhanced Containment) requirements, which is critical for enterprise pilots in the European Union.

What to know about the Category 2 and Category 3 Declaration of Compliance (DOC) system

Unsurprisingly, getting such a DOC was not exactly easy. According to ASTM, getting such approval took years of work. AVSS has had a long relationship with the FAA in testing its parachutes. For example, in 2022, AVSS worked closely with NUAIR, which manages the FAA-designated New York UAS Test Site at Griffiss International Airport in Rome, NY to complete ASTM F3322-18 testing requirements for the DJI M300 RTK drone.  

ASTM doesn’t have anything to do with the FAA specifically, but rather international quality standards. ASTM, which is an international standards organization, develops and publishes voluntary technical standards that companies and makers largely agree to adhere to for all sorts of materials for drones or otherwise (including, yes, drone parachutes). 

Other drone parachutes to have undergone NUAIR testing include the Nexus, designed by Alaska-based company, Indemnis.

After all that, this specific FAA approval to AVSS marks what is now the first Category 2 drone for operations over people. Though, the FAA has given varying types of approvals for certain scenarios to other drone parachute companies. For example, it gave an individual approval to general contractor and construction management company Hensel Phelps to fly over people with a drone carrying the ParaZero’s SafeAir Phantom Parachute System. 

The purpose of the Category 2 and Category 3 DOCs are to delineate requirements for drone hardware based on the nature of the flight. 

There’s a such thing as Category 1 drone operations. But, it only applies to drones weighing 0.55 grams or less. Studies show that lightweight drones pose a significantly smaller safety risk should they crash. And yes, drone flights (assuming they are Remote ID compliant) that fall under Category 1 operations are allowed to fly over people.

That said, drone flights that fall into Category 2 or 3 otherwise need a separate waiver. (At least, until this new DOC came into the picture). Here’s what those two categories entail:

• Category 2: Enables sustained flight over open-air gatherings
• Category 3: Imposes additional safety limitations. Under Category 3, the FAA prohibits drone operations over groups of people. That is, unless they are conducted within or over closed- or restricted-access areas, where individuals are duly notified of potential drone flights. That could include employees on a job site. It also pertains to situations where drones fly over people directly involved in the flight. Or, it includes people who are technically standing under the drone but are also standing under another protective structure (like the drone is flying overhead but you’re under, say, a patio cover).

There’s also a Category 4, which allows drones with an airworthiness certificate under part 21 to operate over people.

What’s next for being able to fly drones over people without a waiver?

For now, the FAA has approved just two DJI drones, working in tandem with the DJI Dock 2. Drone docks are hot these days, offering a landing and charging station for drones. They also provide a safe and convenient location for drones to land and recharge their batteries without needing an operator to manually intervene.

But, the company said it plans to bring more drones to the DOC approval list. That includes the DJI Mavic 3 Enterprise, Skydio X10, and Brinc Responder drones.

The post Fly drones over people without a waiver? Here’s one way to do it appeared first on The Drone Girl.