Activities of Renaud MUSELIER related to 2014/2243(INI)
Plenary speeches (2)
Safe use of remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) in the field of civil aviation (debate) FR
Safe use of remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) in the field of civil aviation (A8-0261/2015 - Jacqueline Foster) FR
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on safe use of remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS), commonly known as unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), in the field of civil aviation PDF (217 KB) DOC (131 KB)
Amendments (30)
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas RPAS technology can replace direct human intervention in dangerous environments;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas greenhouse gases could be reduced if aircraft with high fossil energy consumption were replaced, for certain tasks, by smaller, lighter electrically powered drones;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas all RPAS rules in place in Europe are tailored to assessing the risk of the operation; whereas such RPAS rules are ‘operator centric’determined according to the type of operation and do not take the ‘aircraft centric’ approach used in manned aviation; whereas the risk depends not only on the type of machine, but also on additional factors, such as the area overflown, the expertise of the operator and the particular type of operation;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the potential for growth in this industryis industry operates in a high added-value service economy based on a complex value chain: design, manufacture, operation, training, and processing, storage, sharing, and exploitation of information; whereas, especially where Europeans are concerned, its potential for growth, from the manufacturer to the end user, is immense, for both large businesses and the supply chain composed of thousands of SMEs alike; whereas it is imperative to maintain world class standards of manufacturing and support European know-how and technology;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas even at this early stage, Member States, industry and the Commission have all recognised the potential of this market and are keen to stress that any policy framework must enable the European industry to growth in order to compete globally;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
Ia. whereas the EU should, as quickly as possible, produce a legislative framework purely for civil use of RPAS;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I b (new)
Recital I b (new)
Ib. whereas the European legislative framework must, on the one hand, allow industry to go on innovating and to develop under optimum conditions and, secondly, give the public an assurance that life and property, as well as personal data and privacy, will be effectively protected;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I c (new)
Recital I c (new)
Ic. whereas such legislation should not be confined to revision of civil aviation regulations, but has to cover other areas, including the electromagnetic spectrum and the insurance system;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the US is seen by many as the leading market for the use of RPAS, albeit for military operations; stresses, however, that Europe is the leader in the civilian sector with 2 500 operators (400 in the UK, 300 in Germany, 1 500 in France, 250 in Sweden, etc.) compared to 2 342 operators in the rest of the world;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers that the RPAS sector urgently requires competent authorities to create globalEuropean rules in order to ensure cross- border RPAS development; underlines the fact that if no action is taken promptly, there is a risk that the economic potential and positive effects of RPAS will not be fully realised;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Believes that a European framework, if it were clear, effective, reliable, and put in place without delay, might assist the discussions on global rule-making for the use of drones;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Considers that future legislation of that kind will need to establish a clear distinction between professional and recreational use of remotely piloted aircraft;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Underlines the fact that safety and security are paramount for any RPAS operations and rules and that they must be commensurate with the risks;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Stresses the importance of ‘out-of- sight’ flights for the development of the sector; considers that European legislation should favour this modus operandi;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Underlines the fact that in the long term, technical and regulatory solutions should preferably enable RPAS to use the airspace alongside any other airspace user without imposing on the latter new equipment requirements; notes that that there are a large number of small RPAS operating below 500 feet, together with manned aircraft; stresses that although ANSPs do not provide ATC services at these altitudes, they do have a responsibility to provide sufficient information for both types of aircraft to coexist in the same airspace; notes that EUROCONTROL is supporting states in creating a common understanding of the issues involved and in driving harmonisation as much as possible;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Considers the question of identifying drones, of whatever size, to be crucial; underlines that solutions should be found which take into account the recreational or commercial use to which drones are put;
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Believes that a clear, global, harmonised and proportionate European regulatory framework needs to be swiftly developed on a risk assessed basis, which takes account of different uses and avoids burdensome regulations for businesses that would deter investment and job creation; believes that this framework should be part of a long-term perspective, taking into account the possible future developments and other aspects of these technologies;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Considers that industry and regulators must come together in order toto guarantee legal certainty favouring investment and avoid the ‘chicken-and-egg’ problem, whereby industry is reluctant to invest in developing the necessary technologies without certainty about how they will be regulated, while regulators are reluctant to develop standards until industry comes forward with technologies for authorisation; stresses that SMEs should be genuinely linked to this standardisation process;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 – introductory part
Paragraph 19 – introductory part
19. Considers that future rules on RPAS should address issues relating to: the following aspects, taking into account the recreational or commercial use of drones and the airspace in which they are called upon to operate:
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 – indent 1 a (new)
Paragraph 19 – indent 1 a (new)
- exclusion zones;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 – indent 3
Paragraph 19 – indent 3
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 – indent 4
Paragraph 19 – indent 4
– the identity of the drone and the owner/operator traceability;
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 – indent 7 a (new)
Paragraph 19 – indent 7 a (new)
- insurance and civil liability system;
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Calls on the Commission and the bodies and companies concerned to boost their research and development programmes; considers that, taking into account the expected economic spin-offs from this sector, the EU should favour the development of European technologies, for example through Horizon 2020; asks for account also to be taken of the development of drone detection and capture technologies in research programmes;
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Supports the Commission’s intention to remove the 150kg threshold defining the certifying competences between EASA and national authorities; insists, however, that removing this limit must be accompanied by a boosting of the Agency’s human and financial resources; is very concerned at the possibility that otherwise this new division of competences will cause the sector to slow down rather than expand;
Amendment 136 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Calls on EASA and national authorities to ensure that their rules do not lead to excessive red tape and that systems for authorising operations are based as far as possible not on a case-by- case scenario but, for example, on a system of one validation per operator and/or group of flights;
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Considers that these instances should build up a regulatory corpus which would not transpose the rules of manned flight en bloc but would form a proportionate, progressive and risk-based body of rules;
Amendment 142 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Strongly believes that JARUS is, therefore, ideally placed to quickly and effectively draft global safety regulations for RPAS operations; believes that JARUS should ensure thatake into account anyll future EU rules will be compatible withhen implementing international arrangements in other countries, through a process of mutual recognition;
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Considers that at the moment it is mainly drones for recreational use carrying cameras which pose a risk to privacy; calls on the law-enforcement authorities of the Member States to exchange best practices on combating these flights if they are of a criminal nature;
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Calls on the Commission to consider the best way of regulating this sector as soon as possible; draws the attention of the Commission to the fact that the amendment to the EASA regulation goes beyond drones alone, which might have consequences for the speed with which it is adopted;