# Navigating BVLOS Compliance for Remote Operations Center (ROC)

- Event: NestGen ’25
- Published: March 7, 2025
- Length: 44:24
- Watch: https://nestgen.org/library/watch/6Jq7qQod2ls/

> The transcript of a recorded NestGen session, for reading or for use with an AI tool. It comes from the video's
> captions; automatic captions can mishear names and terms.

## Transcript

**[0:20]** Alright, we can get started because, you know, this is going to be recorded anyway, so people will be able to catch up on anything they may have missed. So first, for those who are just joining NestGen, welcome to NestGen 2025. It's fantastic to have so many industry representatives here today. Today's session will focus on BVLOS, or beyond visual line of sight flight, remote operations, and boxed drone solutions, with a primary focus on Australia, but we'll also touch on some of the regulations and issues in New Zealand. So, a huge thank you to the FlytBase team for organizing this event once again. Year after year, they continue to bring together innovators and operators from around the world who share this same passion for pushing the boundaries of drone technology. Today, as I mentioned, we're going to delve into what everyone should know: boxed drone operations and regulatory oversight. This space has evolved

**[1:24]** significantly in the last six years. The first approvals for boxed drones in Australia were made six or seven years ago, with companies such as Aerobotics and Perpet. But really, with the introduction of DJI's boxed drones, we're starting to see larger- scale adoption, and along with much of the regulatory change, this has also helped to accelerate these types of operations. Over the past year, we have seen many initial tests or concepts of type testing by many organizations. And look, there are still many organizations that are just starting down that path, but there are also many of you here today who are looking for those next steps, or how to scale boxed drone operations, whether with simultaneous operations or simply expanding into different areas. So today we're going to analyze, so to speak, the path we've traveled. We'll try to include something for everyone. Just a few quick logistics points. Please, let's keep this

**[2:28]** very relaxed. So, as we move forward, if you have any questions, please head to the questions and answers tab. Help me with some questions to ask them. No matter how difficult they are. Just write them down. And we'll throw all the tough questions at Luke. No, I'm just kidding, Luke. Well, first I'm going to introduce an exceptional group representing the Australian area, who focus on technological regulations and operational aspects of drone solutions. We have Luke Chaplan from Sky Kelby, Paris Cockenos from Sphere, and Dill Bishop from Hover UAV. And perhaps I forgot to introduce myself. I am Jackie Dumovich. I will moderate your session. I am the CEO of Hover UAV. And it's fantastic to be here. I have been involved in every edition for the past few years. So I'm really excited to be coming back this year and moderating this panel. Instead of reading their biographies, I will pass the floor to the panel so that each of

**[3:33]** them can introduce themselves in one or two minutes and share what they do in their organization. And also a little about his professional experience. You know what, Luke? Perhaps we can start with you. Thank you, Jackie, and hello everyone. This is the first virtual conference I've participated in. So, yes, I am the founder of Sky Kelpy. We are experts in drone herding and aerial livestock management. We are modernizing the way farmers manage their animals through technology, training, and expert advice. The concept of aerial livestock handling in Australia is a well- proven solution. It has existed since the 1970s, when experienced pilots returned from the Vietnam War and helicopter herding was adopted. It is very important for Australia's livestock ecosystem and, again, a very effective solution. In 2022, we decided

**[4:40]** to conduct trials. Sky Kelpy isn't the first to use drones to herd cows, goats, or sheep, but in 2022 we wanted to conduct some pretty sophisticated tests. Part of this was using the best commercial drone technology available on the market. And then test it on a variety of terrains and livestock species. As part of testing the concept, do animals move away from drones as a legitimate form of pressure? When we talk about livestock management, we refer to someone on a motorcycle, helicopter, or horse as a form of pressure. And we demonstrated that a drone is simply another form of pressure that causes animals to move. But some of those tests were a bit like a case study on how we can do this in a regulatory way. Oh, and we work with the Hover UAV team. So, since the beginning

**[5:41]** of this whole crazy thing, I've worked with Jackie and the Hover UAV team, and we managed to get approval for beyond visual line of sight flights for two of my properties in Northwest Queensland. But it was quite a long and extensive process, and we decided that it is probably a barrier to adoption. But that's basically all about me. We have been experimenting with the docking bases more as a proof of concept to demonstrate it to the agricultural and technology industry. Look what we can do from a remote location. In fact, we can take manual control and then that drone is just another form of pressure, and we had another successful demonstration last week. Live demonstrations always have a bit of pressure , but it was great and we also partnered with Hover UAV for that. So that's me. Yes, perfect. And perhaps we'll delve deeper into some of those points as well. Luke is great, he didn't really give himself a big biography, but you know, he's been around for a while.

**[6:44]** He's, you know, a great rodeo rider too . Well, I'm retired, but thanks. Very good. Paris, maybe we'll come with you. You have been present for a long time. Too long, some would say. But yes, look, it's a pleasure to be here. Thank you so much, Jackie. In fact, I met Jackie; I know we were reminiscing about him not too long ago. Probably almost 10 years ago, when we both founded our businesses independently. So, all those years ago, I remember Jackie walking in with little Bob and handing him over to Elliot, our chief remote pilot, and having a professional chat with Elliot in our offices. But, you know, we founded in 2014, I think not too long before you founded your business, Jackie. But, you know, we started our journey simply by selling drones, DJI's traditional product, selling and distributing it. Well, but really as time has passed , we have evolved into an

**[7:49]** organization that focuses on what is really needed to operate technology remotely. And well, when we look at the products within our portfolio, we are DJI distributors. We sell the product, the business product, the agricultural product, but also the underlying operational technology. And we have developed a couple of products focused on the future of autonomous technology operation: our software platform called Curo, which serves to manage the compliance frameworks that the Civil Aviation Security Authority defines as part of the requirements of Remote Operations Centers, in addition to traditional means of compliance; and also HubX, a self-sufficient trailer-type platform that allows you to take an asset anywhere and operate it without needing to connect it to the electrical grid or the internet. It's a comprehensive solution. So, between the two, Curo as a software platform and

**[8:52]** HubX as a mobile platform deployable anywhere, both really take care of deploying technologies in remote and real environments. And, you know, with the team we have in our organization, our chief remote pilot, our product managers, we have a couple of approvals for beyond-line-of-sight flights that we are currently developing and operating from our remote operations center here in Sydney, Australia. If I pause and step aside for a second, our organization is quite extensive. We have a consolidated multidisciplinary team of 43 members across the organization, focused on mechatronics, engineering, software development, production and manufacturing of systems, in addition to our remote operations center. These are very exciting times for us as an Australian manufacturing company, similar to Sky Kelpy and Hover OV. We are really taking on the industry and the landscape, as Luke would probably say , by taking the

**[9:52]** bull by the horns. So I'm very excited about what's happening and, yes, thank you very much for having me. No, perfect. And I think we'll delve deeper into some of those areas, such as their case and the additional elements they require for remote operations, such as communications, in some of the questions as well. Let's move on to , uh, Dylan. Hello everyone. I'm Dylan Bishop. I am one of the consultants here at Hobby UAV. I just want to thank you for the invitation to present here today. It's incredible to see how about three and a half years ago, when I started, I watched NestGen, and now I can present on it as someone who has worked extensively in the BVLOS space with regulators, including CASA, the CIA, and even in Europe as well. I'm very excited to share a little more today about the regulatory process, some of the challenges we face, some of the progress we've made in recent years, and I'm especially excited to be presenting alongside Luke, who was actually the first BVLOS case I personally

**[10:53]** worked on. So, it's good to see you again, Luke. Did you know ? I hadn't even noticed that . Yes, in fact, I think it was one of the fastest we were able to complete . Um, perfect. Okay, let 's get started, you know, and set the context. In other words, this has a more Australian approach and we're going to analyze that from beyond the line of sight. So, for anyone new to the industry, to operate anything outside of those standard operating conditions, you need to have a remote operation certificate, which allows you to apply for additional approvals such as extended visual line of sight and BVLOS. Um, I'm going to quickly move on to the panel. And Luke, you know that in Australia BVLOS is still, um, you know, area-specific. And many organizations, especially if they sell products, or if they are trying to adapt to new customers, or if they are trying to incorporate new farmers and things like that , many have opted for the extended visual line of sight. Um, would you like to

**[11:55]** explain to everyone, Luke, what this extended visual line of sight is, and maybe a little bit about the demo you did this week and how it worked? Yes, it got cut a little bit there, Jackie. But, uh, let's talk a little bit about the extended visual line of sight. Did you say that? Yes. And look, why is that sometimes a big step forward? And then I'll ask Dylan after you to talk about beyond the line of sight . So, more or less, what is extended line of sight? And why is it useful for people in those demonstrations or things like that? Yes, well, I guess, as you said, it's very site-specific with BVLOS, so having a little flexibility to, you know, maybe spark interest in people who want to be contractors in their local area. So, good luck trying to get each BVLOS client to be site-specific. Working under that regulation, under EVLOS, when we talk about herding animals with drones, we are not talking about getting rid of all the staff,

**[13:01]** the dogs or the horses. It's simply another very effective tool to have on hand. So, if we still have personnel on the ground, they can be used as additional observers under EVLOS. You can talk a little more extensively about that, the details, but I think it's up to 1500 meters and you can go further. So, inside the pasture, we can have observers. I think, in the context of the demonstration, it's really great. I think it's mainly so I can showcase this at these conferences I'm doing with the tech community, who find it quite interesting. We went to CASA and requested a mobile remote operations center, which basically means I can control the drone remotely, set up anywhere as long as I have very strong control over the environmental conditions. So not only do I have to have backup power for

**[14:06]** my monitors and computers, and backup internet with good speed, but I also have to make sure I don't get distracted. If I'm on a field trip and some people want to come up and talk to me, that's really not possible. But yes, that's basically what EVLOS means to many of my clients. I didn't talk much about what Skyelpy does, but much like Par Paris did in its early days, and I think still does, we're resellers and we're pretty agnostic when it comes to technology. Obviously DJI: very good drones, easy to use, affordable and ready to fly. We are about to launch an online course that will teach a bit about the technology , review the regulations, flying skills, but above all, livestock handling and how to use pressure in an animal's flight zone to achieve a good result. And we have a great training simulator that we're very excited to announce to the world right now, or soon , or whenever that

**[15:07]** happens. But many of my clients fly under the exclusion category. I'm sure many people know the landowner rule. Where you use your own drone on your property, or you have control of the land, you are leasing it, or you are employed by the manager or owner. But, once again, as you said before, Jackie, you must operate under standard operating conditions . So, flying up to 400 feet is not a problem for us. We never need to go higher than that. But it's just a matter of maintaining line of sight. Many of my clients, many of them farmers, say they have very good eyesight, and that's great , but I'm not just advocating for increased farm safety through the use of drones, I also want to keep the aviation community safe . I think the ball is a bit in the regulator's court. And I believe that when regulations begin to hinder the economic productivity of various sectors, we need to move faster. I've had a

**[16:10]** good experience with the regulator. I think they're doing the best they can with their resources, but I'm starting to try and push a little to, I don't know, maybe improve things. I see that some questions are coming in about FAA sections 107 and 108. Just a reminder, I might touch on that topic at the end. We are focusing on this within the Australian regulatory context. I think there's a session during US hours . The U.S. will also be based on those regulations. But please, if you have specific questions, I might be able to answer some things about the US at the end. Okay, Dylan, maybe we can come over to talk more about what people have already decided, you know, when they have a use case, whether it's in a farm like Luke wants, or in utilities, or mining, they already have their use case. What is that first step and what is the process for them to obtain approval for beyond visual line of sight flights?

**[17:12]** Yes of course. If we can take a macro view first, as you mentioned , any type of operation outside of standard conditions will require you to hold a RIO in order to carry it out. So your first step is to establish a RIO for your organization . That will allow you to fly with direct vision and at night from the start, and that's when we start adding extra features like EVLOS and BVLOS. The steps to obtaining your first BVLOS approval really begin with initial planning on what type of operation you want to carry out and where you want to carry it out . As we've discussed, a BVLOS approval is specific to an area. You can have multiple BVLOS approvals in different areas, but when you submit an application to the regulator, you will need a defined area. You can also include multiple areas in the same request, but you won't have the flexibility to choose a very large area or request coverage for all of Australia, for example. You will need to have a defined

**[18:13]** operational area where you will be flying. Then you move on to the process of performing the analysis of that area using the SORA methodology, which is the one that Australia and many other nations have adopted. The SORA methodology is about meeting a predetermined risk outcome , which is one incident per million flight hours. And that is done through a ground risk analysis and air risk analysis for the chosen specific area or areas, analyzing the impact if the aircraft were to hit someone. You then get a final ground risk score and an air risk score, which translates into your SAIL level. At the moment, SAIL II, which is the risk outcome of a SORA security case, is probably the most popular outcome we see across Australia right now . There are some SAIL III aircraft in development, but the SAIL II is, for example, what Luke's approval is based on, and it 's a fairly achievable level of safety for flying beyond visual line of sight. Once your safety case is finalized and accepted

**[19:18]** by the regulator, the next step, if this is your first time flying BVLOS, is to conduct a flight assessment with a CASA inspector. They will usually go to a test site, which may be a small section of the area you requested or a different site , to monitor your BVLOS flight and ask you to simulate how you would act in abnormal procedures. If any type of emergency arises and once the test is passed, you will be granted your BVLOS rating so that you can continue training your staff internally to fly beyond line of sight and plan and execute those missions. I think one of the things that surprises people most about beyond-sight flying is that the flying itself is not the most difficult element. The most difficult element is all the planning , the engagement with stakeholders, and everything you need to have ready before you make those flights. So, after you complete your security case and are ready for your

**[20:19]** first BVLOS flight, you will need to follow all of your operations planning procedures for that flight with CASA. Typically, there are elements in a flight beyond the line of sight that have not been performed during standard operations. Things like carrying out all elements of your stakeholder engagement plan , especially if you fly near an airfield. You will need to contact anyone you have identified as a stakeholder in the area, usually about 3 days before flying, to inform them. So that, in case of any conflict, it can be resolved in advance. Another element is that, as with all area approvals, you will need to submit a NOTAM, which means learning how to write and comply with those NOTAM data quality requirements . And of course, if it's a large organization that operates, say , 10 to 20 BVLOS flights a day across a large number of sites, it should probably consider becoming a NOTAM issuer to publish them directly. Otherwise, you will have to do it through the ARPAS group. Once you have

**[21:22]** completed all the planning, paperwork, stakeholder engagement, and NOTAM approval, it will be time for the beyond-line-of-sight flight, where you will follow specific procedures different from those for visual flight, with more detailed information on abnormal conditions. Yes, perfect. Thank you for that. Look, when we talk about drones in boxes, it's going to be a lot. You know, many people may imagine that they are sitting in a command center or a remote operations center. You have your box either on a farm, in a mine, or somewhere else. So, obviously, that can be included in an over-the-line flight approval. Or sometimes people already have that approval and might want to add it . Paris, you mentioned in your introduction that you have a remote operations center. Do you want to talk about what's in that remote operations center or what additional equipment is needed when you set up a site, what's on-site and what 's in the remote center? Yes, of course, and I'll probably start with establishing a functional operations

**[22:25]** center and what that requires. Often it's about how the person inside the remote operations center is interacting with the controls interface. And it's really about setting up the environment and making it comfortable for the operator, just like any other workplace requirement. You want your team to be comfortable. You want your people to be comfortable. And some of the things required by the security authority, as Luke identified, are having backup power redundancies , connectivity redundancies, but also, generally, you can see me shaking here. Our remote operations center is quite cold . The climate and environmental control must be good enough so that the operator behind the interface does not necessarily have any external influence or control over how it is operating. So make sure the user is comfortable in the remote operations

**[23:29]** center and has the right equipment to support them. Then, backup batteries , internet, electrical connectivity, and then redundancies in the architecture of the programs, etc. And Jackie, just to clarify, do you want me to talk about the systems when they're deployed and what we're looking for in that regard, or should I just focus on the remote operations center? Yes, plus the remote center, but I suppose it would be great to explain to people that, as part of the regulatory process, you need to manage the air and ground risks that Dylan mentioned. Well, you know, when you work from a remote operations center, additional requirements arise that you might not need if you're on-site. Yes, of course, and thank you for that, Jackie. And to talk a little more about air and ground risk, a large part of it is having connectivity with that common operational picture of the environment where you operate, from a line-of-sight perspective beyond the site. Therefore, having air band radio and radio over IP connectivity. Being able to communicate on the

**[24:30]** frequency the drone is using in the environment, but also having clarity about any air traffic in that local area. Specifically on our HubX platform, we have an air band radio and an ADSB antenna. The ADSB antenna captures all ADSB traffic and common operational traffic within and around the area of ​​ operations. That is to support air risk management and also to support ground operational risk. The DJI base itself has a built-in camera. This allows for a line of sight of everything in front of the system. But another thing we do behind the scenes is a 360 camera that gives us a full 360-degree field of view around the drone. Another thing we've included is: how can we support our pre- flight procedures and perform checks, simple things you would traditionally do if you had someone on the ground? Check the propellers, the batteries, and verify that the system chassis is completely intact. In fact, we use a PTZ camera to

**[25:33]** inspect some of those items as part of our pre-flight checks and requirements. There are many other things we do from a reliability, redundancy, and uptime perspective, which I'll probably be able to talk about a little later. But that's just a summary. Look, you mentioned connectivity, and it's a fundamental part of remote and beyond line-of- sight operations, and how all of this comes together. So, Dylan or Luke, I ask you: what kind of connection are you using? How do you make it work in the middle of the farms? Do you need connectivity, Luke? How do you manage it? Does either of you want to comment on this? If that's alright with you, Luke, I could first describe what your regulatory requirement is , and then you can tell us more about how you managed to meet it . Definitely. Yes. Great. Well, from the standpoint of obtaining that BVLOS loss approval, one element of your SORA security case will be to demonstrate that you

**[26:37]** meet a certain level of security. For example, SAIL 2. And what that means from the control center's point of view is that you must be able to prove that you are below a certain latency level for a complete command cycle. That is , to recognize something in the camera transmission or in the ADS-B of your drone, interpret it in the control center and then send the command back to the drone. That complete command cycle and how long it takes is a very important element of your SORA that any controller will want to understand before even moving on to flight evaluation. And there are a variety of different ways in which you can measure that. Many programs already have that cycle time built in , which is commonly known as latency, and yes, for a SAIL 2, your expected latency is less than 5,000 milliseconds. So Luke, if you'd like to talk a little bit about what connectivity options you use to ensure you get those results in your own setup, that would be great. Yes, I

**[27:38]** think...well, I think Paris is probably better positioned. You know, the main demonstrations we've done of control centers and drones. These are just a few examples, really just to show where the technology is and a very interesting use case that we see developing. But we use Starlink. You know, Starlink has definitely revolutionized rural and remote areas of Australia. We've had problems for a long time, ever since the birth of the internet there. And it's been incredible, it's great to see how it's progressing and I'm excited to see the direct cellular connection trials they're already doing in the US, potentially in Australia too, and how they're going to improve that. I think that's very exciting. But I think that on specific drone issues, Paris could... No, it's fine. Look, maybe we should move on. I know there's a question there, and it actually relates to my next question as well. There is, you know, a lack of

**[28:38]** clarity at the moment. You know, how people might feel that the return on investment has slowed the adoption of remote operations centers and things like that. So maybe I'll pass the word to Dylan right away . So, what we know for now is that many of the tests have been done, you know, one operator per drone. And, you know, when it comes to investing in all this communication equipment, Starlink and the base station, it can be quite expensive. So, what's next? Well, obviously, simultaneous or one-to- many operations. Do you want to explain to everyone what that means and how to get approval for it? Yes, of course, one-to- many operations involve your remote pilot controlling multiple drones. They are sometimes also known as swarm operations and can take many different forms. We're talking about light shows, where you have a group of drones in one place and you command them all at the same time, usually through a highly automated control system where you have programmed a route in advance and they

**[29:43]** simply follow it. But the other element, particularly for beyond-line-of-sight flight, is how we bridge the gap of one pilot controlling, say, four drones in entirely different parts of the country performing potentially different tasks. One on surveillance, one performing a mapping mission, and perhaps another that you manually control to go and inspect a specific piece of infrastructure. So, to gain one-to-many approval, the critical component will be the human-machine interface and how well designed the software platform that enables ground control is. Because when considering the understanding of the airspace, who is in it, the ground hazards, and who is in the area, the complexity of the task for the pilot begins to increase very rapidly. That's why it's essential to have planned flight routes, automation integrated into your system, and robust procedures for transferring control of

**[30:45]** drones that are not in crisis, so you can address any specific abnormal situation that arises in another drone. So there are quite a few factors involved in the one-to- many approval. We could probably talk about that for hours, but the main components will be how well their software automates as many tasks as possible so that the pilot takes on a controlling role for that airspace, rather than someone manually flying the drone. And also, how robust are your procedures for demonstrating to the regulator that having five or six drones flying in different airspaces at different times is still safe for you, the operator, and for everyone else sharing that airspace. Yes, that's perfect. I mean, and then you'll start to see those cost savings come about. Probably another thing that will help make that remote operation of sending the drone in the box viable is getting very quick approvals as well. So... I guess

**[31:46]** if I can talk about scalability for a second, if that's alright with you . Something we talk about a lot is in terms of cost savings. But where we see a lot of desire in the industry for its application is in maintaining or increasing the same number of pilots, but using these automated systems to do much more with the pilots we already have. This will open doors for clients who are involved in a large number of sites, performing a large number of similar patrols, allowing them to take on more work for their own clients by monitoring those sites. And something else that I think will be critical to the whole BVLOS process that often comes up is that there is a waiting period when it comes to getting regulatory approval anywhere, particularly in Australia at the moment. And we're looking at ways to streamline that. Regulators are doing an incredible job trying to issue these approvals faster. But one of the ways to ensure your approvals are better positioned is to guarantee the use of a consistent format, that no

**[32:50]** elements of your SORA are missing, which is where we see a lot of time wasted in a BVLOS approval: filling in elements that you may have omitted or were unaware of when addressing that SORA process . For example, we work on a tool called Soromate, which you can use to streamline your own BVLOS requests and also lowers the barrier to entry considerably for anyone approaching this for the first time, by providing a guided approach to SORA. Yes. No, perfect. I have another question. It seems like I could throw this at you, Paris, but feel free to reply too if you want. Um, it's from an anonymous person, but it says, "What kind of meteorological integrations are needed to get BVLOS approval?" Um, so again, I'll probably lean on Dylan to explain this better, but a lot of it has to do with managing air risk. The best way we try to describe it to our clients and any prospect is: the person at the remote operations center should have as

**[33:50]** good a perception as if they were on the ground, where the drone operates. The way we cover those aspects is by obtaining information about whether there is lightning in the air. Is it raining in the area? What is the system temperature? Will the system work? Um, and I guess from a compliance perspective, Dylan, I'll probably pass the ball to you at this point. Yes. Yes. From a compliance standpoint, it will be part of the minimum conditions and limitations for your operation. Therefore, you will have a prescribed weather requirement that accompanies your BVLOS approval. And it may vary slightly for each BVLOS approval . Sometimes, a reason to fly beyond line of sight is because you are flying in adverse weather conditions. Um, but as you can imagine, when you do that to mitigate air risk, your measures to identify other aircraft or segregate that airspace must be much stricter. In general, if we return to that operational space where we manage multiple sites at once. What this usually means is that you need the

**[34:51]** ability to get live weather data on site. Many of the remote operations solutions , which Paris can speak to regarding the on- site station, have integrated weather systems that give you information about wind and precipitation. And, of course, the ability to look directly through the camera system will tell you everything you need to know about the cloud base. Um, and also, whenever possible, you'll get that information from aviation weather services. But when you set up equipment in the middle of nowhere for extremely remote work, that's where you start relying on the hardware integrated into the various solutions available to say: I know my wind is 10 meters per second right now . And I know my clearance is for 12 meters per second, so I'm ready to begin my operation, but it's something I need to keep an eye on because, you know, there could be gusts, and I need to be prepared and aware of what my procedure will be if that happens. Perfect. And thanks to the person, the question is not in English. So I've had to use

**[35:51]** quick GPT chat translations to try and understand it. I don't know if the translation is correct, but I know it says TMPR. So , I guess, Dylan, I'll pass the buck. Do you want to talk about TMPR requirements in Sora and what you can use to meet them? Yes. For your tactical mitigation performance requirements, the number of aircraft, or rather, the percentage of aircraft you need to be able to identify in an area varies depending on the SORA result you achieve. In that area of ​​ SORA, which is what's popular in Australia right now, you need to be able to detect 50% of aircraft. And there are several different ways to achieve this, but you also need to be able to demonstrate to the regulator that your detection method will work. So something we demanded from the beginning was the ADSB, which is an incredible tool. It is the gold standard of detection because you get all the information about where the aircraft is headed and exactly where its position is. But it's part of the nature of

**[36:53]** working in Australia to know that less than 20% of aircraft have ADSB. So if you can reach that first 17 or 18%—I don't remember exactly what the initial figure is —you know you can put ADSB in your product and you'll capture that 18%. To obtain the other 32%, you must consider: first, can your airspace be segregated in such a way that aircraft detection is really low anyway? Or second, how do you get the kind of awareness you would have if you were in the field operating in VLOS? And the best solution, by far, has been remote aviation radio. So, if you have the ability to place a radio in the field and make it as if your pilot were right there talking, then you have the ability to communicate with aircraft in the same way that they communicate with each other and with drones on the ground. However, one of the elements that becomes very important when deploying that radio is knowing its limitations. We use visual basins as a tool to predict, based on the radio equipment

**[37:56]** we have, how far we can hear and depending on the type of operation. Do we create an area large enough to effectively identify incoming aircraft and thus meet the 50% requirement? There are other detection technologies , such as AI cameras, that we have not yet fully explored in our projects. But the main ones, for the time being, will continue to be the use of ADSB where available and aviation radio if possible. Perfect. Thank you, Dylan. Look, we only have a few minutes left. So please note that after this, Dylan, myself, Paris, and Luke, if you want to join, will be available. We will be on another panel where you can ask questions. We'll be there to chat about any regulatory issues. So I'll pass the word to Paris and Luke to ask them: what's your next step? Luke, you recently mentioned a new application, a kind of game or simulator, which I think will be fundamental, since it is necessary

**[39:01]** to have skills and practice different scenarios. What's next for you? Can you give us a quick summary? They have two minutes and then we'll move on to Paris's final comments. Thank you, Jackie. I'll be brief. We have developed a training simulator for cattle herding; Given the physics of drones and our ability to customize environments, we are excited to create bespoke simulators. We work with many people in the industry and would love to talk to anyone interested in that virtual skills development space. Together with the Queensland government and Meat and Livestock Australia, we are developing autonomous herding software for drones. I call it "Tesla on the road," it's not total autonomy. But it will be another

**[40:06]** really exciting and useful tool. And again, you know, we try to develop everything in a somewhat modular way that might be adaptable to other autonomous applications, but autonomy and regulations are a separate issue, and Jackie knows that well. But anyway, that's all, and yes, thank you very much for the opportunity. It was great chatting with all of you on the panel and with everyone in the audience . Yes, perfect. Paris, do you have any thoughts on that? What's next for you? Where do you think the boxed drone market is headed in the coming years? Yes. Yes. Well, I think we mentioned it earlier, as things expand towards large-scale adoption. When we look at certain industries that took the initiative and seized the opportunity, the mining sector is definitely one where we see a massive impact. And we tell our customers that right now it's a one-to-one operation with manually operated drones,

**[41:10]** but as we move towards this state of autonomy and boxed drones. The real challenge from a compliance standpoint is that autonomous drones will eventually become democratized. So let's pause for a second and think about what that means. If you have a timeshare with several families on a property in, say, Thredbo or the Swiss Alps, you have a property for many families. And what that complex perspective really means is that you have multiple stakeholders within an organization who want to use this democratized platform, I.e., the boxed drone, and it all revolves around the education and training of those who want to use that technology. And I feel that, as time goes on, education and community development, and what's happening at this NextGen event where we're educating people, is where we'll build a lot of confidence in the direction of this

**[42:11]** product. I believe patience is a virtue, and as we move forward , it will be the audience we have here that will drive the success of the industry. And it's organizations like Skylar, Kelpy, and Hover UAV that can support—and I say we too— you can support them to scale, to scale yourselves through this journey, and it's the exposure we have to the nature of compliance that can really support you. So, thanks again to Jackie, Dylan, and Luke for being on the panel, and also to the entire audience. It really has been a great, great opportunity. Yes, and I think that's a great point to end on, Paris. If you're just starting to do this, you 're not alone in it. As you know, there are many people who have already gone through this or are going through it now. So, you know, give them a call. There are no silly questions, so call and talk to the Sphere team or us, or other people and learn more. We know you probably have a lot of regulatory questions right now. So Dylan

**[43:15]** and I will stay, like I said, later. We will probably talk about where we see the future of regulatory SORA, SORA 2 versus SORA 2.5. Speaking of moving away from these single-area operations beyond the visual line of sight. What does the future hold for BVLOS self-assessment , so that they don't have to wait for regulatory approval? So, if you have specific questions about exact components of the framework, please stay; you'll have to leave and rejoin the other session, but jump in and ask. It was great, thanks to Paris, Luke and Dylan for joining me for this session. Once again, thank you to FlytBase for bringing everyone together every year. You know, it's all about collaboration. It's the only way we can all move forward together. I just think I finished at the perfect time. So thank you all. Thanks guys. Thank you.