What the BVLOS Rule Needs to Get Right for Industrial Drone Operations

Stratum Asset Intelligence runs recurring drone inspection programs for industrial and commercial facilities in Northeast Ohio. Roofs, overhead structures, crane runways, rooftop mechanical, solar arrays, tank exteriors — the assets that are hard to reach, expensive to fail, and easy to neglect. Most of those programs depend on the FAA being able to land a sensible Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) framework. So when the FAA reopened the comment period on its Part 108 proposal, we filed a formal comment.

This is the founder-readable version of that filing. The full submission is on the public docket. Here's what we think the rule needs to get right — and why it matters for any owner whose assets get inspected by drone.

Why we filed

BVLOS is the difference between a drone program that scales and a drone program that doesn't. Visual line-of-sight rules are workable for one-off flights over a single roof, but they don't fit a recurring inspection program that walks an asset register across a portfolio. The FAA's draft Part 108 framework is a serious effort to enable routine BVLOS for professional operators, and we strongly support that direction. The question is how the rule lands in detail. Industrial operators are a long way from urban package delivery on the risk profile, but the rule has to work for both.

1. Performance-based electronic conspicuity, not a single mandated radio

The FAA should set performance criteria for electronic conspicuity (EC) — minimum probability of detection, maximum update latency, effective range in cluttered low-altitude environments, reliability, self-monitoring, and interoperability with UAS Traffic Management (UTM) services. It should not lock the rule to a single radio standard such as ADS-B Out.

A performance-based standard does three things at once. It keeps innovation alive, because manufacturers can compete on how to meet the bar. It keeps cost defensible for small operators, who would otherwise be priced out by avionics designed for high-altitude manned aircraft. And it lets operators pick technology that actually fits the operation — for our planned operations (preplanned, repeatable inspection routes over industrial sites) the right EC solution may not look the same as the right one for a delivery drone over a dense suburb. Pin the outcome, not the radio.

2. A layered safety model, not a single point of mitigation

Aviation safety has always been built in layers. Procedures, training, equipage, separation, surveillance — each one fails sometimes; together they make catastrophic failure rare. The same logic should anchor BVLOS.

For industrial operations, that layering looks like: route design and altitude management on predictable, published profiles; temporal deconfliction by scheduling around low-traffic windows; geofencing and airspace coordination through UTM advisories; electronic conspicuity on both UA and manned aircraft; and ground-based surveillance where it adds value. The FAA should authorize operators to combine these layers to meet performance-based safety objectives, with the specific mix tuned to the operational environment. That's much more durable than mandating a specific onboard sensor for every flight regardless of risk.

3. Right-of-way: simple enough to teach, remember, and apply

Right-of-way was the single largest source of comment volume on the original NPRM, and the concern is justified. A right-of-way regime that varies by airspace class, EC equipage status, proximity to airports, and population density category is hard to remember in flight, hard to teach, and hard to encode into automated UTM deconfliction. Cognitive load is itself a hazard.

A simpler baseline is workable: equipped manned aircraft have right-of-way over Part 108 UAS in all airspace; UAS have right-of-way over non-equipped manned aircraft only inside designated low-altitude BVLOS corridors or reserved volumes. That keeps the traditional “less maneuverable yields to less maneuverable” intuition, gives manned operators a clear reason to equip, and is encodable in software.

4. Detect-and-avoid expectations should scale with risk

The proposal that UAS in Class B/C airspace or over Category 5 population areas detect and avoid non-cooperative aircraft is the right instinct, applied with too broad a brush. The DAA hardware that can reliably detect non-cooperative traffic at low altitude today is expensive, heavy, and power-hungry, and its real-world safety value is not yet proven across all the contexts where it would be mandated.

A risk-scaled approach gives the FAA the safety it actually wants without freezing out small operators. Robust onboard DAA where the encounter risk is real — dense mixed-use airspace, near-airport operations, urban delivery. Lower-cost, procedural, or third-party mitigations where it isn't — rural infrastructure inspection, controlled-access industrial sites, predictable repeatable routes. Network DAA, ground-based sensors, and UTM traffic advisories should be explicitly authorized where they meet the performance criteria. That's how the rule becomes economically viable for a Stratum-sized operator without softening the standard for high-risk environments.

5. Realistic transition timelines and small-operator economics

Equipage mandates can quietly become barriers to entry. The 2020 ADS-B Out rollout taught the lesson: rushed timelines created supply shortages, installation backlogs, and disproportionate cost burdens on small operators. The same can happen here.

A 24–36 month phased compliance window after final-rule publication is reasonable. Early-equipage incentives — expedited access to defined operational profiles for operators who equip ahead of the deadline — pull the market forward without coercion. And the rule should explicitly assess small-entity impact, with cost-sharing programs or lower-cost compliance pathways where appropriate. Stratum is the kind of operator the framework is supposed to enable: planned, repeatable, integrated with enterprise maintenance systems, with a strong safety culture by necessity. The rule should preserve a viable path for that profile, not assume airline-scale budgets.

Why this matters for facility owners

If you own or run a facility, the BVLOS rule isn't an aviation footnote. It's the rule that determines whether a recurring drone inspection program is viable on your assets at a price your operating budget can carry. Performance-based EC keeps the cost of equipment competitive. Layered safety keeps the operations defensible to your safety, risk, and insurance teams. Risk-scaled DAA expectations are what allow professional operators to fly your roof on a predictable cadence rather than as a one-off. Realistic transition timelines determine whether the operator you choose this year can still serve you in two years.

How this connects to Stratum's operations

Stratum's programs are designed around the safest end of the BVLOS profile by design. Preplanned, repeatable inspection routes over private industrial and commercial property. Coordinated with facility management, scheduled during low-traffic windows, flown under FAA Part 107 today and structured for Part 108 as the framework matures. Findings flow into your maintenance system as severity-rated, structured records — PDF/CSV findings for Essential Asset Watch, CMMS-ready import for Critical Asset Assurance, direct API or managed feed for the Reliability Program. Critical findings trigger an S1 alert within four hours and a written action summary within twenty-four. The regulatory work and the operational work are two halves of the same job: making industrial drone inspection a planned, defensible, repeatable function of facility operations.

Closing

The FAA's commitment to normalizing BVLOS is the right one. Getting the details right — performance-based EC, layered safety, simple right-of-way, risk-scaled DAA, realistic timelines, explicit recognition of small professional operators — is what determines whether the framework actually serves the operators it's meant to enable. Stratum stands ready to provide additional input or technical expertise as the rule moves forward.

Adapted from Stratum Asset Intelligence LLC's formal public comment to the Federal Aviation Administration, Docket No. FAA–2025–1908, Notice No. 25–07B (February 4, 2026). The full submission is on the public docket.