Subject: Background of the Swiss AltMoC & SORA 2.5 containment requirements
From: "Maarika Rump" <[email-masked]>
To: "Maarika Rump" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2024 15:09:13 +0300

From: Ott Tahk <[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]> >
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2024 9:59 AM
To: Priit Rifk <[email-masked] 
<mailto:[email-masked]> >
Cc: Andrei Bljahhin <[email-masked] 
<mailto:[email-masked]> >; Mait Rõõmus 
<[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]> >; 
Marko Liiva <[email-masked] 
<mailto:[email-masked]> >; Olga Tkach 
<[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]> >
Subject: Fwd: Background of the Swiss AltMoC & SORA 2.5 containment 
requirements

Tere!

Šveitsis, Saksamaal ja Hollandis (võib-olla juba ka mujal, aga neid 3 ma 
tean) on vastu võetud AltMoC, et muuta neid päästikuid mis nõuavad 
täiustatud isolatsiooni kasutamist.

See analüüs on välja toodud SORA 2.5 Annex F lk 71-91 ja Expl. note lk 
13-21.

Sellega seoses,

1. kas on kuulda olnud millal SORA 2.5 võiks AMC-na välja tulla ja millises 
vormis (mingid kuulujutud on, aga muidu on infovaakum EASA poolelt) - kas 
asendab senist AMC1 art 11 või tuleb lisaks? Kas on mingi üleminekuperiood 
plaanis või jäävad mõlemad variandid paralleelselt kasutusse?

2. kas seni võiks olla perspektiivi kasutada sama AltMoC ka Eestis - 
Copy-Paste? Pinnapealselt tundub mulle see olevat üsna lihtne, aga ehk saate 
oma arvamust ja seisukohti avada. Kui kaua AltMoC heakskiit umbes aega 
võtaks, kuidas seda protsessi alustada ja kas/mis see maksaks?

Meie mure on seotud hetkel peamiselt Wingtra drooniga, millele ei ole tootja 
paigaldanud, ja ka 3. osapooltelt pole leida MoC2511 FTS.

Lugupidamisega

Ott Tahk

MÕS käitamisjuht

Eesti Lennuakadeemia

+372 5562 3042

---------- Forwarded message ---------
Saatja: Henri Hohtari <[email-masked] 
<mailto:[email-masked]> >
Date: N, 3. oktoober 2024 kell 17:07
Subject: Background of the Swiss AltMoC & SORA 2.5 containment requirements
To: <[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]> >, 
<[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]> >
Cc: Rosen Petkov <[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]> 
 >, Mohamed Thoraia <[email-masked] 
<mailto:[email-masked]> >

Hi,

Here is some background for the AltMoC and its conception starting from the 
JARUS work that eventually led to the published SORA 2.5 containment 
requirements.

The Swiss AltMoC 
<https://www.bazl.admin.ch/dam/bazl/en/dokumente/Drohnen/specific/sora/uas-altmoc-sora-step9-containment.pdf.download.pdf/UAS-AltMoC%E2%80%93001-SORA-Containment-Risk%20Assessment.pdf> 
which was also adopted by Germany 
<https://www.lba.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/B/B5_UAS/AltMoC_Containment_Eng_20230301.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=3> 
was created to bring faster as applicable SORA 2.5 Containment requirements 
by the respective CAAs. This was done because the understanding of the real 
risk regarding fly-away failures was being analyzed in JARUS and found out 
to be negligible and thus the requirements for independent FTS as mostly 
unnecessary.

SORA 2.5 will bring these changes soon to EASA regulation anyway, but here 
listed the linkage from the AltMoC to the coming SORA 2.5 containment 
requirements justification.

* JARUS SORA 2.5 package, Annex F pages 71-91 
<http://jarus-rpas.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/SORA-v2.5-Annex-F-Release.JAR_doc_29pdf.pdf> 
for adjacent ground areas risk analysis and justification for limits.

* JARUS SORA 2.5 package 
<http://jarus-rpas.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/SORA-v2.5-Explanatory-Note-Release-JAR_Doc_32.pdf> 
Explanatory Note pages 13-21 for adjacent airspace risk analysis and 
justification for limits(or lack of limits).

SORA 2.5 and the AltMoC uses the distinction "large assemblies of people" 
because the intent of the operation is not to fly over an assembly of 
people, but some distance from it and thus the likelihood that a fly-away 
drone happens to crash over an assembly of people is proportional to the 
size of the assembly. In fact, if the assembly is not large enough the 
analysis does not show any significant change in the at-risk population 
density when compared to a typical city.

The JARUS SORA 2.5 Explanatory Note pages 13-21 show several analyses for 
the most dense airspaces in the world with a hypothetical fly-away through 
them showing the "Basic" / Low containment requirements already meeting the 
target level of safety. Thus any airspace link to containment requirements 
was removed from SORA 2.5. The 150m AGL limit was set in the Swiss AltMoC 
mainly due to the limitation of the analysis method used at the time of its 
creation, but the later added new simulations to the SORA 2.5 work showed 
that the altitude does not matter for fly-away risk. Thus the altitude limit 
was also removed from final published SORA 2.5.

Best regards,

Henri

 <http://www.wingtra.com/>

Henri Hohtari

Senior Regulatory Compliance Manager

T: +41 76 5808 270

E:  <mailto:[email-masked]> [email-masked]

 <http://www.wingtra.com/> wingtra.com

---

Kiri on saadetud väljastpoolt valitsemisala.  Ärge avage kirjaga kaasa 
tulnud linke või manuseid enne, kui olete saatja õigsuses ja sisu 
turvalisuses kindel.