EU EASA rules for agricultural drone operations

EU drone regulatory system overview

EU drone rules follow a risk-based, operation-centred system. The planned flight drives the route through the rules. The fact that a flight supports farming does not, by itself, settle its category.

EASA describes lower-risk civil drone operations as falling within the ‘open’ category. Riskier civil operations fall within the ‘specific’ category. Operators must therefore assess how they intend to fly, not just what work the aircraft will do.

The EU framework covers aircraft flown remotely and aircraft designed to fly autonomously. It also covers radio-controlled fixed-wing aircraft, helicopters and gliders, with or without an onboard camera. A lack of imaging gear does not put an aircraft outside the drone rules.

What counts as the UAS

The rules use ‘unmanned aircraft system’, or UAS, for more than the aircraft. The term includes the drone, its control system and the other gear used to operate it. A command unit and launch equipment can therefore form part of the UAS.

This wider meaning matters when an operator describes a farm mission. The documents should deal with the system used for the flight, rather than treating the aircraft as an isolated item. Operators comparing aircraft and system data can use the site’s Drone specifications section, while checking all relevant details against current regulatory material.

EASA also separates the operator from the remote pilot. An operator can be a person or an organisation that owns or rents the drone. The operator and remote pilot may be the same person, but they do not have to be.

Where the EU system applies

The EU Drone Regulations have applied across EU Member States since 31 December 2020. They replaced national drone rules, though Member States retain room to set some local measures. These can cover geographical zones, insurance needs, minimum pilot age and fines.

The framework also applies in Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Iceland through their links with the EASA system. Operators should still work with the relevant national authority. The common framework does not remove every national step.

How EASA agricultural drone rules are structured: open vs specific categories

The first task is to decide whether the whole operation fits the ‘open’ category. That decision must reflect the planned flight and its setting. An operator should not assume that work over farmland is low risk merely because the site is rural.

The ‘open’ category has three subcategories: A1, A2 and A3. Each supports different types of operation and applies needs based on risk. The full applicable ‘open’ category needs entered into force on 1 January 2024.

Before an ‘open’ category flight, EASA tells operators to register as a drone operator. The operator registration number must be put on the drone. It must also be loaded into Remote ID when the aircraft has that system.

When the specific route becomes relevant

The ‘specific’ category covers riskier civil drone operations. This is where the PDRA route can help, provided a published PDRA covers the planned work.

EASA’s published examples show why the operating method matters. Agricultural work appears among the typical uses for several PDRAs. Yet each one sets different UAS and operating traits, such as VLOS or BVLOS flight, ground control and airspace conditions.

Operators must compare the complete mission with the published scope. A loose match with the words ‘agricultural works’ is not enough. The aircraft traits, flight method, operating area and airspace must also align with the selected PDRA.

The wider Guides index can support early mission planning. For the legal route, however, the operator should use the EASA material and the instructions from its National Aviation Authority.

Using PDRA instead of doing a full risk assessment

A Predefined Risk Assessment is an operating scenario that EASA has already assessed. EASA publishes it as an acceptable means of compliance to Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2019/947. It gives operators a set route for showing that a covered operation is safe.

The main gain is narrower paperwork, not freedom from oversight. When a published PDRA covers the mission, the operator does not have to carry out that risk assessment again. The operator instead completes the PDRA table and builds the required procedures into an Operations Manual.

The operation still needs operational authorisation from the National Aviation Authority. The operator submits its application to the authority in its state of registration. A PDRA therefore simplifies the authorisation route but does not replace it.

Published examples relevant to agriculture

The published PDRA list includes several scenarios that name agricultural work as a typical operation. They are not interchangeable. Their main traits differ as follows:

• PDRA-S01 covers VLOS work over a controlled ground area, including over a populated area. It covers controlled or uncontrolled airspace below 150 m AGL.
• PDRA-S02 covers BVLOS work up to 1 km, or 2 km with airspace observers. It uses a controlled ground area over a sparsely populated area and covers airspace below 150 m AGL.
• PDRA-G03 covers BVLOS work over a sparsely populated area. It applies in controlled or uncontrolled airspace close to obstacles as set out in the PDRA.

Agricultural work appears among the typical operations for each of these examples. That label does not confirm that a given farm mission fits. The operator must test the proposed operation against every applicable condition in the PDRA.

The published table also gives UAS traits. PDRA-S01 and PDRA-G03 specify a maximum dimension of 3 m. PDRA-S02 specifies an MTOM of 25 kg and a maximum dimension of 3 m.

These figures are screening points, not a full account of each PDRA. Operators need the published assessment itself when preparing an application. The summary table helps identify a possible route, but the PDRA supplies the detail.

Operations Manual expectations under PDRA

EASA describes the PDRA table as a form of checklist for the Operations Manual. It sets out the procedures that the operator needs to develop and include. The manual should therefore follow the selected PDRA rather than a generic farm-drone template.

The practical sequence is clear:

• confirm that a published PDRA covers the planned operation;
• complete the relevant PDRA table;
• turn its conditions into operating procedures;
• prepare the Operations Manual;
• submit the application to the National Aviation Authority.

This sequence keeps the evidence tied to the proposed mission. It also gives the authority a structured set of documents to review. EASA says the PDRA route can simplify that review for the authority as well as the work for the applicant.

Using the PDRA table to build procedures

Treat each row in the table as a point that needs a clear answer. The manual should show how the operator will meet the condition in actual work. It should not merely copy the wording without explaining the planned procedure.

The flight method is one core point. If the PDRA is based on VLOS, the procedures must reflect VLOS work. If it covers BVLOS with airspace observers, the manual needs procedures built around that stated operating method.

The area on the ground is another core point. Published PDRAs refer to controlled ground areas, populated areas and sparsely populated areas. The selected manual must match the ground setting named in the assessment.

Airspace is also part of the PDRA scope. Some published examples distinguish controlled from uncontrolled airspace or require segregated airspace. Others define how the aircraft operates close to obstacles.

EASA’s example manual

EASA provides an example Operations Manual for UAS work under PDRA-S01. Operators can use it as a reference when setting out their own manual. Its value is in showing how a PDRA can be turned into written procedures.

An example is not proof that a different operation meets the same conditions. The operator still has to describe its own system, mission and procedures. The final manual must support the application sent to the National Aviation Authority.

EASA says a PDRA helps applicants develop both the manual and the evidence of compliance. That link is important. The Operations Manual explains what the operator will do, while the supporting evidence shows how the proposed operation meets the selected route.

Regulatory harmonisation through EASA AMC and GM updates

ED Decision 2023/012/R updates the acceptable means of compliance and guidance material linked to the drone rules. Its stated aim is to maintain a high level of safety for UAS work in the ‘open’ and ‘specific’ categories. It is also intended to improve harmonisation in how Regulation (EU) 2019/947 is put into effect.

This matters for operators preparing repeatable farm procedures. A common framework helps authorities and applicants work from the same structure. It does not remove the need to submit an authorisation application where the ‘specific’ category route calls for one.

EASA also publishes guidelines for work in the ‘open’ and ‘specific’ categories. Issue 3 is dated 17 July 2025 and includes amended material for the ‘specific’ category. The document says these guidelines are not legally binding and must not contradict or change the regulations.

Operators should therefore distinguish regulations, AMC, guidance material and working guidance. Each has a different role in the framework. Current revision status should be checked before material is used to prepare an application.

Practical planning checklist for agricultural UAS operators

Start with the whole operation, not the label ‘agriculture’. Define how the aircraft will fly, the ground setting and the relevant airspace. Then test that plan against the ‘open’ and ‘specific’ category material.

Use this check before drafting an application:

• Decide whether the complete mission fits the ‘open’ category and the relevant subcategory.
• Check operator registration before ‘open’ category work.
• If the mission points to the ‘specific’ category, look for a published PDRA that covers it.
• Compare every PDRA condition with the proposed flight, not only its list of typical operations.
• Complete the PDRA table and turn each applicable condition into a clear procedure.
• Prepare the Operations Manual and the evidence of compliance.
• Submit the application to the National Aviation Authority in the state of registration.
• Check that all EASA material used is the current revision.

The key distinction is simple. A published PDRA can remove the need to perform the Article 11 risk assessment again for a covered scenario. It does not remove the need for operational authorisation.

For agricultural operators, the Operations Manual is where the chosen regulatory route becomes field procedure. The strongest application will keep the mission, PDRA table, manual and evidence aligned. If the planned work does not fit the published PDRA, the simplified route cannot be assumed.