The session covered how the pathway works, who can access it, what the assessment process looks like in practice, and how operators are already using it to operate without the usual 6 to 12 month wait.
Sphere is one of a small number of operators that holds this approval, and it's not easily earned. You need the operational track record and safety case to back it up.
It's what let us work with Yancoal to take them from weekday-only coverage to 7-day BVLOS operations in a matter of weeks, a case study we walked through live in the session.
We ran two polls during the webinar to get a read on where the audience sat.
Where is your organisation on the BVLOS journey?
Which use case is most relevant to your operations?
Most people in the room were near the start of their BVLOS journey, with mapping and infrastructure inspections the dominant use cases.
We got a lot of questions in the Q&A. Below are the ones that came up most and the ones with the most practical value for operators working through the approvals process.
Generally speaking, yes, but there's an important distinction worth understanding. For BVLOS operations, you need to hold either an OCTA (Outside Controlled Airspace exam) or an IREX (Instrument Rating Exam), or you need to be operating under the direct supervision of someone who does.
The IREX is a legacy qualification more commonly held by manned aviation pilots flying in instrument conditions. CASA has since released the OCTA exam, which is the more relevant pathway for drone operators conducting BVLOS in uncontrolled airspace. Depending on the procedures you have approved, it may also be possible for additional crew members to operate under the supervision of the OCTA or IREX holder, but getting that accreditation for anyone regularly conducting BVLOS operations is strongly recommended. It builds the situational awareness and airspace understanding that underpins safe operations.
The Broad Area BVLOS TMI (TMI 2025-03) is designed specifically to address the bottlenecks of traditional site-specific approvals. Rather than requiring a separate approval for each operating location, it allows ReOC holders to conduct BVLOS operations across a defined geographic area, which is what makes it practical for enterprise operators running repeated missions across large or remote properties. Yancoal's experience is a good illustration: moving from weekday-only, site-limited coverage to 7-day operations was made possible by the flexibility this pathway introduces.
On autonomous flight specifically: CASA hasn't formally approved truly autonomous operations at this stage. The answer will ultimately come down to your concept of operations — what you're proposing, how you're going to execute it, and what contingencies are in place if something goes wrong. The technology is capable, but safety remains the central question. If there's no pilot able to respond to an external factor mid-mission, that presents a potential hazard to other airspace users or people on the ground, and that's what CASA will want to see addressed in your CONOPS before autonomous modes are approved.
The TMI document itself is the authoritative reference here and is worth reading in full. At a practical level, the required mitigations come down to two mechanisms: parachutes and sheltering.
A1 category (operations in lower population density areas, below 500 people/km²) allows you to use either a parachute or sheltering as your primary ground risk mitigation. If people in the area will be sheltered by buildings or vehicles, a parachute may not be required. If there's no sheltering available, a parachute is needed.
A2 category (up to 2,500 people/km²) requires both a parachute and sheltering.
B1 category (larger aircraft, 1–3m wingspan, up to 35m/s, below 50 people/km²) similarly requires sheltering or a parachute to be in place.
B2 category (slightly higher population density than B1) requires both parachute and sheltering.
If you're working through the application process, the specific requirements for your operating environment and aircraft type will need to be worked through carefully with your RPAS safety case author or BVLOS approval consultant.
The CASA assessment team is there to verify that what's happening on the ground matches what's documented in your approval, and that your team can actually operate safely and consistently within those boundaries.
A useful way to think about it: if your operations manual states that your crew will wear purple gum boots during every flight, and the inspector arrives to find someone in pink gum boots, that's a conversation you'll need to have. It's not necessarily a deal-breaker, but it highlights a gap between your documented procedures and your actual practice. The assessment is an opportunity to refine your procedures so that what you say you'll do and what you actually do are fully aligned.
In practice, the visit will involve reviewing your KDR and OCTA on-site, observing pre-flight procedures, confirming crew roles, and asking questions to test your team's understanding of the approval conditions. Operational familiarity is the best preparation, your crew should be able to answer questions about approval conditions without reaching for a document every time.
It depends significantly on your starting point. For organisations without an existing BVLOS approval, the realistic timeline from first conversation to live operations is around six months to a year, and that's budgeting conservatively. The onsite assessment itself is one part of a broader process that includes putting together your application, working through CASA's review queue, any back-and-forth on documentation, and the site assessment itself.
If you're coming in with an existing BVLOS approval and established documentation, the process will move faster. Walking before you run, demonstrating safe and effective drone operations before moving to more complex BVLOS work, is always the right approach, and CASA will expect to see that foundation in place.
The expectation is that CASA will want to see the program continue if the trial demonstrates that operators can safely execute BVLOS under it. The TMI was designed in part to alleviate pressure on the more traditional approval pathway, so there's a strong rationale for it to either be renewed or evolved into something more permanent at the end of the 12 months.
That said, the outcome will depend on how the industry performs during the trial. Operating safely, staying within the conditions of the instrument, and meeting the reporting requirements aren't just compliance obligations, they're also the evidence base that CASA will use to decide what comes next. The better the industry performs, the stronger the case for making it permanent.
It's not a straightforward conversion. If you hold an existing site-specific BVLOS approval and subsequently obtain a Broad Area BVLOS Approval under the TMI, the self-assessment privileges that come with the Broad Area framework would allow you to assess new areas. But you'd still need to work carefully through the differences in approval conditions before treating the two as interchangeable.
One important example: operations under the Broad Area TMI must be conducted below 400ft AGL as measured from the pit edge, a specific condition that allows you to fly above a mine pit without following the terrain down into it, which is genuinely useful for mining operations. If your existing approval has different altitude parameters or operational conditions, those differences need to be examined and reconciled. A fresh application isn't necessarily required, but a careful review of the privilege differences is essential.
Not a publicly accessible one. There's no register in place where you can look up active BVLOS approvals or pending applications across the industry. For real-time awareness of where BVLOS operations are being conducted in your area, NOTAMs are the primary mechanism to monitor.
Yes, approvals have been issued in areas near non-controlled aerodromes with a Common Traffic Advisory Frequency (CTAF). However, proximity to a CTAF aerodrome introduces additional coordination requirements, typically including mandatory radio calls on the CTAF frequency, specific altitude restrictions, and in some cases, direct coordination with the aerodrome operator or a NOTAM obligation.
Each application is assessed on its merits, so the presence of a CTAF within 3nm isn't automatically disqualifying, but it will require thorough documentation of how you'll manage the shared airspace. This is an area where having experienced BVLOS approval consultants in your corner makes a material difference to application quality and outcome.
It's not an insurmountable process, but it does require adequate lead time. The incoming Responsible Person would need to go through an assessment with CASA, including an interview and likely a scenario-based evaluation to demonstrate they can make the same kind of operational judgment calls that the role requires. Factoring in CASA's workload at any given time, budgeting a few weeks for the process is a reasonable expectation.
The practical takeaway: think carefully about who you nominate at the outset. If staff turnover is a realistic scenario for your organisation, building a succession plan for key approval roles before you lodge your application will save you time and operational disruption down the track.
The recording of the Enabling BVLOS with CASA's Broad Area Approval & Hub Units webinar is available on our website now. If your organisation is at any stage of the BVLOS journey, exploring options, working through an application, or ready to scale, we'd love to have a chat.
