SORA 2.5-Guided BVLOS UAS for Wildlife Conservation in Kenya: Reducing Friction Between Safety and Field Operations
Authors:
- Guy MaaloufGMGuy Maalouf
- Thomas Stuart RichardsonTRThomas Stuart Richardson
- David Roy GuerinDGDavid Roy Guerin
- Matthew WatsonMWMatthew Watson
- Ulrik Pagh Schultz LundquistULUlrik Pagh Schultz Lundquist
- Blair R. CostelloeBCBlair R. Costelloe
- Elzbieta PastuchaEPElzbieta Pastucha
- Saadia AfridiSASaadia Afridi
- Edouard George Alain RollandEREdouard George Alain Rolland
- Kilian MeierKMKilian Meier
- Jes Hundevadt JepsenJJJes Hundevadt Jepsen
- Thomas van der SterrenTSThomas van der Sterren
Open Access
Abstract
Safe Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) operations are increasingly required for wildlife monitoring and conservation, yet existing regulatory frameworks are rarely tailored to protected areas characterised by low population density and limited infrastructure. This paper presents a field-based use case illustrating how the Specific Operations Risk Assessment (SORA) methodology can be applied to conservation-oriented BVLOS missions under Kenyan airspace conditions, including coordination within military-controlled airspace. We evaluate three population-density estimation approaches (qualitative, bottom-up, and top-down) against available ground truth, and compare tabulated and analytical SORA methods for deriving the Ground Risk Class. The work illustrates how SORA 2.5 structures ground and air risk reasoning in a conservation context, while retrospective review identifies limitations in containment, Operational Safety Objectives, and tactical mitigation performance requirements. Field trials involved five concurrent teams and 30 personnel conducting over 260 flights and more than 60 h of UAS activity across the Ol Pejeta Conservancy, providing insights into multi-team coordination under field conditions. Field implementation revealed areas of misalignment between prescribed safety requirements and operational realities, prompting iterative adaptation of workflows and procedures. Observed outcomes included reductions in team size (25–50%) and procedural steps (18%), derived from retrospective comparison of field procedures. A lightweight Uncrewed Traffic Management prototype was also trialled, revealing practical limitations in conservancy environments. Finally, we present a ten-step framework for developing field-ready safety procedures to support risk-informed decision-making in non-standard operational contexts. The findings provide empirically grounded guidance on applying SORA principles to conservation UAS missions, without proposing a new risk framework or generalised operational model.Keywords
Funding Information
- WildDrone MSCA Doctoral Network (101071224)
- Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/X029077/1)
- AI Institute ICICLE (#2112606)
- Imageomics Institute (#2118240)
- University of Konstanz Investment Grant programme
- Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (EXC 2117–422037984)
This publication has 41 references indexed in Scilit:
- Drones in ecology: ten years back and forthBioScience, 2025
- Quantitative Study on UAV Operational Risk Based on Specific Operation Risk Assessment ModelQuality and Reliability Engineering International, 2025
- A survey of state-of-the-art U-space research2024
- Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs): practical aspects, applications, open challenges, security issues, and future trendsIntelligent Service Robotics, 2023
- Emerging UAV technology for disaster detection, mitigation, response, and preparednessJournal of Field Robotics, 2022
- Flight Tests of Ranges and Latencies of a Threefold Redundant C2 Multi-Link Solution for Small Drones in VLL Airspace2019
- Location, location, location: considerations when using lightweight drones in challenging environmentsRemote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation, 2017
- Precision wildlife monitoring using unmanned aerial vehiclesScientific Reports, 2016
- Does automation bias decision-making?International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 1999
- Ironies of automationAutomatica, 1983