At SAIL III and above, the CAA reads the containment first.
Operational Volume Definition
SAIL III+
We work with your engineering team to define an operational volume that is both fit for purpose and correctly bounded.
Procedures and Crew Training
We help develop the operational procedures, contingency protocols, and crew training framework required to demonstrate that containment measures are not just technically present but consistently applied in practice.
Flight Termination Design
Containment Requirements
We assess your flight termination functionality and procedures, ensuring an immediate and reliable end-of-flight response is achievable and evidenced.
Geocaging Architecture
We review your geocaging implementation against medium robustness integrity requirements, identifying any gaps between current capability and requirements.
Ground Risk Buffer
We assess whether your platform's design and procedures ensure the drone remains within the ground risk buffer following a loss of control or fly-away event.
Compliance Foundation
CAA Rules
BVLOS Permit
Containment, geocaging and FTS are the answer the CAA expects on file. Get the logic right, and the rest of the SORA application has somewhere safe to land.
Get it wrong, and the strongest concept of operations in the world won't pass review. This is the work that decides whether your BVLOS operation flies.
RAE(F) Assessment
We help you prepare your complete compliance evidence package for RAE(F) submission — technical documentation, integrity and assurance evidence, testing and demonstration records.
HOW WE BUILD A CONTAINMENT CASE
From Design to Validated Containment Case
01
Initial Assessment
We review your platform's current design, performance envelope, and intended operational context against the four medium robustness containment criteria — identifying gaps and defining the work required to close them.
02
Geocaging and FTS Review
We assess your geocaging architecture and flight termination design against the Criterion 1 and 2 integrity requirements, identifying any capability gaps and advising on design changes or additional evidence needed to meet medium robustness expectations.
03
Procedures and Training
We help you develop the operational procedures, contingency protocols, and crew training requirements that demonstrate containment measures are consistently applied in practice — not just technically present in the design.
04
Compliance Evidence Package
We help you compile the full technical documentation, assurance evidence, and demonstration records into a structured compliance package — built to meet RAE(F) assessment standards and CAA expectations.
05
RAE(F) Submission & Validation
We support the submission to the Recognised Assessment Entity for Flightworthiness, supporting any queries or clarification requests raised during the assessment process and ensuring the containment case is accepted without unnecessary iteration.
CONTAINMENT, GEOCAGING & FTS
Technical FAQs
Do I need an FTS for every BVLOS operation?
Not always. The requirement scales with SAIL. At lower SAILs, robust active geocaging may be enough. From SAIL III upwards, the CAA almost always expects an independent termination layer.
What's the difference between a geofence and geocaging?
A geofence is a boundary shown on the drone's HMI map indicating No-Fly Zones, for example around aerodromes or sensitive sites. Geocaging is a perimeter you define for your specific operation, the volume of airspace where the operation must be contained.
Can you work with our existing autopilot vendor?
Yes. Most operators build containment around an off-the-shelf autopilot stack. We work with the vendor's documentation, the integrator's evidence, and your operational concept to assemble a case the CAA will accept.
How can containment be implemented?
As early as possible. Retrofitting containment late costs money and credibility. The cheapest time to design for SAIL III is at concept, not at flight test.