> The FAA is also proposing allowing discretionary waivers ... for those that do not meet its anti-collision lighting requirement.
Huh? What would be a legitimate reason for that?
Huh? What would be a legitimate reason for that?
Imagine someone operating out in the bush in Alaska where there are no people. There's no need for the same safety precautions out there. Or operations in mountainous terrain where it's not possible that a manned aircraft would fly -- no need for anti-collision lighting there.
The FAA is quite strict and is very unlikely to hand out waivers unless the operator can clearly show an equivalent level of safety.