EASA Standard Scenarios: STS-01 and STS-02 explained

An EASA standard scenario is a pre-assessed operation in the Specific category where the regulator has already done the risk assessment, so an operator that fits inside it submits a declaration instead of applying for an operational authorisation. Two exist today, STS-01 and STS-02, and they sit in the Appendices to the Annex of the EU drone operating regulation. Fitting one is the fastest lawful route into Specific category work, and the price of that speed is that you take the scenario exactly as written.

The catch that decides most cases is the aircraft. Each scenario is tied to a class label, and without a drone carrying the right label the declaration route closes regardless of how well the operation matches everything else. This article covers what each scenario permits, how the declaration works and what it replaces, why the class label gates the whole thing, and what a programme has to keep on file once it is operating under a scenario rather than an individual approval.

What each scenario permits

STS-01 covers visual line of sight operations at a maximum height of 120 metres over a controlled ground area, and it may be flown in a populated environment. A controlled ground area means exactly what it says: only persons involved in the operation are present on the ground within it, which puts the practical burden on the operator to establish and hold that perimeter for the duration. Because the ground beneath is controlled, the scenario tolerates surroundings that would otherwise push an operation towards a full risk assessment.

STS-02 moves beyond visual line of sight, again to a maximum height of 120 metres and again over a controlled ground area, but in a sparsely populated environment rather than a populated one. Distance limits replace the pilot's eyesight as the constraint: the aircraft may operate up to one kilometre from the remote pilot when no airspace observers are used, extending to two kilometres where observers are positioned. The two scenarios therefore answer different questions, one about flying close to people and the other about flying away from the pilot.

The declaration, and what it replaces

The mechanism is the attraction. Under Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/947, an operator submitting a declaration of compliance with a standard scenario to the competent authority of its Member State of registration is not required to obtain an operational authorisation at all. The authority acknowledges the declaration with a confirmation of receipt and completeness, and operations may begin from there. No case by case assessment, no waiting on an authority's queue, no negotiation over mitigations.

That is a genuine simplification and it is frequently oversold. The declaration is a statement that your operation satisfies every condition of the scenario, made by you, on your own responsibility, and an authority that later finds otherwise is dealing with a false declaration rather than a disagreement about risk. The remote pilot needs a theoretical knowledge certificate for standard scenarios and practical skills training for the specific scenario being flown, the operator needs an operations manual, and both have to exist before the declaration, not after the first job.

The class label that gates everything

STS-01 requires a drone carrying a C5 class identification label and STS-02 requires a C6, and this is where most operators discover the route is closed to them. Class marked aircraft in those two classes were introduced specifically to serve the standard scenarios, and the market took time to supply them. A programme flying capable but unlabelled aircraft, including many aircraft that predate the class marking system, cannot declare under a standard scenario however closely the operation otherwise matches.

The fallback is a pre-defined risk assessment. PDRA-S01 and PDRA-S02 mirror the two standard scenarios and rest on the same underlying risk assessment, without imposing the class label requirement, and they end in an operational authorisation rather than a declaration. That is slower and involves the authority, which is the trade being made. Operators specifying new aircraft for European work should treat the class label as a purchasing requirement rather than a specification detail, because it decides which regulatory route the aircraft can ever be used on.

Living inside a scenario once you have declared

A declaration commits an operation to a shape. The controlled ground area has to be genuinely controlled on every job, the height limit holds, the environment has to remain the one the scenario contemplates, and the crew has to hold the training the scenario names. None of that is difficult on the day somebody wrote the operations manual. All of it drifts, because sites vary, crews change, and an operation that fits comfortably in June has by November taken on a job that fits only if nobody looks too closely.

Records are what make the difference between an operation inside its declaration and one that has quietly stepped outside it. Each job needs its ground area arrangement recorded, its crew and their certificates attached, the aircraft and its class label identified, and the flights logged against all of it. That gives an operator two things: the ability to answer an authority asking whether a particular flight complied, and something more useful day to day, which is the ability to notice in advance that an upcoming job does not fit and needs a different route. The second is worth more than the first. An authority asking questions after the event is a problem already in progress, while a scheduler who can see that next month's site has no workable perimeter still has time to price the job differently or decline it.

Common mistakes in standard scenario declarations

Declaring without the class label. STS-01 needs a C5 aircraft and STS-02 needs a C6. An unlabelled aircraft cannot fly under a standard scenario, whatever its capability, and the pre-defined risk assessment route exists for exactly that case.

Treating the controlled ground area as a formality. The scenario assumes only involved persons are present. A perimeter that exists on the plan and not on the site invalidates the basis for the whole operation.

Picking and choosing conditions. A declaration asserts compliance with the entire scenario. Meeting most of it and improvising the rest is a false declaration rather than a minor deviation.

Sending crews without scenario specific training. The theoretical knowledge certificate and the practical skills training for the relevant scenario are conditions, not recommendations, and the authority can ask to see both.

Forgetting cross border formalities. Operating in a Member State other than the one of registration means providing that authority with the declaration and the confirmation received. The declaration does not travel silently.

FAQ

How is a standard scenario different from an operational authorisation?

A standard scenario is declared rather than applied for. The regulator has already assessed the risk, so the operator confirms it meets every condition and receives an acknowledgement, instead of submitting a case by case risk assessment for approval.

Which drones can be used under STS-01 and STS-02?

Aircraft carrying a C5 class identification label for STS-01 and a C6 label for STS-02. Drones without those labels have to use the corresponding pre-defined risk assessment and obtain an operational authorisation instead.

Do standard scenarios allow flying over uninvolved people?

No. Both scenarios require a controlled ground area in which only persons involved in the operation are present. Overflight of uninvolved people falls outside the scenarios entirely and would need a different route into the Specific category.

Is a declaration valid across the whole European Union?

The declaration is made to the authority of the Member State of registration. Operating elsewhere means providing the authority in that state with a copy of the declaration and the confirmation of receipt and completeness.

Closing thought

The standard scenarios are a well designed shortcut for operations that genuinely look like them, and a trap for operations that nearly do. The declaration route removes the authority from the decision, which is exactly why the conditions are unforgiving and why the burden of showing compliance falls entirely on the operator afterwards. Fitting the scenario is a decision made once. Staying inside it is a decision made on every job.

If you are declaring operations under a standard scenario for the first time, FlybyOps was built for the operational record problem at the center of regulated drone work. A project and job hierarchy that scopes each site, a pilot registry tracking competency certificates, a document vault holding declarations and manuals with their dates, and an append-only audit log are all part of how the platform keeps the declaration, the training certificates, and the class label filed against the operations they made lawful.