FAA Compliance Design Analysis for Arrow’s Project Quiver UAV
1. Key Design Requirements under FAA Regulations
1.1 Airworthiness and Regulatory Compliance
Project Quiver explicitly aims to comply with FAA Part 107 regulations for small UAVs. Therefore, the design must ensure that the maximum takeoff weight (MTOW) does not exceed 25 kg (55 lbs), which is the regulatory upper limit for small unmanned aircraft under this rule. While Part 107 allows operations of drones under 55 lbs without requiring a formal airworthiness certificate, robust design is still essential to ensure safety and reliability in all operational scenarios. Moreover, if future operations include beyond visual line-of-sight (BVLOS) flights or operations over people, the system must be capable of meeting stricter airworthiness standards, such as those required under the FAA’s “flights over people” categories (Category 2/3), which impose kinetic energy restrictions or require parachute systems for mitigation. Structurally, the aircraft must remain strong and reliable throughout its lifecycle, sustaining repeated mechanical stress without compromising integrity.
1.2 Safety and Fail-Safe Design
The FAA emphasizes flight safety, and Quiver incorporates multi-layered safeguards. First, the system must include a fail-safe mode: if control links are lost or key components fail, the drone should automatically perform predetermined safety actions such as returning home or landing. To meet FAA restrictions and avoid no-fly zones, geofencing and altitude limits are built into the flight control software. Quiver also includes an emergency power kill-switch system that independently controls the high-voltage propulsion bus and the low-voltage avionics system. This design allows remote operators to cut off power instantly in emergency scenarios to minimize harm to people or property. Additionally, Part 107 requires a pre-flight inspection to verify the airworthiness of the UAV. In response, Quiver incorporates automatic pre-flight self-diagnostics, checking battery voltage, GPS health, radar altimeter status, and other sensors, and alerting the operator if anomalies are detected. For night operations—permitted under recent FAA amendments—the drone is equipped with anti-collision strobes visible from up to 3 nautical miles. Overall, Quiver’s safety design aligns with aviation industry best practices, using both hardware and software mechanisms to minimize the impact of component failure.
1.3 Electrical and Propulsion System Standards
For the electrical system, Quiver adopts a high-voltage propulsion architecture to improve efficiency and reduce current: it supports 12S to 14S lithium battery packs (with a nominal voltage of around 50V). Higher voltage lowers current demand, reducing resistive loss and the weight of power cabling—an effective strategy for heavy-lift multirotors. To ensure safe power supply, Quiver includes a Battery Management System (BMS) that monitors battery health, temperature, and current draw in real-time, preventing over-discharge or thermal runaway. A dedicated Power Distribution Board (PDB) stabilizes high-voltage power supply and uses high-voltage-tolerant components to provide regulated power to subsystems. Wiring adheres to aerospace standards, separating power and signal lines and shielding them to mitigate electromagnetic interference. The propulsion system includes high-thrust brushless motors and high-voltage ESCs. The drone is designed to hover at 50%–60% throttle under full load, ensuring power redundancy. The ESCs communicate over the CAN bus, enabling precise and reliable control. Altogether, the electrical and power system emphasizes redundancy, safety, and efficiency, aligning with FAA expectations even when not explicitly stated.
1.4 Redundant Control and Fault-Tolerant Architecture
The FAA places strong emphasis on avoiding single points of failure. Accordingly, Quiver adopts a redundancy-first design for its control systems. The flight controller is based on the Pixhawk platform, which includes multiple IMUs and dual barometers. Critical navigation sensors like GPS are dual-redundant; for example, a dual-antenna GPS setup ensures position reliability even if one unit fails or loses lock. Communication links may also be redundant—e.g., a primary control link and a backup telemetry link—to prevent loss of control. For propulsion, motor redundancy is addressed through layout: while quadcopters are simpler, configurations with six or eight motors are more resilient to single-motor failures. For example, the DJI M300 is a quadcopter that supports emergency landing with only three functioning propellers. Although Quiver targets Part 107 compliance, its design incorporates sufficient redundancy in motors and sensors to enhance fault tolerance. Unlike manned aircraft, full hardware redundancy is often infeasible in small UAVs due to weight limits. Instead, Quiver uses selective redundancy combined with fault detection and isolation algorithms, ensuring that the UAV can safely recover or land in the event of a component failure.
1.5 Identification and Communication Compliance
FAA Remote ID rules—effective from September 2023—require all UAVs to broadcast identification, location, and velocity data in real-time during flight. Quiver is designed to integrate a Remote ID system compliant with 14 CFR Part 89. Each unit will be equipped with either an FAA-approved module or a custom solution registered with the FAA, enabling it to broadcast unique identification numbers and flight telemetry. The aircraft will also include visible markings (e.g., printed serials or QR codes) for short-range visual identification. For communications, Quiver includes a telemetry link with a range of up to 5 kilometers, along with customized ground control software to monitor, log, and store flight data. This ensures traceability and supports incident investigations. In anticipation of future urban airspace integration (UTM systems), Quiver’s hardware and software architecture includes open interfaces for possible ADS-B In/Out or networked Remote ID systems. These compliance features ensure Quiver drones are consistently visible, trackable, and authorized to operate in FAA-managed airspace.
2. Comparative Analysis: FAA-Compliant UAV vs. Typical Commercial Light UAVs
| Aspect |
Project Quiver (FAA-Compliant Design) |
Typical Commercial Light UAVs (e.g. Agri, Mapping, Logistics) |
| Design Philosophy |
Modular and multi-purpose. Standardized payload interfaces allow quick mission changes. Open hardware/software encourages community-driven upgrades and transparency. |
Purpose-built for specific applications. Payload interfaces are often closed and not easily swappable. Modifications usually require custom engineering. |
| Redundancy & Safety |
Emphasizes system-level redundancy: dual navigation sensors, redundant power kill switches, and fail-safe logic. May include parachutes. Minimizes single points of failure. |
Varies by model. High-end systems may offer limited redundancy (dual GPS, IMU, batteries). Many models lack tolerance for motor/ESC/power failures without fallback. |
| System Architecture |
Open-source flight controller (Pixhawk), full CAN-bus network (DroneCAN), modular arms, and clean hardware segmentation. ESCs, BMS, GPS, telemetry fully integrated via digital protocols. |
Mixed architectures: many use proprietary flight stacks with CAN + PWM mixes. Modularity and standardization vary; some have foldable arms or replaceable payloads. |
| Flight Controller Reliability |
High reliability, dual IMUs, redundant barometers, built-in self-health monitoring. Supports future dual-FC hot-swappable systems. Ongoing development toward certifiable software. |
Usually based on market-proven but uncertified flight stacks. Some industrial drones may use dual-FC systems, but most rely on single FCs and extensive testing. |
| Certification Expectation |
Designed with FAA certification and Remote ID compliance in mind. All documentation, component traceability, and safety features align with future certification pathways. |
Typically certified only for Remote ID. Most systems do not pursue airworthiness; if needed, compliance is handled by operators seeking waivers, not by the manufacturer. |
3. R&D Process Differences vs. Typical Commercial UAVs
Project Quiver’s development workflow reflects traditional aerospace system engineering, differing sharply from standard commercial drone R&D practices:
- Requirements Management: Detailed system requirements defined at the start, using strict “SHALL” language to define objectives for structure, electronics, power, and safety. Requirements were reviewed publicly and refined collaboratively. In contrast, commercial UAVs often operate from internal design specs without formal traceable requirements.
- Design Review and Validation: Every prototype phase includes formal engineering documentation, simulation, unit tests, ground integration testing, and full flight testing. Verification is iterative but process-driven. Traditional commercial drones rely more on agile trial-and-error development, often without rigorous documentation.
- Flight Test Management: A structured, multi-phase flight test plan is used, with both centralized and decentralized (community-based) flight testing. Tests are documented and analyzed post-flight. Commercial UAV makers generally conduct internal flight tests focused on practical performance rather than standards compliance.
- Compliance Documentation: Complete sets of design files, user manuals, flight manuals, maintenance documents, BOMs, and CAD archives are developed for traceability. These would support formal certification. By contrast, typical commercial UAVs may only have user-level documentation, with internal engineering details not prepared for regulatory review.
- Regulatory Engagement: Project Quiver proactively plans engagement with the FAA, including documentation for Remote ID compliance and potentially more advanced operational waivers. Certification evidence—like FMEA reports or reliability data—is collected during development. Most commercial UAV producers only respond to regulations reactively, such as providing Remote ID or registration as needed.
Summary:
Arrow’s Project Quiver embraces aviation-grade design, with robust safety, electrical, and software systems aligned with FAA regulations. Compared to typical commercial UAVs, it incorporates more structured redundancy, validation, and compliance-focused documentation. Its development process resembles that of certified aircraft, laying a strong foundation for FAA operational approval and potential future airworthiness certification.
So far I think everybody are familiar with the project, especially the principles and purpose. Now we can focus on more study for each subjects and begin to push each other without sleep.
Another important thing is, we need to try to keep that we won’t run out of ideas for certain equipment or attachment design.
