The regulator decides whether you may fly. The client’s contracts department decides whether you may work. Operators who confuse the two arrive fully compliant and still lose the job.
What the Regulator Requires
The regulatory framework sits in the Malaysian Civil Aviation Regulations 2016, with the general unmanned aircraft rules in Section XVI at paragraphs 140 to 144, fees under the Civil Aviation (Fees and Charges) Regulations 2016, and enforcement and penalties provided for separately. Safety, incident and accident reporting follows the published aeronautical information circular, within 48 hours.
In operational terms, an approval application goes to the authority’s strategic affairs division well in advance, with CAAM’s published requirements specifying at least 14 working days before the operation and stating that incomplete applications are not processed. The application carries the date and time window, the coordinates of the area as four corner points, the height, the aircraft specification, the pilot’s details and the purpose, with a separate submission for each location.
The aircraft itself has to be certified by SIRIM and operate on a SIRIM-approved frequency within the approved radiated power, with any other frequency requiring an assignment from the communications regulator.
JUPEM for mapping, aerial photography, filming and videography, which covers most commercial inspection output.
CGSO for restricted areas, including Putrajaya.
The Chief Minister for operations in Sabah or Sarawak, which matters for East Malaysian offshore and plantation work.
MCMC for foreign pilots, with a further approval route where foreign personnel are filming.
The local authority for the flying area itself, such as DBKL across most of Kuala Lumpur.
A planning consequence: each of these has its own lead time, and they do not run concurrently by default. The 14 working days is the regulator’s minimum, not the project’s.
One caution on all of the above. CAAM’s requirements have developed over time and the published guidance an operator finds may not be the current position, so the framework should be confirmed with the authority directly rather than taken from a document of uncertain vintage. The structure is stable; the specifics move.
The Requirement That Is Not There
Here is the finding that matters commercially. CAAM’s published drone requirements set out approvals, equipment certification, frequency, operating limits and reporting. They do not impose a third-party liability insurance requirement, and no sum is specified.
That surprises operators who assume the regulator sets a floor they can meet and then trade on. There is no such floor to meet, which means there is nothing to point at when a client asks what cover is required.
Operators expect the regulator to set the insurance bar so they can clear it. The regulator has not set one, so the bar is set by whoever is buying, and it moves.
The practical effect is that insurance is a commercial requirement rather than a compliance one. It originates in the client’s contract, is set by that client’s risk appetite and their own insurers, and varies between clients, between industries and between individual assets. An operator fully compliant with every CAAM requirement can be entirely unable to work on a facility because the cover they hold does not match what the contract demands.
How a Client’s Contracts Department Sees It
Understanding the view from the other side explains why the requirements land where they do, and why they are often higher than the work appears to justify.
A drone near a live asset is not assessed on the value of the drone. It is assessed on what it could damage and what that would cost. A small aircraft descending uncommanded onto a process unit, a cable tray, a hydrocarbon-containing line or a person is being underwritten against consequential loss, and on an operating facility the dominant figure is production downtime rather than physical repair. That is why cover requirements for inspection work can look disproportionate to the contract value.
Several other things follow from the same logic. The contracting party is usually asked to carry the cover, so an operator working through an intermediary may find the requirement lands on an entity that does not hold it. Clients frequently want to be named on the policy or to see a waiver of subrogation, which are policy features rather than cover levels and may not be present by default. And the exclusions matter as much as the sum insured: a policy that excludes operations over live plant, within a certain distance of structures, or in classified areas is of limited use for exactly the work being contracted.
The sum insured is the easy question. Whether the policy actually responds to a drone descending onto a running process unit is the one that decides the claim.
What to Have Ready Before Bidding
Because requirements vary, the winning position is not holding one particular level of cover. It is being able to answer quickly and completely when asked.
The third item is where qualified operators most often fall down, and it is worth being blunt about. Holding a policy is not the same as holding a policy that responds. An operator who has not checked whether their cover excludes work over live plant has not established that they are insured for the work they are bidding, and discovering the gap at claim stage is the worst possible moment.
Treating It as Capability Rather Than Admin
The operators who win this work treat the commercial pack as part of the capability, maintained continuously, rather than as paperwork assembled when an enquiry arrives.
That means knowing what cover is held and what it excludes, having the regulatory approvals and aircraft certification current and filed together, being able to produce pilot credentials and a documented incident procedure on request, and having a broker who can turn an endorsement around inside a tender window. None of it is expensive relative to the work it unlocks, and all of it takes longer to arrange under pressure than it does in advance.
The underlying point is that flying competence was never the constraint. A technically excellent operator who cannot satisfy a contracts department does not get airside, and the gap between those two capabilities is where most of the lost work sits. Our drone training services address the regulatory and operational framework alongside flying skill, because the certificate that gets an operator onto a facility is rarely the one they spent the most time earning.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does CAAM require drone operators to hold insurance?
CAAM’s published drone requirements cover approvals, aircraft certification, frequency, operating limits and reporting, and do not impose a third-party liability insurance requirement or specify a sum. Insurance requirements for commercial work therefore come from clients through their contracts rather than from the regulator, and they vary between clients and industries. Confirm the current regulatory position with the authority directly, since the framework develops over time.
What approvals are needed besides CAAM?
Depending on the operation, JUPEM for mapping, aerial photography, filming and videography, CGSO for restricted areas including Putrajaya, the Chief Minister for operations in Sabah or Sarawak, MCMC for foreign pilots, and the relevant local authority for the flying area itself, such as DBKL across most of Kuala Lumpur. These have separate lead times and do not run concurrently by default.
Why do clients ask for cover levels that seem high for the contract value?
Because the exposure being underwritten is not the aircraft but what it could damage. On a live facility the dominant cost of an uncommanded descent onto plant is production downtime rather than physical repair, so the figure reflects consequential loss. The same reasoning drives requests to be named on the policy or for a waiver of subrogation.
What should an operator check in their own policy?
The exclusions, as closely as the limit. A policy that excludes operations over live plant, within a given distance of structures, or in classified areas may not respond to the work being bid. Check also that the named insured is the entity signing the contract, and establish how quickly an endorsement adding a named insured or a subrogation waiver can be obtained, since clients tend to ask for these late in a tender.
Sources: Malaysian Civil Aviation Regulations 2016, Section XVI, paragraphs 140 to 144, covering general unmanned aircraft system requirements, together with the enforcement and penalty provisions · Civil Aviation (Fees and Charges) Regulations 2016, Regulation 97, for application fees · Civil Aviation Authority of Malaysia published drone requirements, covering application to the Strategic Affairs Division at least 14 working days before operation, the information required including date, time window, coordinates as four corner points, height, aircraft specification, pilot details and purpose, SIRIM certification and approved frequency and radiated power, operating restrictions including visual line of sight and height limits, and the further approvals required from JUPEM, CGSO, state authorities in Sabah and Sarawak, MCMC and local authorities. These published requirements contain no third-party liability insurance requirement · Aeronautical Information Circular 4/2008, safety, incident and accident reporting within 48 hours
MarineCraft Journal
Get the next briefing in your inbox
Safety protocols, offshore training, regulation and market analysis, written for Malaysia’s maritime and offshore industry. No sales pitches.
We use your address only to send MarineCraft Journal. Unsubscribe any time. See our Privacy Policy.