Manufacturer vs Flight Module Provider


There is a bit of confusion between the roles of Manufacturer vs Flight Module Provider as per NPNT.

On Page 32 of RPAS Guidance Manual, Section 1.3:

In this document, the term “Flight Module Provider” is used to refer to a RPAS manufacturer or any agency who has partnership with the manufacturer to manage certification and related software/security aspects of registered flight modules

This implies that Flight Module Provider can be a different entity from Manufacturer. In such a case, the Flight Module Provider will be primarily responsible for key management. In Digital Sky, the Manufacturer is required to upload a Trusted Certificate Chain. This implies that the Manufacturer and the Flight Module Provider are considered as one.

One way to fix this could be to have Flight Module Provider as a separate entity and have separate roles for Flight Module Provider and Manufacturer.

  • Manufacturer: Responsible for submitting RPAS list application with all the required documents
  • Flight Module Provider: Responsible for uploading the Trusted Certificate Chain and key management

Your thoughts?

@sid @sidbh @sidhant


Hi Abhiroop,

The manufacturer is responsible for safety and identification of their drones and the policies implemented which is the source of the drone for DS platform. The manufacturer may have a partnership with an agency providing key management and other security that means the manufacturer is already trusting RFM provider.