SORA Risk Assessment Australia 2026: Operational Risk Management

SORA (Specific Operations Risk Assessment) is the foundation of CASA's risk-based approach to commercial drone authorization. Rather than applying generic rules, SORA allows operators to demonstrate that specific operations can be conducted safely through documented risk management. This guide covers the 2026 SORA framework, assessment methodology, and practical implementation for Australian drone operators.

What Is SORA?

SORA is a formal risk assessment methodology that CASA requires for Part 102 commercial operations. The process:

Identify hazards — What can go wrong? (engine failure, propeller fracture, signal loss, weather)
Analyze risk — How likely is each hazard? What's the impact if it occurs?
Propose mitigations — What measures reduce risk to acceptable levels?
Demonstrate residual risk — After mitigations, is the operation safe enough?

SORA shifts responsibility from CASA (prescriptive rules) to the operator (risk management capability). If you can demonstrate through SORA that your operation is safe, CASA grants approval.

The CASA SORA Framework (2026)

Four-Step SORA Process

Step 1: Hazard Identification

List all hazards relevant to your operation:

Aircraft-related: Engine failure, battery depletion, propeller damage, flight control malfunction
Environmental: Weather (wind, rain, lightning), obstacles, interference (RF, electromagnetic)
Operational: Pilot error, communication failure, lost GPS signal, airspace intrusion
Third-party: Bystanders, property damage, unauthorized access to flight area

Step 2: Risk Analysis

For each hazard, assess:

Likelihood: How often might this occur? (Rare, Occasional, Frequent, Likely, Very Likely)
Severity: What's the impact? (Negligible, Minor, Major, Hazardous, Catastrophic)
Risk level: Combine likelihood × severity:
Red (Unacceptable): Requires major mitigation or operation is not permitted
Yellow (Acceptable with mitigation): Requires specific controls
Green (Acceptable): No additional mitigation needed

Step 3: Mitigation Development

For Yellow and Red risks, propose controls:

Engineering controls: Aircraft redundancy (dual motors), safety equipment (parachute)
Operational controls: Pilot training, pre-flight checks, weather limits, flight restrictions
Administrative controls: Crew briefings, incident reporting, maintenance documentation

Step 4: Residual Risk Assessment

After implementing mitigations, re-evaluate:

Does likelihood decrease? (e.g., pilot training reduces pilot error risk)
Does severity decrease? (e.g., parachute reduces impact of fall)
Is residual risk acceptable (Green/Yellow) or still unacceptable (Red)?

If residual risk remains Red after reasonable mitigation, the operation cannot be approved.

SORA Assessment Categories (CASA 2026)

CASA guidance groups operations into categories based on complexity:

Category A: Simple Operations

Characteristics: Low altitude, known airspace, no crowds, standard aircraft, VLOS only Examples:

Aerial photography from a private farm (120m AGL, no people)
Small construction site inspection (crew only, no public access)

SORA requirements: 3–5 page assessment, simplified hazard list Approval timeline: 4–6 weeks Example Assessment Size: 1,500–2,000 words

Category B: Moderate Complexity

Characteristics: Standard altitude, standard airspace, occasional over-people, standard aircraft, BVLOS possible Examples:

Real estate photography over city (120m AGL, managed airspace)
Inspection of infrastructure over roads (BVLOS, traffic management)
Agricultural spraying with chemical payload

SORA requirements: 5–10 page detailed assessment, comprehensive hazard analysis Approval timeline: 6–8 weeks Example Assessment Size: 3,000–5,000 words

Category C: High Complexity

Characteristics: High altitude, complex airspace, over-crowd operations, custom aircraft, advanced autonomy Examples:

Drone delivery in urban area (BVLOS over populated area)
Large festival filming with crowds
Beyond visual range surveying

SORA requirements: 10+ page comprehensive assessment, expert consultation recommended Approval timeline: 8–10 weeks (may require CASA site visit) Example Assessment Size: 5,000–10,000 words

SORA Structure and Content

Standard SORA Document Outline

1. Executive Summary (0.5 page)

Operation overview (what, where, when, why)
Risk conclusions (all risks are acceptable with proposed mitigations)
Approval scope requested

2. Operation Description (1–2 pages)

Purpose and objectives
Geographic area (map with coordinates, area boundaries)
Flight timeline (frequency, duration, seasonal variation)
Aircraft specifications (model, weight, payload, endurance)
Pilot qualifications (licenses, experience hours)

3. Hazard Identification (2–3 pages)

Aircraft failures: Engine/motor failure, propeller damage, battery depletion, flight control malfunction
Environmental factors: Wind, rain, visibility, RF interference, lightning, temperature extremes
Operational errors: Pilot disorientation, navigation error, loss of communication, missed obstacle
Third-party impacts: Bystanders in fall zone, property damage, airspace conflict
Data/regulatory: GPS spoofing, telemetry failure, airspace unauthorized entry

4. Risk Analysis (3–5 pages)

Likelihood assessment for each hazard
Severity assessment (using injury/damage scenarios)
Risk matrix: Hazard × (Likelihood + Severity) = Risk Level
Hazards rated Red/Yellow/Green
Justification for likelihood/severity estimates

5. Mitigation Measures (4–6 pages)

For each Red/Yellow risk, propose specific controls
Engineering mitigations: Equipment redundancy, safety devices
Operational mitigations: Procedures, training, weather limits
Administrative mitigations: Maintenance, documentation, incident response
Demonstration that mitigations are implemented

6. Residual Risk Assessment (2–3 pages)

Re-evaluate each Red/Yellow risk after mitigations
Demonstrate that residual risk is now Yellow/Green
Overall operation risk conclusion: "Operation can be safely conducted with implemented controls"

7. Contingency Procedures (1–2 pages)

Emergency procedures for signal loss, battery low, weather deterioration
Landing procedures if malfunction occurs
Incident reporting and investigation process
Periodic safety review process

8. Appendices

Aircraft maintenance logs (previous 12 months)
Pilot license, medical certificate, flight hour documentation
Risk matrix template (detailed table)
Flight plan map (with contingency landing zones)
Insurance certificate (A$10 million liability)

Common Hazards and Mitigation Examples

Hazard: Engine/Motor Failure

Likelihood assessment: Rare (modern multi-rotor aircraft have 4+ motors; loss of all 4 simultaneously is extremely unlikely) Severity assessment: Hazardous (aircraft falls, potential impact on person/property) Risk level: Yellow (rare + hazardous = acceptable with mitigation) Mitigations:

Engineering: Redundant motor design (loss of 1 motor doesn't cause crash)
Operational: Maximum altitude 60 meters AGL (gives parachute time to deploy if all motors fail)
Operational: Flight only in areas where fall zone is clear of people (minimum 100-meter radius)
Maintenance: Visual motor inspection before every flight

Residual risk: Green (redundancy + altitude + area management reduces risk to acceptable)

Hazard: Loss of GPS Signal (Telemetry Link Failure)

Likelihood assessment: Occasional (occurs near buildings, RF interference sources, or at range limits) Severity assessment: Major (aircraft loses position reference, may drift into obstacles or airspace) Risk level: Yellow (occasional + major = acceptable with mitigation) Mitigations:

Operational: Maintain line-of-sight at all times (pilot can navigate visually)
Operational: Geofence set within known safe area (aircraft cannot exceed boundaries)
Operational: Return-to-home altitude set (aircraft automatically returns if signal lost)
Operational: Wind speed limit respected (reduces drift distance)
Training: Pilot proficiency in manual control (practiced 4x/year)

Residual risk: Green (visual line of sight + geofence + return-to-home reduces risk)

Hazard: Adverse Weather (Wind Gust, Sudden Rain)

Likelihood assessment: Occasional (Australia's variable weather, particularly in spring) Severity assessment: Major (wind gust can flip aircraft, rain can damage motors) Risk level: Yellow Mitigations:

Operational: Pre-flight wind assessment (abort if >20 kph sustained wind)
Operational: Weather monitoring continuous (pilot monitors forecast + ground conditions)
Operational: Rain limit: Flight only in dry conditions (abort if rain begins)
Operational: Launch window restricted to morning hours (wind typically calmer)
Administrative: Weather log maintained (all flights documented with wind/visibility)

Residual risk: Yellow→Green (wind limits + weather monitoring + launch windows)

SORA Assessment Development Process

Step 1: Gather Information (Week 1)

Flight plan map (with location details, obstacles, airspace)
Aircraft specifications (weight, endurance, redundancy)
Pilot qualifications (licenses, flight hours, type-rating)
Insurance documentation

Step 2: Conduct Hazard Workshop (Week 1–2)

Assemble team: Pilot, operations manager, safety specialist
Brainstorm all possible hazards
Research similar operations (learn from industry precedent)
Document hazards in initial list

Step 3: Perform Risk Analysis (Week 2–3)

For each hazard: Assign likelihood (Rare–Very Likely)
Assign severity (Negligible–Catastrophic)
Plot on risk matrix
Identify Red/Yellow risks requiring mitigation

Step 4: Develop Mitigations (Week 3–4)

For each Red risk: Propose engineering/operational/administrative controls
Verify mitigations are implementable and documented
For Yellow risks: Propose acceptable operating limits

Step 5: Residual Risk Re-assessment (Week 4)

Re-evaluate each Red/Yellow risk with mitigations
Confirm residual risk is Green/Yellow
Document conclusion

Step 6: Document and Submit (Week 4–5)

Compile SORA document (5–10 pages typical)
Attach appendices (maintenance logs, pilot certs, flight plan)
Submit to CASA with RPAO application or renewal

Industry Best Practices for SORA Development

Use Industry Templates

CASA publishes SORA templates and example assessments on its website. Leverage these:

Baseline structure (don't start from scratch)
Hazard lists for common operation types
Risk matrix standards
Mitigation examples

Engage Subject Matter Experts

Pilot consultant: For realistic likelihood assessment (what actually happens in practice)
Maintenance engineer: For equipment failure analysis
Safety specialist: For mitigation evaluation

Cost: A$2,000–A$5,000 for external review; often worth it to ensure CASA acceptance.

Document Everything

Every flight: Log maintenance issues, weather anomalies, near-misses
Incident database: Track all safety-related events (even minor ones)
Use this data to update SORA: "In 500 flights, we've experienced 0 emergency descents, 0 signal losses" (demonstrates risk is real-world acceptable)

Review and Update Annually

SORA is not static. Each year:

Review actual operational data (how often did Yellow risks actually occur?)
Incorporate lessons learned (near-misses, maintenance findings)
Update mitigations if new hazards emerge
Resubmit to CASA if significant changes made

Common SORA Gaps and CASA Rejections

Gap 1: Inadequate likelihood justification

Claiming "motor failure is rare" without supporting data. CASA expects: "DJI drone motor reliability is X% based on [manufacturer data]; 4-motor redundancy means failure of all motors simultaneously is [probability]."

Gap 2: Severity underestimation

Stating "aircraft fall causes negligible injury" without considering fall zone. Falls from 60+ meters can cause serious injury or death. More honest assessment: "Hazardous (potential serious injury)" then mitigate with altitude limits.

Gap 3: Weak mitigations

Proposing: "Pilot will be careful not to fly in rain." This is not a mitigation; it's wishful thinking. Proper mitigation: "Flight only in dry conditions; weather monitoring continuous; launch window restricted; pilot decision authority to abort."

Gap 4: No residual risk re-evaluation

Proposing mitigations but not re-assessing: "After implementing [control], is risk now Green or still Yellow?" If still Yellow, are further controls needed?

Gap 5: Inconsistency with operational manual

SORA states "maximum wind 20 kph," but operational manual says "pilots may operate in up to 25 kph wind." CASA will reject or request clarification. Ensure consistency across all documents.

Automating SORA Management with MmowW

SORA assessment is a living document, not a one-time submission. You'll update it annually based on operational data. MmowW streamlines:

Hazard tracking — Maintain real-time database of actual incidents/near-misses to inform SORA updates
Mitigation verification — Confirm pre-flight checks and procedures are documented and followed
Weather data logging — Automatic wind speed, visibility, precipitation recording for each flight
Maintenance documentation — Aircraft maintenance schedules tracked, inspections recorded
Residual risk assessment — Annual SORA review facilitated by operational data trends
Document management — Version control for SORA iterations, approval dates tracked

FAQ: SORA Risk Assessments

🐣 Piyo: "Do I need a new SORA for every operation, or one document covering all flights?"

One comprehensive SORA covering your operation scope. If you're doing aerial photography in various cities, one SORA covers "aerial photography operations in Australia, maximum 120m AGL, VLOS." If you expand to BVLOS or other aircraft types, update/resubmit.

🦉 Poppo: "How detailed must my risk assessment be for a simple operation?"

CASA expects proportional effort. Simple operation: 3–5 page assessment, 10–15 identified hazards. Complex operation: 10+ pages, 30+ hazards. Don't over-engineer a simple operation, but don't under-document either.

🐣 Piyo: "What if I can't fully eliminate a Red risk?"

Acceptable: Propose mitigations to reduce it to Yellow. Example: "Pilot fatigue is a risk; we mitigate with 2-hour maximum flight duration per pilot per day, daily rest requirement." Residual risk is Yellow (occasional + major), which is acceptable with controls.

🦉 Poppo: "How often must I update my SORA?"

Annually recommended. More frequently if: New aircraft type added, new geographic area, significant incident occurs, or new technology implemented. Submit updated SORA to CASA for approval.

🐣 Piyo: "Can I use a template SORA without customization?"

Call to Action

SORA is not a checkbox exercise; it's the foundation of your operational safety case. A well-developed SORA demonstrates to CASA (and to yourself) that you understand your risks and have credible mitigations.

MmowW provides the operational data and documentation infrastructure to support a living SORA. Start your free trial—A$8.50/drone/month—and build a defensible safety program.

References

CASA Specific Operations Risk Assessment (SORA) Guidance Material
CASA SORA Template & Examples (casa.gov.au)
CASR Part 102: Commercial Unmanned Aircraft Operations
Risk Management Standards: ISO 31000 (international reference)
EASA (European Union) SORA Framework (comparable standards)