FAA’s Electric Aircraft Bottleneck Is Certification and Airport Readiness
Deployment of electric aircraft in the U.S. has become a challenge beyond the mere prototyping stage. It is now a question whether the existing regulatory framework, engineering capacity and airport infrastructure can sustain the safe entry into service of electric aircraft. This is a more pressing obstacle than the sheer availability of concepts and ideas.
Derrick Collins from the Government Accountability Office defined electric aircraft as battery-powered aircraft that utilize electric motors in place of fuel-powered engines in order to drive propellers or turbines either fully or partially. Manufacturers are working on both fully electric and hybrid-electric aircraft primarily for short- and medium-range purposes. Such aircraft include conventional and vertical take-off aircraft meant to be used for regional and rural air services, pilot training, medical evacuation and urban passengers transportation.
Regulatory challenge is relatively simple – electric propulsion is not covered by existing FAA airworthiness standards. It means that the agency has to evaluate electrically powered aircraft on a case-by-case basis. To date, the FAA did not certify any manned electric aircraft and it is unknown when such operations will become commercial.
From an engineering-policymaking perspective, it is important since these vehicles cannot be categorized as traditional ones. Some electric aircraft combine features of fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters, which makes the FAA use several airworthiness standards to evaluate one and the same product. It means that certification is not only a question of proving the efficacy of motor or batteries. The task is to prove the whole aircraft, its propulsion architecture and operating concept to be equivalent in terms of safety to conventional aircraft.
It is the reason why the FAA relies on the use of special conditions for each separate project. These project-specific regulations are supposed to confirm that a newly developed technology allows to reach the same safety standard as traditional types of aircrafts. Over time the agency plans to change regulations in order to provide more standardized reviews but now it should rely on project-specific approach.
Staffing is another constraint. According to Derrick Collins, manufacturers and all other participants of the process emphasized the need of FAA in in-house expertise for certification and evaluation of the novel technology. Collins especially highlighted the issue of hiring of engineers in disciplines like propulsion. The FAA recognized the need of more personnel and was taking necessary steps to hire specialists in this area.
The need for new staff is not only related to the numbers. Certification of electric aircraft requires regulators who are capable of evaluating tightly interconnected systems including propulsion, energy storage, electrical distribution, control mechanisms and aircraft-level safety effects. Practically speaking, the speed of the process depends not only on the preparedness of an applicant but also on the possibility of a regulator to analyze novel architectures and technologies properly.
Infrastructure is the third major constraint. Collins called it an important challenge of the process of deployment and according to FAA data only 47 airports had made a plan for providing charging stations for electric aircrafts by the end of 2025. It is a limited base for national aviation system, especially if the first operations of these aircraft are expected to be carried out at regional and general aviation airports.
Airport readiness is not only a question of installing chargers. Airports are characterized by high start-up costs, uncertain demand and problems with providing of electrical power. Collins stated that some airports may require dedicated transformers or large-scale battery energy storage systems to provide enough power for electric aircraft. It means that airport operators should not think only about aviation but also about utility interconnection, peak load management and long-term investments in infrastructure.
There is also a systems integration-related reason why regional airports are supposed to be the starting point. Collins underlined that regional deployment may be one of the important advantages of electric aircraft, allowing connecting citizens to the national aviation system. In addition, Collins also mentioned that regional and general aviation airports can be attractive destinations since they have less congested airspace and more free land for ground infrastructure. However, even in this case the FAA would still have to establish the same safety standard for these airports.
The next step is data collection. In March FAA selected eight pilot projects located in 26 states for collecting data necessary for providing guidance for safe integration of electric aircraft into the National Airspace System. The process is important since certification of electric aircrafts does not mean the creation of operational ecosystem yet. The agency still needs to develop practical guidelines for the integration of these aircraft into airport operations and airspace system while maintaining safety of passengers, cargo and all other users of the system.
The main lesson is that the development of electric aviation in the U.S. is not only the aircraft design program anymore. Its success will be measured by the degree of maturity of airworthiness standards, propulsion expertise, airport capacity for providing of electricity and integration into National Airspace System rather than the number of concepts presented. In aviation new propulsion is important only when the whole system is ready to certify, support and operate it.
Thomas Caldwell, AMI’s Senior Editor for Mechanical & Mobility Engineering covers vehicle electronics, systems integration, electrification, chassis systems, propulsion and safety policy.
