The company has developed a system that is based on the Apple Vision Pro AR system. The high-fidelity imagery of aircraft flight decks allows trainees to manipulate all the controls and view the instruments and status indicators in real time as they do so.

The system won’t replace full-on flight training device hours, but it will allow trainees to master homework tasks.

“The Apple Vision Pro App developed by CAE will allow pilots to familiarize themselves with the flight deck, practice critical procedures and develop muscle memory for key functions from anywhere,” Emmanuel Levitte, CAE’s chief technology and product officer, said in a statement. 

The company has fully developed the app for the Bombardier Global 7500 but says it can be adapted to any aircraft.

AVweb’s Russ Niles took the goggles for a spin and said the system is startlingly realistic.

“The fidelity and the virtual manipulation of the controls is hard to describe until you’ve done it,” Niles said. “With some practice, a trainee could be confidently running procedures and dealing with emergencies in a realistic way without leaving the couch. The prospects for this kind of training device are significant.”

Niles spoke with CAE’s Director of Incubation Eric Fortin, who developed the system, about its possibilities.

Editor’s Note: This article first appeared on AVweb.

The post CAE Develops AR For Flight Training appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

At the National Business Aviation Administration-Business Aviation Convention and Exhibition (NBAA-BACE) in Las Vegas, FAA Administrator Mike Whitaker signed the SFAR, which contains initial operational rules and pilot training requirements for powered-lift aircraft and will remain in effect for 10 years.

“It’s here today,” Whitaker told NBAA-BACE attendees Tuesday morning. “It is now a final rule.”

The FAA called the SFAR the “final piece in the puzzle” for introducing powered-lift aircraft, which could begin flying passengers, cargo, and even ambulance services in rural and urban areas as soon as next year.

The category is a relatively new, special class of aircraft covering designs that take off vertically like a helicopter but cruise on fixed wings like an airplane. To be considered powered-lift, the aircraft must generate lift primarily from its engines—which can be electric, hydrogen, or hybrid-powered—while relying on rigid components, usually wings, for horizontal flight. They will become the first new category of civil aircraft since helicopters were introduced in the 1940s.

The FAA sometimes refers to these as vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) or advanced air mobility (AAM) aircraft, the latter term covering new aircraft technology more broadly.

For years, the agency communicated to the aviation industry that there would be a pathway for powered-lift designs—such as electric air taxis being developed by Joby Aviation, Archer Aviation, and others—to be certified as Part 23 normal category aircraft.

But the regulator unexpectedly reversed course in 2022, determining instead that they would be certified as Part 21 special class aircraft. That kicked off a yearslong effort to develop an entirely new set of rules for powered-lift pilot training, operations, maintenance, and more.

The FAA last year released a proposal addressing several of those areas. It was panned by a collective of industry groups, however, who argued that the proposed pilot training requirements were too strict. They also clamored for performance-based operational rules—drawing from aircraft and rotorcraft guidelines as appropriate—rather than the creation of a new powered-lift operational category, as the FAA proposed.

FAA and Department of Transportation officials have promised to address the industry’s concerns. According to Whitaker, the SFAR does exactly that.

“For the last 80 years, we’ve had two types [of aircraft], rotor and fixed wing,” he said. “We now have a third type…and this rule will create an operating environment so these companies can figure out how to train pilots. They can figure out how to operate.”

The SFAR applies helicopter rules to certain phases of powered-lift flight, regardless of whether the aircraft is operating like a helicopter or an airplane. But in response to the industry’s feedback, it uses performance-based rules for certain operations, applying airplane, rotorcraft, or helicopter rules as appropriate.

For example, powered-lift aircraft can use helicopter minimums for VFR and IFR fuel requirements and minimum safe altitudes when they are capable of performing a vertical landing at any point along the route, as a helicopter is. This will allow manufacturers to get around the issue of low battery energy density, for example, by lowering the fuel reserve requirement.

“The rulemaking approach now is to really focus on performance and making sure you can prove that you can operate safely, or you can meet certain performance metrics, rather than being prescriptive and telling you exactly how to do it,” Whitaker said. “So we’re trying to create a larger envelope to have different means of compliance for some of the requirements and the rules.”

The approach mirrors the European Union Aviation Safety Agency’s (EASA) special class for VTOL (SC-VTOL) rules, which base operational guidelines on situational factors—like reserve fuel levels—instead of aircraft design. It’s a change that will be welcomed by manufacturers, who can now design aircraft for a wide range of operations rather than those defined by a narrow powered-lift category.

“We need to have the flexibility to allow these businesses to succeed, do so safely, and adjust our approach as we go along,” Whitaker said.

The other major difference between the SFAR and the FAA’s initial proposal is the creation of a pathway to train powered-lift pilots with a single set of flight controls. Some programs will still require dual controls. But throwover controls and simulator training will be acceptable substitutes. The change is a big one, as many powered-lift manufacturers designed their aircraft—including trainers—with single controls.

“Some pilot training can happen in the normal way that it’s always happened, with an instructor that has a set of controls and a student that has a set of controls,” Whitaker said. “But sometimes it’s a single set of controls that are accessible to an instructor, so we have rules that allow for that type of operation. And sometimes they have other configurations. So there again, we put in performance metrics to make sure that the companies can train instructors, and the instructors can train pilots.”

Last year, the FAA released a blueprint intended to serve as a framework for policymakers, describing a “crawl-walk-fly” approach to integrate powered-lift designs alongside conventional aircraft. The agency predicts they will initially use existing helicopter routes and infrastructure, and pilots will communicate with air traffic control as needed.

But Whitaker on Tuesday said the FAA will continue developing a new ecosystem for powered-lift aircraft. Critical to its blueprint is the construction of vertiports: vertical takeoff and landing sites equipped with electric chargers and other powered-lift infrastructure.

“The blueprint that we put in place 16 months ago for introducing this technology includes vertiports, and we’ll continue to work on that issue,” Whitaker said.

Plenty more work must be done in order for powered-lift designs to take to the skies at scale. But the SFAR gives the industry a practical pathway to begin flying.

Like this story? We think you’ll also like the Future of FLYING newsletter sent every Thursday afternoon. Sign up now.

The post FAA Finalizes Rules for Powered-Lift Aircraft appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

There were two choices for instrument approach plates: the government-printed National Ocean Service (NOS), or Jeppesen. Every fledgling instrument candidate had to choose which they would use.

I learned to fly IFR using NOS products. As I recall, it was the cost of the Jeppesen charts subscription combined with the fact my ex-U.S. Air Force instructor—who said he “cut his teeth” on NOS—that made me lean toward the latter. 

It was the 1990s and everything was still on paper. There were tactile as well as visual differences between Jeppesen and NOS. The first thing a fledgling instrument pilot noticed was that the paper used for the Jeppesen products was lighter and felt more delicate than the NOS plates, which are printed on newsprint.

In 2000, Jeppesen Sanderson Inc. was acquired by the Boeing Company, and Jeppesen continues to be the industry standard for commercial aviation. According to my professional pilot friends, their employers pick up the cost of the subscription. The cost varies, depending on how much geographic coverage you seek.

If you use both NOS and Jeppesen—and many pilots do—you will notice similarities between the two, as well as subtle differences.

The graphics are similar, but slightly different, so you will want to study before you take the aircraft into the soup. If you are seeking to become “bilingual,” it’s helpful to get an approach you know well and compare Jeppesen and NOS side by side. 

These are just a few things you will want to keep in mind:

Take It From the Top

Jeppesen approach plates have a briefing strip at the top that spells out the most pertinent information an instrument pilot needs. That information includes the name and the identifier of the airport, the expiration date of the plate, if the airport has category A, B, and C approaches, and what kind of approach it is (VOR DME, in bold letters, for example). 

Beneath this are several rows of rectangular boxes with the radio frequencies, navigational aid used for the approach, final approach course, altitude for glideslope intercept, MDA or DH, and airport elevation. Missed approach procedures are spelled out, and there are a few lines of notes specific to the airport.

The NOS plate is arranged with the name of the airport and type of approach on the top right, with the navigational aid and final approach course on the top left along with elevation of the airport, touchdown zone, and runway. NOS also has a “T” in a black triangle to let the pilot know there are obstacles to be avoided during takeoff, and conversely an “A” in a black triangle to give similar warnings about the approach.You will have to flip through the binder to find the page that has this information. 

The NOS binder, if hard copy, can be bulky. I learned to divide mine into A-N, then have another binder for M-Z.

The Jeppesen plates have more detail on them and more bold type to indicate the fixes that define the approach. The course the aircraft is supposed to fly is depicted by a heavy dark line and an arrow.

The NOS charts also have an arrow line, but the line is thinner. Also, the airport diagram with the field elevation appears on the lower right side of the page, along with information about the type of lighting in use.

Both plates use a segmented arrow to depict the missed approach procedure.

As NOS are used extensively by the U.S. military, you’ll find notes for these pilots in parenthesis on the plates, as well.

NOS also has “shelf life” information printed on the side. For example on the VOR/DME-A for Gillespie County Airport (T82) in Fredericksburg, Texas, it reads “05 Sep 2004 to 3 Oct 2024.”

Electronic Versus Paper

You will likely find it challenging to find a pilot outside the training environment who still uses paper charts. It’s much easier to store charts digitally in a tablet than it is to carry a binder—or in some instances, a suitcase—of charts with you in the cockpit. You have probably seen those large suitcase flight bags pilots used to carry to accommodate their approach plates.

At the flight school level, it can behoove you to know both Jeppesen and NOS, as the more skills you have, the more employable you are.

The post What to Consider When Choosing Instrument Approach Plates appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Most first-time flight students accept this, not knowing that they can change instructors if it’s not a good fit. They may not know it’s not a good fit unless someone points it out to them. 

Your instructor should be available at least twice a week for lessons, should be able to answer your questions and provide you with a syllabus, or at the very least an outline of what you can expect in each phase of training. And perhaps most importantly, your CFI should be your advocate—helping you over the obstacles and, to some extent, helping you move forward in your training.

School Culture

By definition, an advocate is someone who supports a cause or person. In this case, the flight student is also the customer.

Ask if the flight school business model supports CFI advocacy for the learners. You may get a deer-in-the-headlights look. It often boils down to a single CFI assigned to a learner, rather than the learner flying with whomever is available at that time. If there are multiple CFIs working with the learner, it can be challenging for the student to connect with an individual and for a particular CFI to become an advocate for them.

The benefit of having a CFI who will advocate for you can make all the difference. It is a lot easier to learn when you are working with a CFI who is invested in your success. This CFI will give you the tools you need to be a safe and competent pilot. You will be taught how to use the syllabus, Airman Certification Standards, Federal Aviation Regulations/Aeronautical Information Manual, Pilot’s Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge and the Airplane Flying Handbook rather than falling back on the dreaded phrase “my instructor told me.”

What to Expect

Having your CFI as an advocate doesn’t mean the CFI will pencil whip your logbook, bribe the DPE, or allow you to cut corners. On the contrary, they will learn how to best teach you and then apply that knowledge.

For example, if you are a flight student who needs something tangible to hold in their hand to grasp a concept, your CFI might create a model of airspace for you to hold as you learn.

If you are an athlete and play multiple sports, the CFI may use a sports metaphor to help you grasp a concept. Aiming at a particular spot on the runway and knowing that you will touch down just past it, for example, is similar to the way a forward pass in football is thrown ahead of the receiver.

A CFI who is your advocate will also likely experiment until they find what teaching method works best for you. They will also help you find a DPE that works best with your personality, and may even make introductions to help put you at ease.

A CFI that advocates for you will be supportive when you are successful and offer gentle correction when something needs to change. They will listen to your concerns, encourage you to develop your own weather minimums, and follow the IMSAFE pilot fitness checklist.

There will be days when the weather is beyond your capability and comfort level, and, to some extent, what can be managed by dual instruction. Remember, the purpose of flight training is to teach someone how to fly, not for the CFI to show off their skills. Both the CFI and learner need to ask themselves, “What will the learner get out of this today?”

There may be times when the flight student perceives they are not being treated fairly, such as if they were not allowed to fly because their airplane was given to someone else. Perhaps it was because those other learners had check rides coming up in a day, and those take priority. This needs to be explained to the student up front because hard feelings limit learning.

If it appears the school is trying to stretch out a learner’s training by only allowing them to fly once a week, it’s time to have a talk with the school scheduling department. It may not be aware that this tactic is not in the best interest of the flight student, as it makes it near impossible to retain knowledge or skill. 

If the student is getting in their own way but not having the time or resources to fly more than once a week, it is time to have a talk with them about putting off training until they have the time and resources to commit to flying at least three times a week.

If it comes down to a personality clash between the learner and CFI, it’s best for the flight student to fly with someone else. Be up-front, be polite, be professional, and make the change. Remember, learning to fly is about the student’s needs.

To the flight students, if your CFI suggests you fly with someone else, this can be a favor. If they truly are your advocate, they want what is best for you.

The post Finding an Advocate in Flight Lessons appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Pipistrel is part of the Textron eAviation segment of Textron Inc. According to Textron, the Velis Electro received full type certification from the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) in 2020, followed by an FAA exemption earlier this year that permits it to be used for flight training.

• READ MORE: Textron Loans Pipistrel Velis Electro to Smithsonian

“The foundation has leased the Velis Electro to Proteus Air Services, a flight school in Santa Monica, where it will be used primarily for pilot training,” said Eco-Aviation president Scott Burgess. “Additional discovery flights in the Velis Electro will provide hands-on, educational experiences for students and others in the community. These flights are designed to inspire and educate community members about the possibilities within the aviation sector, particularly those who may not have previously considered it as a viable career path.”

Burgess said the Velis Electro was selected because it offers a lower-cost and more sustainable learning platform for student pilots to acquire flying skills while giving them early experience on next-generation power systems. 

“The aircraft is quiet, producing noise levels of only 60 decibels, low cost, and user friendly, making it an ideal solution for flight training with zero carbon emissions,” he said, adding that the foundation is expecting the arrival of its second Velis Electro in November.

• READ MORE: Pipistrel’s Velis Electro Promises Electric Revolution

More Than Flight Training

In addition to providing flight training, the Eco-Aviation Foundation has plans to create an Eco Flight Ground School and initiate scholarships while working with local youth-focused community centers and aviation training opportunities.

According to the foundation, the scholarships will fund private pilot ground school, training on electric aircraft technologies, and the FAA knowledge test.

The post Santa Monica Flight School to Deploy Pipistrel Velis Electro Trainer appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Within the next month, the FAA will release a final rule outlining pilot certification and initial operations for electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) air taxis and other powered-lift aircraft, a U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) official said Thursday.

At Honeywell’s third annual Advanced Ait Mobility (AAM) Summit in Washington, D.C., Christopher Coes, acting undersecretary of transportation for policy within the DOT, said a highly anticipated special federal aviation regulation (SFAR) defining the rules will be published in the next few weeks.

“The department has a final rule for our powered-lift operations, and we expect that that will be published in the next month,” Coes said. “And I think you will see it is quite responsive to the industry’s comments.”

Industry Raises Concerns

The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for the powered-lift SFAR in June 2023. The rule would set alternative training and eligibility requirements for certifying powered-lift pilots as well as create operational rules for passenger and cargo transport.

But the document was decried by a collective of stakeholders, spearheaded by the General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA), who took issue with many of the agency’s proposals.

Namely, industry groups believe powered-lift training courses should credit existing rotorcraft and airplane category certificates, and pilots should be able to add a powered-lift rating directly to those permissions. They urged the FAA to lower the threshold for powered-lift flight hours, remove a requirement that limits training to dual control aircraft, and allow more training in simulators.

The groups also argue that performance-based—rather than prescriptive—rules should be used for powered-lift flight, such as by applying airplane and rotorcraft rules as appropriate rather than creating a new category of operations.

Kristie Greco Johnson, senior vice president of government affairs for the National Business Aviation Association (NBAA), said Thursday that members are seeking a “practical pathway” to AAM integration. And the SFAR could be that pathway.

“AAM isn’t a future Jetsons concept,” Johnson said. “It is actually happening right now in our airspace.”

Amanda Joyner, managing director of government affairs for GAMA, agreed with Johnson and said members are hopeful that the SFAR will help them to get their products on the market quickly. Eventually, investment into AAM manufacturers will dry up if the firms are unable to demonstrate a product, so a final rule could help them begin to turn a profit.

What It Means

The deadline for a powered-lift SFAR is December 16, as mandated by the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 signed into law on May 16—a provision that was lauded by industry organizations, private companies, and lawmakers alike.

The FAA earlier this week missed the bill’s September 16 deadline to issue a NPRM for beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS) drone flight. But Andrew Miller, a staffer on the Senate Commerce Minority Committee, and Alexander Simpson, a staffer on that chamber’s majority counterpart, said they are confident the FAA will meet the SFAR timeframe. Hunter Presti, a staffer on the House Majority Transportation Committee, is optimistic but believes it will be tight.

According to Simpson, should the agency miss its deadline, existing standards and regulations for rotorcraft and fixed-wing aircraft would apply to powered-lift models.

Coes said his office is simultaneously developing a U.S. national strategy to safely integrate AAM operations alongside conventional aircraft. That plan has been in the works for over a year and is under department review.

The initiative will require an interagency review and final briefing to Congress, “but I am confident that this will be a set of documents that can be championed by the industry, by academia, by labor, our state and local partners, as well as Congress,” Coes said.

Coes added that his team is working with the International Civil Aviation Organization’s AAM study group to harmonize international consensus on AAM standards, practices, and procedures. The goal, he said, is to ensure the U.S. takes the reins on those provisions.

Conference attendees including Coes hope the FAA and other federal agencies will be able to use the Los Angeles Olympic Games in 2028 as a showcase for AAM technology. The event could also serve as a proving ground for the integration of AAM aircraft with other transportation systems.

In support of that effort, the FAA last year released its Innovate28 blueprint for air taxi integration. Earlier this year, the agency proposed comprehensive certification criteria for AAM aircraft, laying the groundwork to get them approved to fly.

But there is still a long way to go, and the powered-lift SFAR—whenever it is released—will be a key part of the process.

Like this story? We think you’ll also like the Future of FLYING newsletter sent every Thursday afternoon. Sign up now.

The post DOT: Final Rule on Air Taxi Pilot Training, Operations Coming Soon appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Graduates of T-38 training usually go on to fighters or bombers, but the acute shortage means that there aren’t enough pilots available for the other duty tracks.

According to a memo, the Air Force reported that the service is short by 1,848 pilots, with “1,142 of those being fighter pilots.”

Still, the memo identified a “significant but necessary policy change” opening up other career paths for T-38 graduates.

“While we would prefer to send every qualified T-38 graduate to a fighter [formal training unit], circumstances dictate that we utilize available capacity to maximize pilot production,” the memo said. “In the near term, in addition to traditional fighter/bomber assignments, T-38 graduates will be matched to additional T-6 First Assignment Instructor Pilot assignments and opted for non-fighter/bomber aircraft.”

Editor’s Note: This article first appeared on AVweb.

The post Air Force Pilot Shortage Could Send Some to Noncombat Roles appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Bloomberg reports that the training sessions will begin as early as November, lasting into 2025.

The requirement extends to all of the airline’s nearly 11,000 pilots with training sessions taking place for one day at its Dallas headquarters. A company memo cited by the news outlet said the training sessions are intended to discuss “specific events and working together as a flight crew to appropriately manage risks.”

In April, a Southwest Boeing 737 Max 8 dropped within 400 feet of the Pacific Ocean near Lihue, Hawaii. Later, two separate Southwest flights received low altitude alerts, descending within hundreds of feet over Oklahoma City and Tampa, Florida, while still several miles from the respective airfields.

Another Southwest flight from Portland, Maine, to Baltimore took off from a closed runway in June.

In the same memo, the airline acknowledged the spike in incidents, adding that “meaningful work is underway to address these events and advance our safety.”

The FAA is currently conducting a safety audit on the carrier, similar to what United Airlines faced earlier this year.

Editor’s Note: This article first appeared on AirlineGeeks.com.

The post String of Safety Incidents Prompt Additional Southwest Pilot Training appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

This was the learner’s third flight lesson, and already he had mastered the use of the checklist. 

I stood back, silently observing—it appeared someone had not used the checklist when they shut down the aircraft. 

To shut down the engine, the mixture knob or lever is pulled full aft, with the knob or lever left out. Yet, looking at this cockpit it was obvious someone had put the knob back in.

As that was not the correct procedure, the learner took extra care with the inspection, calling my attention to several other discrepancies. He found several electrical switches left “on,” the most disconcerting of which was the avionics master switch. This aircraft had several placards warning the pilot to make sure the radio was off before activating the avionics master switch and to make sure the avionics master was off before activating the aircraft master switch.

According to the chief mechanic and owner of the Cessna 172, if these procedures were not followed, a surge of power could be sent to the radios, possibly damaging them. Apparently this had happened in the past. In addition to the placards, there was a warning written in all caps and in red on the checklist.

• READ MORE: How to Beat the Summer Heat When Flying

This wasn’t a one-time experience. The mixture knobs in other aircraft were also found in the full rich position. It was obvious someone—perhaps several someones—were not following the checklists.

The flight school was busy, as most of the instructors were flying eight hours per day, and there were multiple student pilots with solo privileges renting the aircraft. The concern of the chief CFI was that the instructors were not teaching checklist use, or worse yet, not demonstrating and modeling proper cockpit procedures. The CFIs were reminded to carefully watch their learners and remind them to use and follow the checklist during each phase of flight. 

An email was sent to all the renters and students, asking them to please use the checklists especially on aircraft shutdown. Some of the learners were confused by the email, because they thought the only problem that could arise from an improperly shutdown aircraft was the potential of a “hot prop,” the term for the magnetos being left on.

When the magnetos are shut off, the spark is grounded to the airframe. If the magnetos are left on, the spark is not grounded, and there is the possibility the prop can “kick,” as in move forcefully on its own if bumped or repositioned by hand. Approach the propeller like it is a big dog you don’t know—with caution and respect.

• READ MORE: Discovering Situational Awareness in the Instrument World

I have seen the aftermath of someone getting hit by a prop. It was at a Saturday morning fly-in pancake breakfast. It was winter and one of those cold, clear days that are so rare in the Pacific Northwest. The owner of the Cessna 172 was moving the prop by hand to a vertical position to signal that he needed fuel. 

I was two spots away when I heard the impact. I turned in time to see him on the ground. The engine hadn’t started because the mixture was out, but the prop had rotated on its own, coming down rapidly and striking his arm.

Although shaken, he said he was fine, as he was wearing a heavy winter jacket, and it prevented him from getting a serious injury. Or so he thought. A few minutes later he collapsed. We thought he was having a heart attack. He was lucky that several of the people in attendance were paramedics. When they got his jacket off, they discovered his arm was broken— there was bruising and swelling — and determined that he was in shock. 

I share this story with my learners. Oddly enough, the one who was skeptical of the damage a  live propeller could do was the one who had the ignition key break off during aircraft shutdown. It was the policy of the school to quickly switch to “off,” then back to “both” to determine the mags could be grounded to the airframe, then shut the engine off. As he switched back to both, the key sheared off. The mags were stuck on. 

We shut the aircraft down by pulling the mixture full after and depriving the engine of fuel and turned off the master switch. I ran inside to get the chief mechanic while the learner stayed with the airplane, standing behind the strut, and warning his classmates of the potentially live and therefore dangerous prop. 

We both watched as the chief mechanic used one of his specialized tools to turn the mags to the off position and removed what was left of the key. As he got out of the aircraft he looked at the student and playfully admonished him: “Go easier on the Wheaties! You’re breaking the keys!”

As for the identity of the pilot who was improperly shutting down the aircraft, he was a private candidate who thought he was helping the other pilots by putting the mixture to the “rich” position at the end of the flight because it was on the engine start checklist, and he wanted to save the pilots a step.

After he was educated about the importance of following the checklist, the behavior ceased as learning had taken place.

The post The Importance of Following Checklists appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

The company on Monday said it completed the first pilot training program for its Alia CTOL (also called the CX300) with a customer, United Therapeutics (UT), and its subsidiary, Unither Bioelectronics. Beta took company leaders and flight operations executives through its full CX300 pilot training syllabus, which the company intends to use during future in-aircraft training once approved by the FAA.

The move represents a step toward finalizing a CX300 training product to accompany initial aircraft deliveries to customers. Beta expects to begin deliveries next year following type certification.

UT was Beta’s first customer, placing an order for the company’s electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) Alia model and electric charging stations. The firm is also an investor, having provided Beta with $52 million to get off the ground and a $48 million contract to build Alia, which it helped design. Martine Rothblatt, founder and CEO of UT and a member of the Beta board, was the first noncompany pilot to fly the aircraft.

When Beta unveiled the CX300 in 2023, UT was one of its first customers alongside Bristow Group and Air New Zealand. The company intends to use the two aircraft to quickly transport medical cargo, such as 3D-printed organs, at what Beta claims will be a fraction of the cost of conventional designs.

Both models are fully electric and designed to carry up to 1,000 pounds of cargo, or as many as five passengers, in a space of 200 cubic feet, cruising at 135 knots. The Alia has an expected range of 250 nm, while the more robust CX300 has demonstrated a range of 336 nm during test flights.

Beta has already begun installing a nationwide network of electric charging stations for its aircraft to tap into and is working with FBO networks such as Signature Aviation and Atlantic Aviation to electrify their terminals.

But one major step remaining for the company, and all electric aircraft manufacturers, is developing a pilot training curriculum.

Beta’s tailored CX300 syllabus, which the company said it has been refining for years, must still be approved by an FAA Flight Standards District Office. Walking a customer through the process, though, suggests that the firm is anticipating the green light sooner rather than later.

Over three days, Beta took a team comprising seasoned Unither helicopter and fixed-wing pilots through a three-step curriculum covering ground training requirements, familiarization with the aircraft and its systems, and operational employment for air ambulance missions.

The process began with overviews of the aircraft’s manuals, aerodynamics, concept of operations, limitations, and requirements, followed by reviews of its electric propulsion technology, fly-by-wire flight controls, and other atypical systems.

Capping off the campaign was a series of simulator rehearsals, during which Unither pilots completed practical exercises, performance planning, and preflight and ground operations. These culminated in two simulated missions—one IFR, one VFR—along routes the company intends to fly with the aircraft.

“The tailored syllabus from this event will be used with future in-aircraft training utilizing Beta’s dual-seat trainer configuration,” Beta said.

Beta so far has trained eight of its own pilots to fly the CX300, in addition to Rothblatt and pilots from the FAA, U.S. Air Force, Army, and customers UPS and Bristow. This year, it completed several “real-world” missions during two CX300 deployments for the Air Force under its contract with AFWERX, the department’s innovation arm.

More recently, Beta received a lift when the FAA authorized it to begin training pilots on its Alia eVTOL. The company tells FLYING it will eventually walk UT and Unither pilots through a separate curriculum for that model.

Like this story? We think you’ll also like the Future of FLYING newsletter sent every Thursday afternoon. Sign up now.

The post Beta Walks First Customer Through Electric Aircraft Pilot Curriculum appeared first on FLYING Magazine.