There’s a subset of the population that simply craves excess and revels in abundance.

While that may be true for some jet-setting globetrotters, in the world of GA aircraft ownership, such thinking is relatively rare. Big airplanes have correspondingly big fuel tanks that cost big money to top off.

But what if your mission calls for heavy iron? What if your top priority was to own and fly the biggest airplane possible?

Here in the U.S., such dreams are complicated somewhat by an FAA regulation that requires in-depth training and certification—known as a type rating—to fly jet aircraft or any aircraft with a maximum takeoff weight in excess of 12,500 pounds. While structured, thorough training isn’t necessarily something one should avoid, the regulation begs the question: What are some of the biggest aircraft types a typical private pilot could fly without crossing that threshold and having to undergo such training?

Here, we explore your options if size were prioritized over the typical factors we consider during an aircraft purchase:

Cessna 208 Caravan

Ask just about any Caravan pilot how it flies, and they will invariably describe the big Cessna as nothing more than an oversized 182.

Simple systems, docile handling, and flight characteristics  similar to just about every Cessna produced with tricycle gear define the Caravan. Those who fly them for a living might lament the presence of a propeller or the lack of a swept wing, but they’re always quick to praise it overall.

• READ MORE: Seeking Out Ghosts of Your Airplane’s Past

First flown in 1982, the Caravan continued a trend that arguably began with the growth of the 172 into ever-larger variants. After the 172 and 182 first flew in 1956, subsequent larger versions appeared in the ’60s, including the 205, 206, and 207. Popular in remote, rugged regions like Alaska, these workhorses earned a solid reputation for reliably moving people and cargo into and out of challenging areas—and doing so economically. The Caravan is known as “the flying Swiss Army knife” because of its versatility.

As these models sold through the ’70s, Cessna began exploring a larger, clean-sheet development that would utilize a Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A turbine powerplant. The resulting model 208 Caravan saw immediate success—initially in the original configuration as a nine-to-13-passenger aircraft, but particularly after 

FedEx ordered 177 cargo variants a short time later.

Most private owners opt for the standard passenger version or the lengthened Grand Caravan with additional seating. The cabin can be configured with high-density seating for utilitarian operations or plush club seating that resembles the seating arrangement of private jets. With full-fuel payloads in excess of 1,000 pounds and an available belly pod that enables the transport of baggage without cluttering up the cabin, overnight trips with friends become simple and straightforward.

Perhaps the most impressive aspect of the Caravan, however, is how simple and straightforward it is to exercise such capability. Even the Grand Caravan, with its nearly 9,000-pound maximum takeoff weight, 

performs as predictably as a four-seat 182. Transitions into the big Cessna are simplified with modern Garmin avionics, and the type is popular enough that qualified training is easy to find.

One of the Caravan’s most intriguing aspects is the availability of Wipaire amphibious floats. Equally capable of operating from land or water, these enable anyone with a seaplane rating to access an even wider variety of destinations–and have fun doing it.

One Caravan amphibian owner inbound to this year’s EAA AirVenture was reportedly notified of an incident at the airport and instructed to hold around a lake for an estimated 45 minutes. Making the best of the situation, the pilot simply landed on the lake, shut down, and went for a swim with his friends until arrivals were allowed in.

If that’s not a fun way to operate a big airplane, we don’t know what is. 

Grumman Goose

While the Cessna Caravan can achieve some impressive things with its amphibious floats, there’s something to be said for a pure flying boat—particularly one with the lineage and soul of a classic 1930s-era Grumman Goose. A product of aviation’s golden age, developed in the era of barnstormers, airmail, and art deco style, the Goose was one of four twin-engine flying boats of Grumman fame.

The model that most people are familiar with is the hulking, 37,500-pound HU-16 Albatross. Designed to perform rescue operations for the U.S. Coast Guard, it was able to handle rough seas in the open ocean and handily exceeded the 12,500-pound limit for this exercise. The rare G-73 Mallard was the next size down in the Grumman flying boat lineup, and at 12,750 pounds, it only just exceeded our weight limit.

• READ MORE: EAA AirVenture: A Study in Cargo and Packing

The G-21 Goose, on the other hand, weighs in at a respectable 8,000 pounds and thus qualifies for our list of big aircraft for private pilots. Powered by two 9-cylinder Pratt & Whitney R-985 Wasp Junior radial engines that each produce 450 hp, the Goose produces a sound and feel like no horizontally opposed piston or smooth-running turboprop can match. After flying a classic airplane with engines like this, nearly every alternative seems to have the soul of an Amana dishwasher.

There are certain advantages to a flying boat over an airplane with floats. Because the fuselage itself serves as the hull, the center of gravity sits much lower than that of a float plane. This increases stability in the water and, depending on the specific design, can withstand rougher seas. 

Additionally, the lack of external floats and braces can make a flying boat more aerodynamically efficient than an airplane on floats. For example, the Goose can cruise at just over 190 mph, while a Beech 18 on floats—using the same engines—can achieve only about 135 mph. Since both burn roughly 50 gallons per hour in cruise, the Goose’s faster speed makes it the more economical of the two on a given trip.

Of course, the mention of economy is laughable in the context of the Goose. With tailwheel landing gear, five-to-seven seats, multiple engines, and particularly as a seaplane, obtaining insurance would likely require divine intervention. Alternatively, one could become independently wealthy and self-insure.

But performance numbers and cost savings are not what the Goose is about. The Goose is about transporting you to an entirely different era of aviation on every flight. Reach up and grab the ceiling-mounted throttle levers, peer through the prop arcs just ahead of the cockpit windows, feel the reverberation of the big radials, and you might as well be Indiana Jones on your way to dinner in Monaco after delivering provisions to your team of archeologists in Alexandretta.

de Havilland Canada DHC-6 Twin Otter

Moving up from our 8,000-pound contenders, we finally reach the biggest and heaviest aircraft one can fly without a type rating.

At precisely 12,500 pounds, it’s not a coincidence that the maximum takeoff weight of the de Havilland Twin Otter matches the maximum limit imposed by the FAA. De Havilland correctly reasoned that the Twin Otter would be that much more attractive to prospective customers if it could be flown by pilots without a type rating. 

Not that additional advanced training would be a bad thing for Twin Otter pilots. From the beginning, the 19-passenger twin turboprop was designed to access some of the most inhospitable locations on earth. From Antarctic expeditions to the South Pole to commercial service to the shortest commercial runway in the world to hair-raising mountainside operations in Nepal, the Twin Otter has extreme capability, and operators use every bit of it.

If outdoor apparel manufacturer The North Face made an airplane, this would be it.

• READ MORE: The Pros and Cons of Aircraft Towing Solutions

Fundamentally, the Twin Otter differs from other similarly sized twin turboprops in its short takeoff and landing (STOL) performance. With a published STOL takeoff distance of only 1,200 feet to clear a 50-foot obstacle and 1,050 feet for landing over the same 50-foot obstacle, the short-field capability is astounding. 

In comparison, the non-STOL Embraer EMB-110 Bandeirante, with the same engines and the same passenger capacity, requires 2,648 feet and 2,848 feet, respectively.

Everything comes at a price, and this capability is no exception. Equipped with big double-slotted Fowler flaps and drooping ailerons, the wing is optimized for low-speed flight and, consequently, is less efficient at higher speeds. Additionally, the exposed wing struts and fixed landing gear, while lightweight and durable, add more drag to the equation. Ultimately, you can expect a maximum cruise speed of around 160 knots.

The Twin Otter is as versatile as it is capable. Standard landing gear enables operation from rough, unimproved runways. Lightweight straight floats provide water access without much of a payload penalty, while fully amphibious floats are able to be flown from land or water. Similarly, both straight skis and wheel skis are utilized in harsh winter climates like Antarctica.

The end result is perhaps analogous to a heavily modified Jeep Wrangler rock crawler. This is a machine laser-focused on extreme capability, able to access places few others can.

If you want fast, comfortable, long-distance transit, there are far better alternatives. But if you want the ability to take a group of friends and a few weeks of camping supplies deep into the wilderness via short, rudimentary airstrips, the Twin Otter is tough to beat.

Beechcraft King Air 260

Take a survey of the most common mission profiles of most aircraft owners, and you’ll find that landing on mountaintop airstrips in Nepal and delivering supplies to the South Pole tend to rank toward the bottom of the list.

More likely, buyers will be interested in fast, comfortable transportation between well-established metropolitan airports. And if their passengers are able to watch cat videos on Instagram and take naps along the way, all the better.

This is where a proven performer with all-around usability comes into play, and few are as proven as Beechcraft’s King Air family. With lineage extending back to the Twin Bonanza that first flew in 1949, the platform evolved into the ’50s-era, piston-powered Queen Air before culminating in the turboprop King Air family that remains in production today.

While many variations of the King Air have been produced over the years, the line can generally be divided into three primary variants.

The entry-level 90, with seven seats and a 10,100-pound maximum takeoff weight, is commonly positioned as a step up from cabin-class piston twins. Excluding the commuter airline variants like the Model 99 and the 1900, the largest King Air is the 350, with seating for 11 and a maximum takeoff weight of 15,000 pounds or more.

Splitting the gap is the midrange 200-series, exemplified by the King Air 260. Like the Twin Otter, it features a maximum takeoff weight of precisely 12,500 pounds, eliminating the need for type-rated pilots. When it comes to real-world, cross-country capability without a type rating, few options are as refined and proven as this King Air series.

The basic formula hasn’t changed much over the years. Combine two Pratt & Whitney PT6 turboprop powerplants, a roomy cabin with comfortable club seating, and docile, well-mannered handling qualities, and you’ve got a flexible performer that, unsurprisingly, has been successful for decades.

One sign of Beechcraft’s quality is the U.S. military’s continued allegiance to the brand.

Over the years, the Bonanza, Baron, Twin Bonanza, Queen Air, and King Air have all found roles in various branches of the armed forces. If ever there was a “mil-spec” airplane, this would be it, and it’s telling that direct competitors like the Cessna Conquest and Piper Cheyenne never followed suit.

With an avionics suite that includes autothrottles, digital pressurization, and synthetic vision, the newly updated 260 reduces workload, making it easier than ever to manage in flight. In the end, this King Air just might be the single closest thing to a private jet available to fly for pilots without a type rating.

Antonov An-2 Colt

Life isn’t all about sensibility and economic viability. Not all of us dream of flying IFR from one perfectly manicured resort town to another.

In a world of smooth yacht rock and clean-cut golf tournaments, some of us long for Metallica and Burning Man.

For this subset of the flying population, the Antonov An-2 is just the ticket. First flown in 1947 and produced in largely unchanged form for approximately 50 years, this monster taildragger was to the Soviet Union what the C-47 was to the U.S.—a rugged, dependable transport that can survive multiple wars and rise to just about any challenge.

With a maximum takeoff weight of 11,993 pounds, it falls just under our weight limit and is, therefore, a natural contender for one of the largest aircraft one can fly without a type rating.

Since its introduction just after World War II, the An-2 has worn many hats, serving as an airliner, military transport, firefighter, crop duster, and even an armed attack aircraft. Nearly 20,000 examples were built in Russia, Poland, and China. Provided you have the means of shipping and importing goods from those parts of the world, spare parts are plentiful.

Everything about the An-2 is massive, unrefined, and utilitarian. The 9-cylinder Shvetsov ASh-62 engine, a development of the Wright R-1820 Cyclone that powered the Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress and Grumman HU-16 Albatross, produces just over 1,000 hp at takeoff power. While doing so, it consumes a staggering 110 gallons per hour.

According to those fortunate enough to have logged time in the beast, attempting to wrangle it through steep turns and crosswind landings is not unlike trying to ride an inebriated water buffalo through a museum’s display of priceless antiquities and fine china. Significant upper body strength is required, and at times, one wishes for a third arm to keep everything running properly. Once finally established in a given phase of flight, things unfold both slowly and deliberately. 

Slow flight is, in fact, one of the An-2’s greatest strengths. With an estimated stall speed of only 35-40 knots and a kite-like 770 feet of wing area, it requires just over 500 feet of runway for takeoff and slightly more for landing. The kite-like qualities turn against you in crosswinds, however, with anything more than 8 knots described as “intolerable.” Taxiing in winds greater than 20 knots is said to be impossible.

Finding a rational reason to purchase such a machine requires searching one’s heart and ignoring one’s brain. For nearly any mission, there exists a more logical and economical alternative. However, logic and economy are simply not significant factors for those who own and love the An-2. 

Instead, this belching, oily anachronism is itself an experience. The purchase could perhaps be justified during preparation for the onset of a Mad Max-style zombie apocalypse scenario, wherein a large aircraft is needed to survive the harshest conditions imaginable with limited maintenance support.

But otherwise, one purchases an An-2 simply to enjoy the An-2.

This feature first appeared in the September Issue 950 of the FLYING print edition.

The post Planes That Are Not Too Big for Fun appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

To mitigate that, I chose two short flights that can be accomplished in a normal evening’s flight sim session. My selection criteria was to fly my first flight in New England, between two airports that I flew out of when I was training to complete my private pilot certificate. The second flight was a departure and destination in a part of the world where I had zero experience and no prior knowledge of the topography. The idea was to use the first flight of the evening as a warmup with the familiar and then end the night with the challenge of the unknown.

To add to the fun, I met up with a friend of mine from college in the Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 (MSFS2020) multiplayer environment so that we could pilot the flights together in a very loose formation. My friend was just getting back into flight simulation after many years away from the hobby. We used Discord, the free communication app, to stay connected during the flights. Although we flew on MSFS2020, these flights are software-agnostic, and you can easily fly them on X-Plane 11 or XP12. Across both flights, there was only a short time spent in cruise, allowing all phases of the flight to occur quickly, adding to the challenge of staying ahead of the airplane. As a result, both flights delivered adequate feelings of accomplishment and a chance to enjoy a fun, aviation-themed experience from home.

Flight 1, The Familiar: New England Island Hop

• Purpose: Sightseeing
• Software: MSFS2020 with free enhanced airports from www.Flightsim.to
• Route: Departed Nantucket (KACK) Runway 24 to Katama Airpark (1B2) Runway 3
• Aircraft: Cessna 208 Caravan
• Conditions: Summer; live weather, adjusted to midday at noon local time
• Distance: 22 nm
• Time en route: 14 minutes
• Modification: If you are interested in roughly doubling your flight time, I recommend you depart from Block Island (KBID), especially if you have never flown out of the 2,500-foot runway.

After getting Discord set up outside of the flight sim environment, we met up on the ramp at Nantucket, Massachusetts (KACK), using the multiplayer function in MSFS2020. My friend’s father was an active pilot during his childhood and even flew one of the B-17s that toured the country during the 1980s and ’90s.

Since we both share an interest in all things aviation, I jumped at the opportunity to welcome him back into the exciting world of flight simulation, especially considering all the advances made since the flight sims of our college days. Neither of us had tried the multiplayer function in MSFS2020 before, and I was eager to fly with some company since most of my flights from home are solo endeavors, save for the excitement and immersion offered by live ATC services provided by VATSIM and PilotEdge that I regularly layer into my experiences for added realism and a chance to practice on the radio.

• READ MORE: Our Pilots of the Future May Share Sim Stories

For our first flight, we selected the venerable Cessna 208 Caravan, a popular island-hopping aircraft with robust landing gear, which seemed like an ideal choice for our destination. Sitting in our cold and dark aircraft, my friend suggested that I try the digital checklist function in MSFS2020, which is accessed by clicking the icon in the menu bar near the top of your screen once you are loaded into an airplane. Having never flown the Caravan, the digital checklist features a small “eye” icon to the right of the instructions listed. Clicking the “eye” causes the camera to cleanly sweep to the individual button, switch, or lever you need to operate to perform the checklist item. Using the “eye” icon provided a visual flow of the checklist during engine start and helped me understand the layout of the cockpit and controls.

Alternatively, you can use your mouse or hat switch on your yoke to move the camera manually to each item in the cockpit, but the “eye” was much faster and more convenient. Many general aviation aircraft in MSFS and X-Plane offer in-depth systems modeling, making the start-up experience a learning opportunity for the curious sim pilot. On the evening before I try a new airplane, I search for a start-up procedure video on YouTube, just to get familiar ahead of time. @JonBeckett’s channel on YouTube offers both videos and checklists to help get you started. For many years, I used a physical paper checklist in-sim but recently started using the ForeFlight checklist function on the iPad mounted in my flight sim cockpit.

Even though it is another piece of technology to manage, I like the green check mark that is displayed next to each completed item in the ForeFlight checklist. This shows your progress, making it easier to see if you skipped a step. You can also edit a checklist in ForeFlight. I added reminders to complete a takeoff briefing before departure and tap the brakes during climbout to halt the wheels from spinning before raising the landing gear. The sim is an ideal environment to become comfortable with new checklist behaviors, and I have enough practice that I am ready to try it on a future real-world flight.

After engine start, my friend and I taxied our Caravans to Runway 24 for takeoff. We opted for a formation takeoff, and I found it very difficult to stay within 500 feet of my friend’s aircraft. I could immediately tell why formation flying requires a lot of training and how challenging it must be to hone this skill in the real world.

Departing KACK in the Cessna 208 Caravan

Once in the air, we turned west over the ocean toward Katama Airpark (1B2), located on the southeastern corner of nearby Martha’s Vineyard. A popular real-world New England fly-in destination, Katama features a short taxiway connected to a grass parking area right next to the beach, making it one of few beach-side general aviation airports accessible to private aircraft in New England.

I selected Runway 3 as I had landed on it a few times with my instructor during my private pilot flight training a decade earlier. I hadn’t been back to visit Katama in the sim yet, so I hoped my memory of the real-world location would help me with my visual approach. It was a short flight across Nantucket Sound, and I opted for a 2,000-foot cruising altitude, keeping our two-ship flight VFR below a broken line of puffy, fair weather clouds at 2,500 feet that stretched south of the island out into the Atlantic Ocean.

Turning Final for Runway 3 at Katama Airpark (1B2)

Since I use a single 4K 55-inch TV screen as my main monitor, I supplement my situational awareness with ForeFlight on my tablet and my Real Sim Gear G1000 PFD and MFD sitting in my Stay Level Avionix panel. Using all of this information together kept me from overflying the right-base-to-final approach turn, and I rolled out on a 3-mile final with “030” bugged on my heading indicator. Spotting Runway 3 is an interesting visual exercise in both the real and flight sim world.

• READ MORE: Taking a Virtual Flight with the Yawman Arrow

The runways at Katama are neatly cut from the flora of a large field. As there are fields that border the airpark on both the left and right sides, I double-checked to make sure I was lined up with the correct one.

Although Runway 3 is 50 feet wide and 3,700 feet long, it looks narrower and shorter from the air. The light winds kept the last few hundred feet of my approach stable, and I checked to make sure I was at 75 knots, with full flaps and prop full forward. I was interested to find out if grass had been modeled differently than pavement, as the surface in the real world typically requires a soft-field landing, slightly nose high, to minimize the vibration on the aircraft’s landing gear.

With one last trim adjustment before touching down, the Caravan’s muscular suspension deftly swallowed up any surface undulations that may or may not have been modeled, and I let the aircraft roll out to the end of the runway, where I turned around in time to watch my friend come in for his landing.

I particularly enjoy landing at airfields that I have flown into in real life, using the flight sim’s digital version as a bridge back to a memory from my real-world logbook. However, one of the many benefits of home flight simulation is the option to leave behind the familiar and try new destinations in unfamiliar parts of the world. The only cost is your time, and selecting from any of the 37,000 registered airports in MSFS2020 can spark some anxiety of choice, which often leads me to stay in New England, where I have the most real-world flying experience.

But such “comfort zone” behavior does a disservice to a world full of new airport destinations, re-created in impressive detail, waiting just beyond the click of a mouse.

Flight 2, The Unfamiliar: Skagway to Haines, Alaska

• Purpose: Sightseeing
• Software: MSFS2020
• Route: Departed Skagway (PAGY) Runway 20 to Haines (PAHN) Runway 26
• Aircraft: Beechcraft Baron BE58
• Conditions: October; live weather, marginal VFR, light rain, 4 p.m. local time
• Distance: 19 nm
• Time en route: 15 minutes
• Modification: Consider departing from PAHN and then returning to Skagway (PAGY) to try landing on Runway 2. The airport at Skagway sits at 44 feet msl but is ringed by 5,000-plus-foot peaks, making it an intimidating approach but visually stunning.

My friend from college spent part of his formative years living outside of Seattle. An Alaskan cruise with his wife found them departing as passengers in a single-engine GA aircraft out of a small airport called Skagway (PAGY), located roughly 65 nm north of Juneau in a mountainous and glacial region of Alaska near the Canadian border and Coast Mountains. It would have taken me decades of sim flying to find Skagway, and when my friend described the unique geography of steep mountains rising around three sides of the airport, it sounded like the ideal unfamiliar departure point for our next flight.

With live weather enabled, my friend and I met up on the ramp in marginal VFR conditions with light rain and 3 miles visibility. Despite the weather being definitely below my personal minimums in the real world, the conditions gave us a chance to test our visual navigation skills as we flew down the Taiya Inlet to Haines Airport (PAHN). Climbing out of Skagway in the MSFS Baron, I had all the de-icing equipment and pitot heat on as a precaution and was cruising at 3,000, well below the 5,000-foot ridges, to avoid the clouds.

The light rain stopped, and the weather in-sim improved as we approached the town of Haines, and I had a clearer picture of the mountain peaks through the remaining tattered clouds. Beautiful was an understatement, and I used my camera commands to look out over the wings for a better view. The geography of Haines was no less striking than Skagway, and both airports should be on your short list if you have never explored Alaska in the real world or flight simulator. MSFS pulls local METARs when using live weather, and I cross-referenced the information on ForeFlight. The winds were coming from the west out of 220 degrees at 23 knots, providing a 40-degree left crosswind for landing on Runway 26. We chose a flight path that had us make a right turn over Haines toward the airport located northwest of town. My friend opted for a 3-mile right base to final.

Wanting a closer view of the mountains to the west of the airfield, I flew southwest over the Chilkat Inlet. Being mindful of the peaks to the west and blowing snow that was starting to lower visibility, I turned back toward the airport and descended to traffic pattern altitude, which I had set using my altitude selector on the Garmin G1000 PFD. I entered the pattern using a standard 45-degree entry to a left downwind for Runway 26. Consequently, that also gave me a great view of my friend’s aircraft on final approach.

We kept it mostly quiet on the comms for landing, but my friend mentioned the strong crosswind on final. Turning from left base to final, I double-checked that my fuel selectors were on, verified my gear was down, mixtures were set to full, and I moved the Baron’s props to full forward. The strong westerly wind was pushing me off the centerline of 26, which I started correcting with rudder and aileron. I opted for approach flaps only and worked pretty hard to touch down on the left rear wheel first. My Virtual Fly YOKO+ flight yoke builds up mechanical resistance as you approach the edges of the control travel, providing valuable immersion during high workload moments like short final. I landed a bit off the centerline but kept the Baron out of the snowy grass and taxied to the end of the runway, having needed most of the 4,000 feet available.

The unfamiliar geography, marginal VFR conditions, and crosswind on final provided plenty of challenges for a short flight, reminding me how much the home sim experience has to offer. Add to that the unexpected challenges of live dynamic weather, and there were a lot of variables to be managed during the 20-minute flight.

Sometime this winter when the weather in the real world is below your minimums, load up MSFS or X-Plane and try one of the innumerable short flights to a new destination. I hope you enjoy the exploration. Let us know your favorite short flight aircraft/airport combination by writing to edit@flying.media.

Quick MSFS2020 Tips

Visit www.flightsim.to and search for the airports you will be using for your flight. The flight sim community has built enhancements of all kinds to the base Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 sim experience, including both free and payware.

You may find free upgraded airport scenery that you can download and place into your MSFS2020 community folder so that it will be loaded automatically for your flight. Run a search for how to find your community folder, and then set the location as a favorite so you can find it easily in the future.

This column first appeared in the January-February 2024/Issue 945 of FLYING’s print edition.

The post Here Are 2 Quick VFR Flights to Try on Your Home Flight Simulator appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Reliable Robotics, which in November completed the first flight of a Cessna 208B Caravan with no one on board, received military airworthiness approval to begin flight testing and operational missions of remotely piloted aircraft for the U.S. Air Force. The company will demonstrate its dual-use automated flight capabilities for military use cases such as cargo missions.

Reliable’s remotely operated aircraft system (ROAS) completed an airworthiness assessment comprising a comprehensive safety analysis, maintenance and operational evaluations, and testing of its automated flight tech. 

The approval is the latest milestone in the company’s Phase III Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) contract with AFWERX, the innovation arm of the Air Force. That collaboration began in 2021. Since then, Reliable has conducted a demonstration flight at California’s Travis Air Force Base and been contracted by AFWERX to study the possibility of automating large multiengine jets.

Now, the firm is one of only a few in the emerging aviation space with military airworthiness under its belt. Beta Technologies received the first such approval for an electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) design in 2021. Lift Aircraft, maker of the Hexa personal eVTOL, nabbed one the following year. Other manufacturers of novel tech, such as Archer Aviation, also maintain relationships with AFWERX and the Department of Defense.

“Our AFWERX partners are developing exciting automation technologies through robust engineering and flight test campaigns,” said Hank “Hog” Griffiths, AFWERX airworthiness and test lead. “The technology is maturing rapidly and this airworthiness approval for a certified aircraft retrofitted with an autonomous flight system provides significant opportunities for the military.”

ROAS allows pilots to safely operate aircraft from the ground, which could alleviate the sting of pilot shortages. Some even argue automated flight tech could one day be safer than crewed flight.

Reliable is developing the aircraft agnostic system to automate all phases of flight—from taxi to takeoff to landing—for any design. That includes cargo aircraft designed for payloads north of 3,000 pounds.

The company has an entrenched relationship with Textron Aviation and Textron eAviation—the manufacturer’s sustainable flight arm—to retrofit ROAS onto additional Caravans. Textron has delivered more than 3,000 of the aircraft, making it one of the most widely used turboprops in the world.

ROAS’ continuous autopilot system relies on advanced navigation and multiple redundant layers to reach a level of reliability equal to crewed flight, Reliable claims. It includes automatic braking and is positioned as being able to prevent both controlled flight into terrain (CFIT) and loss of control in flight (LOC-I), according to the company.

Redundant hardware and software automate the flight control surfaces and engine controls. Similarly redundant voice and data networks, meanwhile, enable remote command and radio management for pilots.

“Nothing compares to showcasing how our autonomous flight capabilities will immediately enable new ways for the U.S. Air Force and other departments of the military to lead with innovation, improve safety, and project power across the globe,” said former Air Force Major General David O’Brien, senior vice president of government solutions at Reliable.

But Reliable is looking beyond defense use cases. ROAS—capable of automating aircraft with useful loads as high as 3,000 pounds or the ability to take off from shorter runways—could one day enable time-sensitive deliveries to locations currently served by piloted Caravans. In 2022, the company announced plans to launch a fully owned Part 135 airline subsidiary led by former Ameriflight executives.

In addition to its collaboration with the Air Force, Reliable has also demonstrated automated flight capabilities for NASA and the FAA, the latter of which formally accepted the firm’s certification plan in June. The company capped off 2023 with its historic cargo flight, keeping an uncrewed Caravan in the air for 12 minutes.

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

The post Reliable Robotics Earns Military Airworthiness for Remotely Piloted Caravan appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

As part of that effort, the agency recently hosted a weeklong series of trials of Mountain View, California-based Reliable Robotics’ continuous autopilot solution. The testing and simulation regimen included three flights of the company’s modified Cessna 208 Caravan, which lasted several hours. The demonstrations should give the FAA insight into the integration of remotely piloted aircraft in congested airspace.

“Collaborating with the FAA on demonstrations like this will help enable the future of mobility and the evolution of our airspace to accommodate new aircraft systems,” said Davis Hackenberg, vice president of government partnerships at Reliable. “Watching our system successfully operate in a live test environment is exciting, and we are proud to help pave the way for future integration of large uncrewed aircraft.”

The series of flight tests and simulations demonstrated Reliable’s ability to reroute the aircraft, change speeds on a dime, and fly under simulated weather conditions by updating flight plan routing. An onboard test pilot observed each flight. The system was also tested in simulated Class B airspace, typically defined as airspace surrounding the nation’s “busiest” airports.

Reliable shared aircraft telemetry from the company’s control center through third-party service provider OneSky, which transmitted the data to the FAA’s NextGen Integration and Evaluation Capability (NIEC) research lab. 

FAA air traffic controllers also participated in the testing, soaking up valuable insights to bring back to the NextGen program office as it develops its Urban Air Mobility (UAM) Concept of Operations 2.0. The living document is essentially a blueprint for future UAM services.

The demonstrations were part of the FAA’s UAM Airspace Management Demonstration (UAMD), which aims to showcase emerging urban and advanced air mobility (AAM) concepts to plot future operations. Trials were funded by the agency through Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University and took place at Reliable’s control center in Mountain View.

“The flight tests conducted by Reliable highlighted the ability for new aircraft systems to interact with third-party service providers and seamlessly integrate into future airspace environments, and provided critical data for future operations,” said Diana Liang, enterprise portfolio manager at the FAA.

The agency formally accepted Reliable’s Project-Specific Certification Plan (PSCP) for its continuous autopilot engagement system in June. That makes it one of a handful of firms that have made material progress toward type certification of a fully automated flight control system, though it will have a few more significant hoops to jump through before it gets there.

The Flight Path Ahead

Reliable’s autopilot system automates all phases of flight, from taxi to takeoff and landing. It uses redundant hardware and software to automate flight control surfaces and engine controls, as well as redundant voice and data networks for secure air-to-ground connectivity, which enables remote aircraft command and radio management.

The solution includes electromechanically actuated brakes with autoland capability. It also integrates aircraft with airborne detection technology for traffic and terrain avoidance. A precision navigation system, meanwhile, uses sensor fusion techniques common in spacecraft design to bring together inputs from multiple sensors and create a single, unified model.

An advanced autopilot flight management system ties everything together with a simplified user interface, enabling remote supervision of all phases of flight in all operating conditions.

The system is designed and will be certified for a wide variety of aircraft and applications. But the company intends to start by retrofitting Cessna Caravans and launching automated air cargo operations in the U.S.

So far, Reliable conducted flight demonstrations in May for the Air Force through a contract to study the automation of large, multiengine jets. It also has a Phase III Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) agreement to demonstrate the performance of remotely piloted aircraft for the department.

That campaign followed prior flights with NASA as part of the agency’s AAM National Campaign. These included detect-and-avoid encounter flights of Cessna 172 and Cessna 208 aircraft to help NASA validate the use of existing FAA primary surveillance radars.

Reliable is working to commercialize its technology for Part 23 cargo and Part 25 passenger aircraft. It’s currently going through the process defined in Part 21 and FAA Order 8110.4C for certifying new aircraft, engines, and propellers and is seeking Part 23 supplemental type certification. That means it will certify to well-known airworthiness requirements for normal category airplanes. This is similar to the process used currently for autothrottle and autoland STC development in piloted aircraft.

Notably, the company’s design certification plan will not require special conditions or exemptions. Its solution will not be treated as a new type design—instead, it will leverage existing regulations for normal and transport category aircraft, modifying them slightly.

Reliable is seeking approval for operations across the entire coterminous U.S. plus Alaska, with no exemptions, special conditions, or equivalent level of safety findings. Recently, it’s made a few key executive appointments to improve its chances.

Hackenberg joined the company in May after nearly two decades with NASA. There, he served as AAM Mission Manager and spent many years leading a project to integrate unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) into the national airspace system, among other tasks.

Reliable also brought on Lee Moak and Steve Alterman as strategic advisors in December. Moak served on the Department of Transportation’s Advanced Aviation Advisory Committee and the Postal Service Board of Governors; Alterman led the Cargo Airline Association for four decades as president.

Another important addition was Scott O’Brien as vice president of legislative affairs in October. O’Brien was previously senior director of public policy and advocacy for the National Business Aviation Association and worked on legislative strategy for the organization’s AAM Roundtable.

Other appointments include a veteran engineer of Virgin Orbit, Lockheed Martin, and Paragon Labs as chief engineer, and the former leader of remotely piloted aircraft system integration efforts for General Atomics as vice president of UAS integration.

Reliable recently provided input on the House FAA Reauthorization Bill, lauding the legislation for giving the FAA more authority and resources to advance certification of autonomous flight systems. The bill calls for the creation of an FAA Office of Innovation that will work directly with agency leadership to support innovation, as well as incentives for broader ADS-B usage to prevent midair collisions.

We will see if these provisions remain in the legislation by September 30, the deadline for FAA reauthorization. But if they do, Reliable’s credibility will be on the rise.

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

The post Reliable Robotics Demos Automated Flight System in FAA Trials appeared first on FLYING Magazine.