The head of a leading company working to put electric planes into the skies has slammed Europe’s aviation regulator, warning its rules could bankrupt the fledgling industry.
The certification guidelines issued by the European Union Aviation Safety Agency will make it “extremely difficult” to bring new vehicles, commonly known as air taxis, to market, Archer Aviation CEO Adam Goldstein said in an interview.
“EASA has publicly said, ‘We know our regulations are tougher and bad for business, we don’t care,'” Goldstein told the FT.
California-based Archer is one of the companies seeking approval to operate so-called electric vertical take-off and landing (eVTOL) aircraft to provide a range of services from short flights in congested urban areas to longer regional flights. Co-founded by Goldstein, the company will go public in 2021 with a market capitalization of about $800 million.
Several companies want aviation safety regulators to certify their vehicles for flight starting as early as next year.
EASA is the only regulator to issue formal guidance for eVTOLs providing commercial services to passengers. Its approach assumes relatively high flying volumes in urban areas.
The agency has asked developers to adopt the same safety standard that applies to large commercial jetliners: the probability of one catastrophic failure in 1 billion flight hours, or “10 to minus 9” in industry parlance.
Criticizing regulation for being too restrictive, Goldstein said there was no point in nurturing an industry if “an approach that still achieves the highest level of safety, but …” could be taken. . . which is more appropriate to allow companies to “build” around.
Archer’s second prototype, Midnight, will make its first test flight this summer, Goldstein said, and he hopes to create an aircraft that is “as safe as today’s commercial airliners.”
“Archer’s view is that high safety standards are bad for business. EASA disagrees with this view,” EASA said in a statement.
The EU regulator said the safety targets it set were based on a “risk assessment” and were “assessed to be equivalent to bus transport safety once eVTOL operations reach medium scale”.
It added: “EASA’s view is that setting such security targets can boost business and protect future business.”
The FAA has yet to issue standards. Industry publications report that it may set a target safety level of one catastrophic failure per 10 million or 100 million flight hours.
The FAA said the new electric aircraft are mechanically simpler than commercial jets, allowing for a regulatory approach with certification standards “appropriate to the size and complexity of the aircraft and the type of operations involved.”
The FAA’s approach to eVTOL is conceptually different from EASA’s, but equally safe, U.S. officials said. The regulator argues that it can achieve the same level of operational safety without imposing the same requirements on back-up systems built into planes because it will consider risk in other ways, including by treating pilots as additional safeguards. official.
In the U.S., “it’s a real positive for U.S. companies because regulators are very supportive,” Goldstein said.
On Wednesday, regulators proposed rules setting out training protocols for pilots of planes that take off vertically and then switch to winged flight. David Boulter, the FAA’s acting administrator for aviation safety, said the proposals would “safely usher in this new era of aviation and provide the certainty the industry needs to grow.”
EASA also has recommendations on what pilot training is required to make eVTOL operational.
The two regulators are in talks to agree on a common certification approach for the industry to ensure companies can fly between regions. They will meet again next week in Cologne.
Meanwhile, disagreement over the target level of safety has sparked debate among industry competitors. European companies argued in public filings last year that U.S. companies must meet EASA’s safety standards. They also expressed concern about the lack of detail on the FAA’s airworthiness standards for some of its U.S. rivals.
During public comments, UK-based Vertical Aerospace said regulators should require a “10 to minus 9” safety target due to eVTOL’s “complex aircraft systems and complex commercial operating environment.”
Trevor Woods, Head of Regulatory Affairs at Vertical, said the divide between regulators “will narrow as certification requirements become clearer. Ultimately, we and the rest of the industry would like to see eVTOL rules standardized across countries.”