From the Cockpit with Reliable Robotics’ Goeller

California-based Reliable Robotics is looking to automate fixed-wing cargo aircraft, and has been carrying out automated flight tests using a FedEx Cessna 208B. The company has established its own subsidiary airline, AirDialog, which in June launched services for FedEx between Albuquerque (ABQ) and Gallup (GUP). Cargo Facts caught up with Reliable Robotics Chief Business Officer Myles Goeller at the Farnborough International Airshow to discuss the company’s plans for aircraft expansion and developments for the future autonomous freighter certification process. The following is an edited version of that conversation. [caption id="attachment_56859446" align="alignright" width="380"] Reliable Robotics Chief Business Officer Myles Goeller. (Photo/Reliable Robotics)[/caption] Cargo Facts : What is the status of the development of your remotely piloted 208B? Myles Goeller: The program has been ongoing for at least three years, and we’ve been actively working on the Cessna Caravan. At this stage, we are pretty well advanced from a technology or an engineering program perspective. We have experimental variants of that aircraft that we’ve got hardware on and we’re flying manned flight tests on a regular basis. From a risk perspective, we do have the ability to fly some of that unmanned, but we’re flying it manned because we’re going through the process of developing the technology. More importantly, we’re in the process of finalizing the design and production of the hardware that we will actually take to certification and obviously that’s going to need to meet — both at a component level and at a system level — a level of redundancy that is going to satisfy the regulator. We are breaking up the certification process into a couple of phases. The initial phase we’re seeking from the FAA, which is well advanced at this stage, is the automation of the aircraft, which is all of the hardware and software certification that requires us to have an aircraft fly itself from gate to gate completely independently, with no manual intervention. We would still have a safety pilot on board and that is going to be a sort of regression. At that point, the pilots still perform the role of detect and avoid, so the visual detecting voice is performing a communication function as well. CF : How might your automation enhance the ability of your aircraft to perform cargo? MG: We’re not super sensitive to weight. We’re very sensitive to cost. So, the system has to be affordable from a capital investment perspective so that the economics of it are easy to make sense and so we’re balancing all of those trade-offs. Weight is obviously one of them, but it’s not acute. I think it’s going to be in the range of 200 to 300 pounds and so it’s going to add some weight while there’s a pilot on board. Over time, it is going to be either neutral or positive to the weight of the aircraft. When we’re in high production of the system, it is likely to be lighter than the initial iteration. The issue is one of volume, not weight. CF : In expanding the rollout of your technology, what aircraft models would be next? MG: We’re not 100% committed to any program just yet. I think there are some fairly obvious incremental candidates for us. With the SkyCourier coming out, as a large-form Cessna Caravan, that’s an aircraft that looks promising to us, if we can validate that the market is really excited about that as an aircraft. The top end of that feeder cargo space, the ATR 72, is an interesting aircraft. We’re keeping a very close eye on and actively speaking to a number of people building new aircraft platforms, electric or hybrid or vertical takeoff. I think there are some promising candidates out there, but we’re not committing yet to any one of them. CF : How scalable is the system itself? MG: The scalability of the hardware and components is an engineering challenge. That’s just a function of size and capability of the components, but that's not the difficult aspect. The big jump is the change from Part 23 to the Part 25 certification basis — and the actual operating side of that as you shift from Part 135 to Part 121. Those are much higher, much more rigorous certification standards for automation. I don’t see it as being an engineering problem, even though the regulator is going to require a high degree of redundancy and a high degree of reliability of hardware, componentry, etc. Those are surmountable engineering challenges; the big hurdle to get over is getting through the certification. I think what we’re seeing is, there are so many people trying to certify things at the moment and people are getting to the point where there is a bit of finger-pointing about regulators. That being said, a lot of this is highly complex and novel, and it's safety critical. Obviously, like anyone, we’d love things to happen faster. We’re seeing a very deliberate process that the FAA is running to work through these issues, and I’d say we’re very encouraged, particularly with the engagement that we have with them and the progress we’ve seen. This Q&A originally appeared in the July 2022 issue of Cargo Facts.

From the Cockpit with Reliable Robotics’ Goeller

A discussion of aircraft automation and the certification process

Freighter Aircraft Transactions in August 2022

Maersk’s Corfitsen joins the Cargo Facts Symposium 2022 Fireside Chat

Related Posts

From the Cockpit with K2 Aviation’s Karl Ryan

Production freighter activity highlights May FATs

Widebodies account for more than half of April’s transactions

Maersk’s Corfitsen joins the Cargo Facts Symposium 2022 Fireside Chat

Cargo Facts Free Newsletters

Cargo Facts Connect Podcast

Follow Us

Welcome Back!

Retrieve your password