Regulation: The Overlooked Enabler of Aviation Innovation
Why the relationship between innovators and regulators can determine how quickly breakthrough technologies reach adoption and scale
By Craig Fuller
Having always had a passion for technological innovation and for aviation, this headline caught my attention a few days ago:
Joby Aviation Inc. has claimed a new milestone in aviation history after completing a fully autonomous transcontinental flight across the United States. The flight utilized a retrofitted Cessna 208 Caravan, equipped with Joby’s J208 autonomous flight technology. It spanned 3,199 miles across 10 states with zero control inputs from the onboard safety pilot.
An important “milestone” to be sure, but it got me thinking about the necessity of collaboration between the innovators and the regulators.
The achievement of flying without the aid of a pilot now involves technology that has proven itself in emergencies where with the push of a button, the aircraft’s flight management system will search, find and successfully land on the nearest appropriate runway. And now, a Cessna Caravan, according to Joby Aviation’s press release on September 18th, made a 3,199-mile journey with multiple stops, autonomous taxiing, takeoffs and landings, an onboard safety pilot, and remote supervision. It was a “cross-country autonomous journey” where no human intervention in the air was required, according to Joby.
1. When Regulation Unlocks Innovation
Of course, none of this would be possible without the use of precision guidance delivered through the Global Positioning System (GPS) which in September 1983 President Ronald Reagan committed to making available for civilian use, following the Soviet shootdown of Korean Air Lines Flight 007. I remember, because I was at the White House as a member of the staff as well as being a general aviation pilot.
President Reagan’s announcement caused two individuals, one named Min and one named Gary, to conclude that a whole new means of aviation would be possible. However, the company employing them at the time to develop air navigation systems did not believe that this new approach would replace the tried-and-true navigation systems in place for decades.
So, these two individuals, Min and Gary, would eventually form Garmin.
Less than 10 years later, I was flying a Beechcraft Bonanza with a Garmin navigation system installed. And, within another 10 years the general aviation community had fully embraced the values of “glass” that was replacing the dials of yesteryear rapidly in the general aviation community and was spreading to our fleet of commercial aircraft.
2. Why Does Aviation Move So Slowly?
Interestingly, during this time frame we saw the development of the internet, personal computers, and eventually iPads, and handheld devices packing computer power that could only have been imagined in the 1980s. The personal use of technology soared with adoption occurring across the world.
Why then, did aviation which had remarkable visionaries producing technological innovation move at a much slower pace?
This question remains at the heart of modernizing our air transportation system and air traffic management systems to this day.
In many ways the challenge is summed up by the difference between what is at the core of the technology innovation community and the core of the regulatory side of the aviation community. The technology community introduces new devices and issues software updates routinely to fix bugs. The regulators in aviation have, for good reason, zero tolerance for “bugs” or system failures. Regulators demand evidence that critical systems are dependable—and that an aircraft can remain safe when something fails. That requires testing, backup systems and careful attention to how pilots interact with the technology. And, when a failure occurs (think 737-MAX or air traffic communications shutdowns), it becomes big and sometimes tragic news.
The truth is, that very few people (at least in the beginning) were at risk if their iPad failed. But, flying at 36,000 feet in weather at 400 miles an hour and losing the navigation system is another problem.
3. The Risk of Change; and the Risk of Standing Still
Years ago, a senior FAA safety official met with a group of us and said, “…you need to understand that for us, making a change in a regulation presents a risk.”
He said this to a group of us arguing that we needed to have terrain warnings on moving maps in cockpits of general aviation aircraft at a time when flight into known obstructions (e.g. mountains) was a leading cause of fatal accidents. Our case was the flip side of the coin: failing to change outdated regulations was killing people.
These two approaches – and maybe two cultures – must collaborate. It is the only path forward to bring the advantages of new technology into a safe and efficient flying environment. Like a Caravan flying across the country autonomously, there will be history making advances, but these advances will only be embraced if operators view them as safe.
There is no question our aviation transportation system can and needs to get better. Our aviation system can become safer, more capable and more efficient. Getting there requires innovators and regulators to work together from the beginning, with shared safety goals and a clear path to adoption. Collaboration is how we shorten the distance between a promising milestone and a dependable capability. Only by joining forces will we ultimately shorten the time between innovation and adoption rather than lengthen it.
