BETA Technologies, Inc. (BETA) Q2 2026 Earnings Report, Transcript and Summary

Hello, everyone. Thank you for joining us, and welcome to the BETA Technologies Second Quarter 2026 Financial Results Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] I will now hand the call over to Devon Rothman, Head of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Thank you, operator, and good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining us for BETA Technologies Second Quarter 2026 Earnings Call. Joining me today are Kyle Clark, our Founder and Chief Executive Officer; and Herman Cueto, our Chief Financial Officer. Following their prepared remarks, we will open the call for Q&A, where Kristen Costello, Head of Government and Regulatory Affairs, will also be joining us. Earlier today, we issued a press release announcing our second quarter 2026 financial and operating results as well as an investor presentation, which are both available on the Investor Relations section of our website. Before we begin, I'd like to remind everyone that today's discussion will include forward-looking statements. These statements are based on our current expectations and assumptions and involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially. Please refer to our filings with the SEC for a discussion of these risks. We will also reference certain non-GAAP financial measures. Reconciliations to the most directly comparable GAAP measures can be found in our earnings materials. With that, I'll turn the call over to Kyle.

Thanks, Devon, and good morning, everyone. On our last call, we covered the growth of our commercial backlog, eIPP selections and most importantly, continued certification progress. Today, we get to show you how our consistent focus has enabled us to execute on our plan. We'll go deeper on our key announcements from Farnborough, the MV250, our hybrid flight demonstrations and expanding partnerships with GE Aerospace. Our charging partnership with Archer and Macquarie and the order from Loganair. We'll also cover the launch of the eIPP operations, our flights in Japan and Hawaii, Secretary Duffy and the FAA Deputy Administrator, Rocheleau, coming to Vermont and our regular KPI update. These developments are connected. They come from the same plan, certify and produce aircraft designed around simplicity, develop the core propulsion technologies, aircraft systems and components in-house and carry those technologies across commercial and defense applications. The work we complete on 1 program strengthens every other program, and the progress this quarter shows that strategy is working. The majority of our team is focused on certification. We have successfully worked through key policy interpretation issues with the FAA to enable solid progress in the certification of our H500A motor. On CX300, we reached a significant milestone that gives us a complete and agreed-upon foundation for the next phase of the certification program. Each of these milestones flow into certification of the A250 vertical takeoff and landing aircraft and continue to mature BETA's relationship with the FAA. In parallel, our manufacturing teams are developing the systems and procedures critical to achieving production certification immediately following the type certification of our motor and our aircraft. At the same time, focus teams are expanding our charging component and defense businesses, all of which build on and contribute back to the same technological base. Switching gears to Farnborough, starting with a new order. Earlier this year, we flew across Scotland with Loganair and the Royal Mail, connecting Glasgow, Dundee, Aberdeen, Inverness, Wick and Kirkwall, covering postal routes to some of the most remote communities in the U.K. Loganair watched their aircraft closely through those missions and placed an order at Farnborough. This aircraft is positioned perfectly to provide low-cost, zero-emission access to the Islands and Highlands of Scotland and across the U.K., cargo today, passengers in the future. Luke and the team at Loganair are world-class operators, and we're proud to see their tartan on our aircraft. Next, we unveiled the MV250. The MV250 is the military variant of the civilian VTOL aircraft, combining hybrid propulsion and autonomous capabilities for contested logistics. Beyond its breakthrough capabilities, the important point is how we are building it. It is developed in the same core technologies already flying in our CTOL and VTOL aircraft, including batteries, motors and flight control computers. This lets us move faster and at a lower cost compared to a clean sheet defense program. Our hybrid turbo generator developed in partnership with GE Aerospace gives MV250 the range and onboard power required for the mission while proving its safety and reliability for future use in civilian applications. Our defense work is a powerful catalyst for cutting-edge technologies with applicability across our family of aircraft. This focus and portability has been a core part of our strategy since the early days here at BETA. The MV250 carries a 2,000-pound payload over a 250 nautical mile tactical range. It cruises at speeds above 170 knots, which is faster than any existing military rotorcraft and has a projected repositioning range of over 1,300 nautical miles. It can self-deploy and operate from ships, austere locations and forward positions that fixed-wing aircraft just can't reach. When it lands at a forward operating base, the turbo generator keeps running to supply operational energy directly to the troops to recharge batteries, communications and electronic warfare systems. It is a logistics platform and a power source in the same airframe. The MV250 is built on an open modular architecture that can integrate with a range of autonomous mission systems. That flexibility is important to military customers because it allows the aircraft to adapt as missions, operational requirements and autonomy technologies evolve. For military operations, we have integrated the Sikorsky MATRIX, a proven capability suite built for multi-mission applications. Alongside our commercial and defense developments, we hit a significant milestone with GE Aerospace, flying the Electrified Powertrain Flight Demonstration Aircraft, or EPFD for short. Our partnership with GE Aerospace continues to expand. At Farnborough, we flew and jointly announced the successful test flights of the hybrid aircraft. BETA served as the integration partner on the EPFD, working alongside GE to successfully demonstrate the feasibility of hybrid propulsion on regional scale passenger aircraft. BETA pilots flew the hybrid aircraft from our test facility in Plattsburgh, New York to Farnborough, England and set a new altitude record for hybrid aircraft over 30,000 feet. Flying at that altitude demonstrates the ability to operate where commercial flights do today. Hybrid electric propulsion has been part of our road map from the beginning. Our partnership with GE Aerospace accelerated that development on 2 fronts. First, it advanced our joint work on the hybrid turbo generator. And second, it opened up the door to integrate hybrid technology directly into regional passenger scale aircraft. These economics open up regional and commuter routes that previously were not financially practical. EPFD proves that this path is viable, and it provides a wealth of data that flows into our continued partnership with GE. This milestone required regulatory approval from the FAA, regulators in Canada, Greenland, Iceland and U.K. Civil Aviation Authority. BETA and GE's shared commitment to safety and working closely with the regulators made that possible. Next, I want to give you an update on a few other defense developments before we move on. In April, we received our first special airworthiness certificate for an optionally piloted aircraft, or OPA, for N709JL, an ALIA CTOL aircraft. This aircraft has already completed its first autonomous flights, flying with both BETA's internal autonomy stack and Sikorsky's MATRIX stack. Autonomy is foundational to the MV250 program and using our CX300 aircraft as a test bed for this technology is a testament to the flexibility of our architecture and our platform. Also, during the second quarter, at the invitation of the U.S. Army, we deployed our ALIA aircraft to a live-fire Exercise Aurora 2026 in Sweden, supporting NATO's Eastern Flank Deterrence Initiative. We flew alongside conventional and military assets supporting logistics operations in a complex environment. We completed the deployment flying 30 sorties and using only about $300 of electricity. Beyond an excellent demonstration of our aircraft, the operational data we brought back is directly informing our development of the MV250. On our work with General Dynamics, we have moved into Phase 2 on our internal classified programs and entered Phase 1 of a new and separate program providing critical hardware solutions. And those are just the 2 that I can mention. Undersea applications have become a meaningful and growing area for BETA, and our work continues to expand the aperture of where this platform can operate. Beyond classified work, our component sales business continues to grow. Shortly after the end of the quarter, we announced the sale of flight control computers and software licensing to Horizon for their X7 aircraft. This technology has historically come from a short list of legacy aerospace suppliers. We developed ours in-house to the same standard designed for power-lift aircraft. Horizon chose our flight control computers because they met the high bar that aircraft certification demands. This is the third major aircraft program flying on our flight control computers. We have talked on prior calls about what motor sales to Eve and hardware sales to General Dynamics meant to our component sales business. Flight control computers extend that further. We are now selling motors, batteries and flight control computers. Other OEMs are looking to BETA to provide the same high reliability, flight critical systems for their aircraft, and the portfolio they are choosing from continues to grow. Every time we add a component to that list, our customer base expands and our technology gets proven across more platforms. At their core, these are enabling technologies built from the first principles of our own aircraft and valuable to the industry precisely because of that. We built the technology that now others have adopted. Before we get into KPIs, I want to cover our work with the Department of Transportation and FAA on the launch of eIPP operations. On June 1, Secretary Duffy came to BETA. He flew 3 sorties in our CTOL, in our VTOL and alongside our hybrid aircraft. He is the first U.S. Secretary of Transportation in history to fly an electric aircraft. The administration came to Vermont, got in our aircraft and went flying with us. This is the product of years of building trust and working alongside the people and agencies building this regulatory environment. On July 12, United Therapeutics became the first to launch operations under the eIPP, flying 2 of our aircraft in Maryland and Virginia to transport an organ. We were the first company in the program to reach that milestone. BETA launched in 2017 with United Therapeutics as our first customer. What started as an R&D contract grew into an aircraft order, a charging order and a relationship that helped shape our family of aircraft. Martine Rothblatt, United Therapeutics Founder and CEO, was the first person outside of BETA to fly ALIA as a crew member. 9 years later, our first customer is our first eIPP operator. Across 26 states, operators like Metro Aviation, Bristow and Republic Airways will fly our aircraft ahead of type certification. Together, we are building operating plans and demonstrating real-world use cases that will inform FAA rulemaking. This represents more than a 1-year pull forward on commercialization for the BETA aircraft, and it's happening now. Our readiness was earned through 190,000 nautical miles flown to date, a safety record built across every one of those miles, years of work with the FAA and a charging network that is already in the ground across the country. Our customers and operators have been flying this aircraft worldwide in real conditions on real missions long before the eIPP opportunity was created. When the contract was signed, the aircraft, infrastructure, operating experience and regulatory partnerships were already in place and allowed us to launch immediately. Farnborough presented another opportunity to further our relationships with global regulators. Beyond meetings with leadership from the FAA, EASA, UKCAA, GACA and ANAC, we gave each of these agencies the opportunity to watch the technologies they're working to certify, fly in the airshow every day. In addition to these aerial demonstrations, FAA pilots and delegates are flying our aircraft regularly. These flights are reinforcing our belief that design philosophy rooted in simplicity can support motors and aircraft that are well positioned for certification. We showed up in Farnborough with 3 aircraft, flew 2 of them every day during the airshow and had military customers, airline operators and global regulators watching all week. On to KPIs. Our backlog now stands at 1,001 aircraft and $3.9 billion. We have set $4 billion as our year-end target. We are essentially there now at the halfway point of the year. The Loganair order is a great example of how that backlog grows. An operator wants an aircraft that will let them fly more reliably and at a lower cost. We show up and go flying, demonstrating the realities of electric aviation to their pilots, maintainers and dispatchers, flying actual routes in real-world conditions at night in all sorts of weather. They get it and then they place the order. We have now flown over 190,000 nautical miles across our fleet. The cargo routes in Scotland with Loganair and the Royal Mail that led us to that order, organ transport missions in Virginia with United Therapeutics, cargo demonstrations in Japan with Yamato, one of the country's largest delivery networks, in fact, and an 8-week demonstration program with Hawaiian Airlines, Mokulele and Surf Air evaluating performance across inter-island routes and demonstrating our aircraft's ability to fly the missions that Hawaiians rely on. Every nautical mile adds to the safety record, the operational data and the confidence our customers and the FAA have in this aircraft. Every new country we fly in is yet another independent regulatory body that has reviewed this aircraft and cleared it to operate. Our year-end goal remains 250,000 total nautical miles, and we are on pace. We now have 138 charging sites. On our last call, we announced a 34-charger contract with the Florida Department of Transportation. We began delivering those chargers in the second quarter, which contributed to our revenue performance. Our charging business is generating revenue today against contracted orders with the opportunity to build an even larger network ahead of us. A few weeks ago, we announced America's Consortium for Electric Skyways, or ACES, with Adam at Archer and Macquarie Capital. Macquarie brings infrastructure and finance expertise, BETA supplies the hardware built on the standard that the industry has adopted and Archer accelerates the deployment by identifying strategic locations. Together, we are building up to 250 charging sites across California, Texas, Florida and New York. These sites join a network that BETA already owns and operates and that other OEMs use for their missions. The consortium accelerates the growth of our current network and with the necessary capital and continues to build the infrastructure that our industry needs. Our Max Demonstrated Rate has not changed from what we reported last quarter. That is intentional. We have been consistent about our approach. The highest value work we can do on the production floor right now is building the foundation that allows us to ramp efficiently, securing long lead materials, expanding vertical integration, staging production lines, qualifying suppliers on quality and conformity and bringing the labor we have hired up to the standard that the industry requires. We are executing on each of these tasks in parallel. When the production ramp comes, it will be into a system that's ready for it. Moving on to certification. Continued rotation is no longer a limiting factor for the H500A program, and the path forward does not require any changes to the engine. We have worked with the FAA to resolve the policy interpretation issue. The team has now developed the data sets needed, and we have made meaningful progress with the FAA on the compliance approach. We are continuing to close the remaining elements methodically, and we will measure the completion when the FAA accepts our work. We also completed additional tests for credit, teardowns and inspections of the engines that were used in durability and in lightning tests with the FAA actively participating. The teardowns were uneventful and show the robustness of our engines under these extreme test conditions. These are among the most demanding test activities in the program, and the results reinforce our confidence in the design and the data supporting certification. On software, last quarter, we were targeting completion of requirements-based testing across all 2,100 engine software requirements. We have substantially completed that test effort and the formal runs of these tests for the FAA are all underway. When we started this program, we were building not only an engine, but also a regulatory framework in close partnership with the FAA. The rules for certifying electric motors did not exist. We have been at the table as those rules were written, which means every issue we resolve becomes a standard the next company has to meet. We have done and are continuing to do the work. Shifting to our CTOL aircraft. We have closed the requirements definition phase of the CX300 program. The last open issue paper was signed off by the FAA, and we received 100% acceptance of our Detailed Design Standards collector. My understanding is that this is the very first in the AAM industry. This is an important product of our stepwise approach to certification. We resolve requirements early, complete the engine and aircraft work in sequence and carry the accepted methods forward wherever the architecture is common. That reduces ambiguity and lets our teams focus on producing evidence required for compliance. With requirements definition complete, we can finalize the compliance plans for each requirement. Certification test activities for multiple systems are already running in parallel, along with our preparations to enter TIA flight testing. As always, we report certification progress when it has been accepted by the FAA. Because the CX300 and the A250 share substantial commonality, much of the CX300 DDS work carries directly into the A250 program. The CX300 establishes a foundation that the A250 is built on, common aircraft architecture, flight controls, production tooling and processes, test methods and regulatory groundwork. Each requirement we agree with the FAA on, each compliance method we validate and each production process we establish reduces the work and risk on the A250 program. Our propulsion certification strategy follows the same approach. The H500A will power the CX300. The A250 will use the H500B, an amended type certificate variant that builds on the H500A. The standards, test procedures, compliance methods and production foundation established for the H500A program carry into the H500B, allowing the next engine to advance from a proven certification basis. The same compounding effects happens in flight. Every hour we log generates data on the aircraft, its system and its operations in real-world conditions. We bring that data, validation and regulatory expertise into every certification program across the platform. The more we fly and the further each program advances, the stronger the foundation becomes for the aircraft that follow. On July 12, we launched eIPP operations. On July 20, we unveiled the MV250. The Loganair order brought our aircraft backlog 1 step away from the year-end target of $4 billion. The charging network we have built is becoming the infrastructure other OEMs are building their operations around. Each milestone reflects our core development philosophy. Every program at BETA converges back to the mainline of technology to support the development, certification and commercialization of our aircraft motors and components. The certification requirements, compliance methods and production processes established on the CX300 carry forward into the A250. The work completed across the A250 platform gave the MV250 a flight-proven foundation to move rapidly in addressing our nation's defense needs. That is the stepwise approach that has guided us from day 1. Every program advances the common platform and the common platform allows every aircraft, engine and component that follows to move faster. This is our product development strategy. Before turning it to Herman, we recently announced plans to expand our financing with the Import-Export Bank of the United States. Chairman John Jovanovic and the bank's team has shown exceptional leadership on strengthening U.S. aerospace manufacturing. Herman, over to you.

Thank you, Kyle, and good morning, everyone. Kyle walked through what BETA delivered this quarter. From a financial perspective, those milestones demonstrate how consistent and focused investments made over several years in technology, infrastructure, regulatory readiness and vertical integration are beginning to generate revenue and expand our opportunity set. The eIPP launch is a clear example. States are committing capital and the FAA and Department of Transportation are active participants in implementation. The eIPP is delivering tangible benefits months ahead of our expectations. The same policy environment is also strengthening demand for MV250. The administration's focus on American manufactured autonomous platforms and higher rate production to prioritize the war fighter help create the opportunity behind the aircraft we unveiled at Farnborough. The commercial and defense tailwinds we are seeing are connected and BETA is positioned to benefit from all of them. Those operating decisions are now showing up in our financial results. Revenue in the second quarter was $14.7 million, above our guidance range of $8 million to $11 million and year-over-year growth of 146%. The outperformance was driven primarily by revenue recognized on the EPFD program and charger deliveries to the Florida Department of Transportation. With GE Aerospace, the revenue reflects the steady expansion of a partnership that began with a joint technology development agreement for one program and now include multiple active programs. The contribution this quarter reflects both organizations' ability to innovate, execute and scale that work together. The Florida Department of Transportation deliveries, along with the recent expansion of our partnership with Archer demonstrate BETA's product maturity and the infrastructure monetization model in practice. Florida committed capital to deploy BETA charging infrastructure in anticipation of eIPP operations, and we delivered against that commitment. Operating expenses were $166 million in the quarter, including $122 million of R&D and $44 million of G&A. R&D reflects continued investment in certification, MV250, eIPP operations and production readiness. Our continued disciplined deployment of capital led to a second quarter adjusted EBITDA of negative $110 million at the midpoint of our guided range of negative $100 million to negative $120 million. We ended the quarter with approximately $1.5 billion in cash and cash equivalents. Our capital deployment strategy is focused on building the manufacturing capability, product portfolio and operating infrastructure required to scale. Last week, we announced plans to expand our EXIM Bank relationship with up to $1 billion in net financing. The EXIM program is a key enabler of that strategy. When used to finance capital assets, it will materially extend our financial runway and give us the flexibility to move faster on CX300, A250, MV250 manufacturing at a time when market signals are strengthening. The focused strategy of deploying capital across R&D and manufacturing continues to produce revenue today. As Kyle described, the sale of flight control computers to Horizon Aircraft is one example of BETA's organically developed technology, creating commercial value. Alongside our certification progress, defense work and growing component sales business, it reinforces BETA's position as an aerospace and defense company. These are returns on decisions made years ago, and they inform how we think about the decisions we are making today. Turning to our outlook. Performance through the first half of the year and increased visibility into the balance of the year gives us confidence to raise our full year revenue guidance to $42 million to $50 million. The improved outlook reflects execution across our commercial, government and technology initiatives. The launch of eIPP operations, the unveiling of the MV250 and other milestones achieved since our last call reinforce our confidence in the long-term opportunity and our conviction that this is the right time to accelerate. Accordingly, we now expect full year adjusted EBITDA to be in the range of negative $400 million to negative $445 million. We continue to expect full year capital expenditures of approximately $150 million to $200 million. We are moving faster on vertical integration and aircraft and component production capabilities. The anticipated EXIM financing supports these investments with nondilutive capital. The acceleration of production engineering and technical investments is driving spend in the near term. We expect that investment to remain at pace throughout the year as we build towards the capabilities that we are working with EXIM to fund on the capital expenditure side. We remain disciplined about capital allocation and realistic about the execution work ahead. The market is signaling that BETA's products and capabilities are increasingly relevant, and we intend to maintain the speed required to convert that signal into durable revenue growth. Before we turn the call over to the operator for Q&A, we wanted to provide a little color on the third quarter for modeling purposes. Revenue for Q3 is expected to be in a range of $8 million to $12 million and adjusted EBITDA to be in a range of negative $115 million to negative $125 million, reflecting the investments we just spoke about. At this time, I will turn the call back over to the operator for Q&A.

[Operator Instructions] Your first question is from the line of Kristine Liwag with Morgan Stanley.

It was great to see all the aircraft at Farnborough. So Kyle, it sounds like there's been significant progress on the H500 motor. It's encouraging to hear that you've got a path sorted with the FAA as well as the requirement definition phase for the CX300. So given that the work is progressing in parallel, once the acceptance or the certification of these 2 come about, could they end up being closer together than previously expected? Or are there elements of the CX300 development and certification process that are dependent on the motor being certified first with like some sort of lag in time line? How do we think about the timing of these 2 potential events?

Kristine, great question. So the structure of our product development sequence with H500A coming before the CX300, there was an intentional year split between them. That is not necessary. In fact, you can concurrently certify those things. So the H500A working through those policy interpretation issues has not affected the CX300 program. In fact, I mean, we can get right through TIA and through flight testing. And if need be, the H500A could be concurrently certified. But that's not the case since we were able to work through the continued rotation and we found a path with the FAA. So we're actually in really good shape. And I'll tell you, it's interesting. The FAA hasn't done a lot of certifications of engines, yet they've done a lot of certifications of aircraft. Moreover, the engine companies like the GEs and the Pratts, they're ODAs. So the burden on the FAA is much less there. So we're really working through a -- not only a new technology introduction to the FAA, but a less exercised corner of the FAA when we look at the engine. And that's one of the reasons we focused on that first, focusing on the hardest nut on the wheel to take it off first. With the CX300, as you saw with our progress, this -- what we call the DDS collectors the design -- the Detailed Design Standards collector, it actually resolves all those policy issues on the front end of this, and it's a process that was really defined for Part 23 Amendment 64. And it allows us to move very quickly through the CX300. And as you probably saw, we have a large number of those test plans already approved. So the answer to your question very bluntly is no, it does not negatively affect the CX300, and we're feeling really good about both programs now that we got through those real hard interpretation issues.

Your next question is from the line of Andres Sheppard with Cantor Fitzgerald.

Congratulations on the quarter. It was also great to see everyone at the Farnborough Air Show last month, and congrats on the launch of the eIPP and on the recent flight with Secretary Duffy. Kyle, I want to come back to the military aircraft, the MV250. So it's exciting to see your first military aircraft that, in this case, combines hybrid and autonomous capabilities. I guess my question here, what type of application and use cases will you target here? And given the more progressive certification process for defense, how quickly do we perhaps think we can begin to deploy this and to achieve scale? And lastly, maybe you can remind us of how you're thinking about the selling price for these.

Yes. Thanks for the question. So for us, what's really important to BETA is maintaining consistency and focus across all of our platforms with the core technologies. So the MV250 military aircraft shares a ton of parts and pieces and technologies with the civil aircraft. Ultimately, it's a dual-use aircraft. That includes the wings, the booms, the tail, the flight control computers. And this has always been planned within our business as part of the product development strategy. As engineers, we really focus on that how we do this is as important as what we do. So we're going about this in a way that allows us to leverage those same developments into the MV250. That application of the MV250, it's a multi-mission platform. The first step -- the first focus is something we call contested logistics or Aerial Logistics Connector. It's a huge fuselage. It's like the size of a sprinter van inside. You can carry 4 pallets of stuff, 2,000 pounds of payload. And you can carry it a very long distance further than like a helicopter. You can certainly ferry the aircraft further. So that's kind of the main line. Of course, it will be used for exfiltration, CASEVAC, MEDEVAC and launched effect. You may have seen in Farnborough and the aircraft we brought over there, there are standard launch effects tubes that can do things like drop sonobuoys or smaller drones. So with a 13-hour loiter time, it gives us the ability to use that for kind of an overwatch aircraft. But I think the essence of the technologies we're bringing to bear, it is not limited like a helicopter to forward speed. Speed is important. That was my biggest surprise out of Farnborough talking to people like under Secretary Duffy about the needs of the military. And they need to go fast. And helicopters have a retreating blade problem in their speed. We can go faster than that. We can go further than that. And we can go further than that without a pilot. So we can go into riskier areas, moving goods, bringing water, medicine, bullets to our troops while keeping them out of harm's way. The other thing that wasn't talked about a lot, and we just proved it out at the Aurora U.S. Army exercises in Sweden is it's fewer crews. So you only really need one maintainer and one pilot in our manned aircraft and you delete the pilot in the autonomous aircraft. So this becomes a really low logistics tail for the military to deploy these aircraft, and that's about 1/10 of a legacy rotorcraft. So it's like goodness all around, and we are firm believers in giving our American troops the very best technologies, and that's what the MV250 brings to the party. So hopefully, that answers your question, sir.

Excellent. Yes, it does. And maybe just a quick follow-up, if I may. Just wanted to get your take again on the joint charger announcement with Archer. What do you see as most significant here? And how do you expect this charging segment to materially grow, perhaps particularly given that the eIPP has now started?

Yes. Great question as well. It's a common misconception when you base chargers on what you know from electric vehicle chargers. To a large extent, airports are public use facilities. That means that we all have to coalesce around a common standard. You don't get to put something on publicly paid for land and then say, you only can charge or you can only fuel the Gulfstream, right? So we have to get to a standard that we all believe in. And at GAMA, we all came around a standard. That's step 1. Step 2 is that we are all going to use the main veins and arteries of our country of this infrastructure that we have of airports -- so let's work together to make sure those veins and arteries get us to our strategic endpoints. And that's where the partnership with folks like Archer, Macquarie, customers and even land developers really starts to shine. There will be high-value endpoints off the airports. Archer focused on major metropolitan areas have unique strategic insight of exactly where to put those chargers. So we marry that with the main lines -- and we marry that with the main lines and we have the strategic endpoints connected to this network of airports. So we rely on people like Adam Goldstein at Archer to like figure out strategically what's important in L.A., for example. And that's not a place where BETA hangs out a lot. Yet we have really good insight where the cargo routes of UPS are and the medical routes of United Therapeutics are. And you put those together, you end up with a more powerful network, and that's the kind of the thesis behind the consortium.

Andres, it's...

Go ahead.

Let me just add a couple of things on ACES. First, I would start with, it's a very exciting opportunity. As you understand, it creates the opportunity to build out the infrastructure required for electric aviation beyond what's already in the ground today. The consortium operators at this point are Archer and BETA, but we expect that to grow as BETA has the only certified CCS charger suitable for electric aviation. There are many aviation companies currently using the standard. So we expect the consortium will grow. And right now, what's key is the consortium coming together and identifying the strategic locations for chargers and on what time line. So that's some of the work that we're doing right now. And as I said when I started, it's an exciting opportunity, and we'll continue to update the investor community as we build out the tactics to execute what's in front of us.

Your next question is from the line of Ronald Epstein with Bank of America.

So Kyle, I think you laid out pretty well on the call that BETA is more than just sort of an eVTOL company, but it's a whole suite of technologies that build on each other for CTOL, VTOL and electric propulsion, hybrid propulsion, hybrid electricity generation, just a whole basket of technologies that can be used across a bunch of different fronts. So one of my questions for you is sort of myself, a little bit of an airplane geek watching things flying around the country. It's noticeable that up in Plattsburgh, New York, there's a Heart Airplane. And I think it's public knowledge that you guys have been involved with that. I was wondering if you could kind of walk through what you're doing there and how that interplays with what BETA is doing?

Ron, thanks for the question. You are right. We are supplying our technologies to a number of programs. Unfortunately, I can't comment on the extent of our supply to Heart. I mean it's a huge thing for the whole industry to see the next step-up in scale of electric aviation and what they're doing is just awesome. It is -- we are, as you know, huge fans of everybody in this industry, specifically that program. But it's really good. And apologies for not being able to dive into that one. But I can say that the strategy of selling these components makes BETA a better company, publicly working with Eve on these things, Embraer is a great company. We've learned a ton working through design reviews and delivering product to them to allow them to fly, working with GE on our certification programs and hybrid programs. Every one of these programs makes us better, makes us smarter. And that's what allows us to kind of gain trust with the FAA and accelerate our production, our certification, our design and get a lot more feedback than what would have happened if we were just serving ourselves. And it keeps the best engineers, an extremely important asset to our company interested and involved in new and diverse programs every day, but they're all tied back to a common set of technologies that are germane to BETA's airplanes. So yes, that is our strategy, and it's going very well.

And if I may, just as a quick follow-on to that, and I just got one more after this on a different subject. But I don't know, kind of looking at pictures of their airplanes, which they have, their propellers look a lot like what you guys use. And a lot of times, propellers are matched up to motors. I don't know. I mean, am I drawing a wrong conclusion there? I don't know if you can say anything on that.

Yes. I guess I have to say no comment on that one. But yes...

Ron, it's Herman. I want to just pull on a thread that you brought up about multiple ways to win. And I think that is really what we're after, and I'm happy that you said it. Right now, our current aircraft backlog now sits over 1,000 aircraft. The mix between CTOL and VTOL is about 50-50. And this quarter, the Loganair order is really an awesome order for us because it's a mission that we could go and complete today. And beyond aircraft, the enabling technologies that we always talk about, the component backlog is also getting a lot of traction. So we talk about Eve, we talk about Horizon. And then batteries is now starting to become a thing. And as we've said in the past, we're very particular about what we put into the backlog. We evaluate the customer, we evaluate the use case, the commitment level that the customer has, the operational readiness and then really look at the infrastructure needs. And this gives us great visibility into the probability of a successful launch. So building the business with multiple ways to win is something that we are very focused on building.

Got it. And then as a follow-on to that to both of you, how are things like resourcing just the various tools and different things that you need for the ramp? Like I don't think it's a secret that autoclaves are in short supply and different tooling in short supply and so on and so forth. Just from an industrial ramp-up perspective, how is that going?

It's going extremely well, Ron. One of the things that I think is quite differentiating for BETA is that we are building the aircraft that we're flying today in our production facility. We very early on in partnership with EXIM built a facility so we could build on the tooling that we build our production aircraft on. So there isn't a secondary kind of step after certification to then ramp into deployment in production. So it's actually going very, very well. And again, like being consistent and methodical in our plan allows us to get -- when we have autoclaves, right? We saw that coming. We set up the right kind of autoclaves that we need to do our composites work. We got them in place. We got the trim tools. We got the machinery, the ultrasonic testers, which are also hard to come by, along with the people that are qualified to interpret those inspections, all in place early days because working in a regulatory environment doesn't give you the flexibility to up and switch your strategy very quickly.

Your next question is from the line of Sheila Kahyaoglu with Jefferies.

And I apologize if I missed this in detail, but I just wanted to -- your slides are always so helpful. I just wanted to hone in on Slide 15 and 16 and the H500A. I know Kristine discussed it a bit. What's kind of left as we think about Phase 4 on the engine start and how we think about that going forward over the next 6 to 12 months?

Sheila, so in the Phase 4 implementation phase, it is the execution of our testing. We've completed a large number of the tests. And I will just remind you that we don't chalk up the progress until the FAA accepts the results of the work. So we have a ton of testing going on. I think the ones that were most relevant for this quarter, we're completing the Lightning test and the associated teardowns with it as well as the durability testing and the associated teardowns that are overseen by the FAA. And then we take credit for that progress. So to answer your question directly, what's left, there's mechanical, there's DO-160 stuff. And there's a series of longer-term tests that have to go this quarter. But 1 of the things to remember is that every one of these tests we have done before. And we don't do those tests for the first time in front of the FAA. And when we do it with the FAA, a lot of times, the longest pole in that test is scheduling those witnesses, those teardowns and the review of that data together with them. So we have somewhere near 40 different dyno assets here, doing different things to the motor continuously. We've got 80-plus thousand hours of run time. If you compare that to a typical turbine engine, it will just have 1,000 or 2000 hours on it before it's certified. The level of work that we've done here is pretty remarkable. And what's left is basically repeating these tests in front of the FAA, getting sign-off on the methods of collecting this stuff and the ultimate sign-up through the type certification board of getting the type certificate. We are in pure execution mode, having kind of retired that big ominous issue around policy interpretation recently.

No, that's great. And great to see all the momentum at the airshow as well, even if it meant I got kicked out of a meeting because you had customers. So really good progress. And then just on the CX300, as we think -- same question, how do we think about Phase 4, the completion of that? Is it just hours of testing, working with the FAA, if you could get into the nuances.

Yes. First off, I apologize if you got kicked out, but we do need to prioritize customers, and I think that's good for you and for us. On the CX300, the implementation, it is a well-known process to certify an airplane. And we have been very consistent of not asking for special conditions or introducing new technologies that weren't previously opined and/or clarified. So in the airplane itself, we had previously kind of chalked up the 3 new technologies being the propulsion, the batteries and the fly-by-wire system. The fly-by-wire system is largely enveloped and completely enveloped actually from Part 25 standards. So the risk is very, very low there that there's any issues associated with the interpretation of that. The batteries, we got through our series of papers and accepted issue papers on it. So there's clarity there. And our entire -- 1 of the early test plans that we had approved with them, it's something called AC 23-8C, which was a standard for flight testing, Part 23 airplanes handling qualities, flying qualities. And that has all been submitted and agreed to. But I think 1 really important note there, just to kind of talk about the way that BETA approaches problems. We have a little mountain on the side of our airplane, and it signifies find the highest mountain to climb first, much like taking the hardest nut off the wheel first and go to that. You get to the top of that, you get a great vantage point on the other challenges. We accepted -- we invited and we've flown with FAA test pilots, and we do it regularly to make sure the qualified -- kind of the qualifiable tests such as human factors are opined on well before we get to the end. And these test pilots come and they have a singular objective. They are focused on safety, and they do an incredibly rigorous job of giving us feedback early in the design cycles, and those have all been implemented. So I think that if I look out forward, there's execution risk left on the H500A. We get through TIA on the CX300, and then we redo the same type of things we've already done with the FAA on these tests, again, in front of them. It does take time, but the execution is very, very doable in front of us. And then we get into the A250, which is probably your follow-on question, where we introduced the new dimension of flight vertical takeoff and landing. We've been flying those aircraft regularly. It does introduce new risks, but we feel very comfortable that we've contained those with a very simple design.

Your next question is from the line of Chris Pierce with Needham.

On the progress to date. I guess if we think about -- you had your initial eIPP demonstration. And if we look at kind of what you've done globally or in Hawaii, in the U.K., in Norway, should we expect to see an eIPP sort of iteration along those lines where it's more of a lengthier operational phase with an existing customer? Or is it different by site? It's hard to say what we should look for going forward as you launch additional sites?

Yes. I mean that's exactly what you should expect. When we get -- it's kind of a neat little story. When we executed the first eIPP flights, that contract was executed 12-ish hours before we flew. And we did it immediately. And we had 90 days to do it, by the way, and we did it in half a day. We dispatched multiple airplanes halfway down the East Coast, picked up a heart, -- we had a pilot from our customer already -- had already gone through training. We had the chargers in the ground, and we executed that mission within a number of hours. That was to ensure that it was clear to the FAA, the DOT, our customers and everybody watching the states and tribal territories that AAM is here, it's ready to go. All we needed was the execution of that contract, and we went and moved the heart. That was step 1. Now what we're working towards is expanding that out to the other jurisdictions that we're going to be flying and then getting into Phase 2 under 135 operations. Remember that former one was done under Part 91 operations. And those will start to get -- and I think I mentioned this before in 1 of our earnings calls, they aren't demonstrations. Those are true operations that start to go at cadence multiple flights a day. When we were flying down in Orlando recently, we were doing 6, 8, 10 flights in a day. That's the type of cadence where you exploit the benefits of low recurring cost of electric aviation, and that's what our customers want. And that's -- you're absolutely right. That's what you should expect to see as the eIPP sites get turned on and start to materialize. I think Herman has something as well.

Chris, it's Herman. The July UT flight was a big milestone because it was the transition from readiness to operations, which is really important. Our focus today continues to be on building a repeatable operating cadence, aircraft dispatch, charging, ground handling, maintaining customer workflow and data capture. All of those things are really important throughout this eIPP process. Each operation that we do gives us an opportunity to mature the operating playbook with customers and public company -- excuse me, public sector partners and then apply that playbook across all of the eIPP markets as they mature. Over the next couple of weeks and month or so, we expect Louisiana and Texas to come online with customers like Metro, Bristow and Future Flight Global. So you'll start to see more of the eIPP flying over, I would say, the next 4 to 6 weeks.

Okay. Perfect. And then just going back to Sheila's question on Slide 16. Can you sort of walk us through what Phase 4 looks like when you do begin TIA testing? Is it just a certain number of flight hours that need to be sort of done to get FAA comfort? Or is there like a playbook in terms of what needs to happen there? Or is it still sort of an unknown because of the new -- the novelness of the aircraft? And just kind of -- and then is the gating factor sort of like you talked about getting the FAA pilots on site and that's sort of out of your control? Like how should we think about the green bar moving forward on Phase 4 on Slide 16?

Yes. So really, I would say there are like 4 major buckets there. We have a conforming article structural test where we twist, bend and break and airframe to show that the structural margins meet the design intent. We, of course, have done that. Just by way of example, we've built 5 different wings that have gone into stress testing to make sure that when we get the FAA in front of it, it works. So that's a conforming article. The FAA has seen us build. It goes into a large hydraulic system gets twisted. So that's one. The next one is a kind of a durability test that is an extended test on a singular airframe that really evaluates the maintenance, the durability, the wear on the aircraft over time. And then the other test assets, they go into a sequence of flying qualities, handling qualities, obviously, basic operations such as it's an IFR aircraft. So you fly in all weather and show little things like door seals and brake action and other such things on compromised runways and compromised weather. So those are the kind of the major big bone things. Now within the test plans of that overall aircraft, there are a number of like less obvious ones. We just did a complete dry run on our electromagnetic susceptibility and emissions, for example. So that's a ground test where we run a series of different sweeps around the aircraft to ensure that we aren't going to pollute anything around the aircraft, and we're not susceptible to that type of radiation. And just so you understand how we think about this, we have 80% commonality between our CTOL and our VTOL aircraft. Our VTOL aircraft adopts Part 27 standards and helicopters as you probably know, fly close to high tension lines. Those high-tension lines have high electric fields around them. So the susceptibility standards are much higher for that type of aircraft, and we adopt that early to ensure that risk is retired prior to getting to the VTOL. So it's basically a Part 23 aircraft certification program with the knowledge that we're going to be walking directly into the A250 VTOL program. So hopefully, that's helpful. And we could go very deep, but I'm getting the nod from my team not to go too deep on this.

Your next question is from the line of Andre Madrid with BTIG.

I understand you pulled forward the introduction of the MV250 by about like 6 months back in the fourth quarter. But given the updates from Farnborough, I was curious if you can maybe just highlight how conversations with potential customers are progressing on that platform. And additionally, I guess, since it's kind of aligned, I'll also throw on another one there. In light of recent announcements from peers and your commentary around further vertical integration, I guess just how should we be thinking about potential M&A to support your defense applications? Is that something that's kind of on the road map for you guys?

Yes. Great question. We did pull the MV250 forward from the initial plan. We did that because we saw a very strong demand signal. That demand signal, by the way, was more than validated in Farnborough. We showed up there expecting to kind of generate a little bit of interest -- further interest domestically. That went to the very highest levels of the U.S. military, and there is an incredibly keen interest in moving forward. I think the performance specifications speak for themselves. And then, of course, exercising these -- our other aircraft around Europe and around the world has generated foreign military interest as well. So I would say it's been extremely good. I think, as you know, DEVCOM of the Army has paid for hybridization and autonomy work, and we're rolling that up to the point where we can get a rapid prototyping contract to focus on the aircraft and the operations we intend to bring this to over the next year. It's all kind of really aligned with the acquisition reform of the military, where they're looking for low-cost, rapidly deployable systems that are built on commercial platforms. And that's what we have delivered. And everything is kind of singing together, the performance of the aircraft, the mission set that's needed, especially in the Pacific and the acquisition reform. And the executive orders that kind of set the table for this, prioritizing the war fighter and the defense acquisition executive orders have only augmented this. And look, we've played nice with everybody, especially with GE and Sikorsky as partners. We're getting great access to folks in Washington and even with others like Merlin Autonomy and smaller companies and on the component side with General Dynamics. It is -- I'm just a hum drum engineer, but I'll tell you like the momentum I felt in Farnborough and the interest by the military was very, very real and kind of unprecedented based on the feedback that we got from people like Jim McConville, who's the Chief of Staff of the Army, who's now on our Board. He walked away really excited to answer your very first question. I missed the second part of your question. We did an acquisition last quarter of an AI company, and it is focused on executing on these things. It's not as sexy as the kind of detect-and-avoid autonomy AI portion, but it's way more important in my opinion, which is the validation and verification of safety critical code within our flight controllers. And this is -- nobody in this industry can claim success yet. So we have to look at the very hardest problems. In our case, the entire industry's case, it's getting through certification. So we focused -- we focused our acquisition strategy around acquisitions in this case that address the hardest problems first. And that is validation verification through the DO-178C process of software. It's not as sexy, but it's really, really meaningful.

Got it. No, that's super helpful. I appreciate the color there, Kyle. And then, Herman, maybe 1 for you. I guess, could you -- I don't know I might have missed this, but did you maybe outline the exact timing of the expanded EXIM Bank financing?

No, we didn't announce that the exact timing of it, but we're currently in talks with them. As you know, we have a long partnership with the EXIM Bank. They -- which began in 2023, and they funded our South Forty facility. So we've been through a lot with the EXIM Bank over the years, including going through their diligence. We have plans to meet with them in the upcoming weeks where we're going to talk about how we're looking to drive more volume for the factory, do more vertical integration, and we're looking forward to that meeting. Think about EXIM as a strategic financing partner, really an execution enabler. What we're doing with the EXIM Bank is materially extending BETA's financial runway, and it gives the company more flexibility to invest through the current growth phase that we're in. It's going to give us flexibility on long-cycle industrial investments like CapEx. And if you were to think about this, you have the IPO proceeds, which will fund things like R&D and certification. And now we have EXIM where we could use them to fund a lot of the CapEx. So it's really a big enabler for us right now.

Your next question is from the line of Noah Poponak with Goldman Sachs.

This is Tomas Russo on for Noah Poponak. Maybe just one on the aftermarket profit opportunity. Can you discuss how higher energy density batteries may impact the cadence of customer placement and how we think about battery margin trajectory as battery technology improves?

I think a higher energy density, higher power density, lower cost battery are all things that every battery manufacturer is working on. They're at a point where all of those things are going towards the better constantly. But if -- I think the essence of your question is, if you get a high enough energy density battery, does it reduce the frequency of battery change out? The answer is no. You increase the performance of the aircraft, you increase the performance of the aircraft and you may actually put cells -- less cells into the battery, which gives you more payload. So those trades become an optimization point. And just kind of for visibility for you, the UPS, for example, our largest order is with UPS. Their feeder fleet flies between 100 and 150 nautical miles typically. That range is well within the ranges that we're flying right now. They don't actually want more range. They want more payload and they want more volume. Those things are the trades that they want to make, and that's with the IFR reserves already accounted for. That's the trade that they want to make. And if it costs them less to fly, instead of kind of saying what limited amount of stuff can we put on the airplane, they say, how much can we put on the airplane. And as we start to approach parity with over-the-ground shipping, then the aircraft volume goes way up. And this is all part of kind of the UPS vision of how aviation fits into their future network. So I think it's a goodness all around to get to higher energy density. You increase and just the math of it, if you double the range, you have 4x the accessible city pairs. It's the square of the radius of the circle that gives you the area of the circle. And that is really good for UPS. It's really good for us. It's great for Amazon. It's great for United Therapeutics to get access to more city pairs, which just means more flights for BETA.

That is helpful. And then over the past couple of quarters, we've recently talked about the operating cost of a conventional aircraft versus the BETA CTOL. Could you just talk maybe a little bit about the pathway for eVTOLs to provide a lower total cost of ownership for customers and how the inputs of that will evolve over the coming years?

Yes. I mean, look, it is -- you're absolutely right. I mean the cost of energy becomes relatively insignificant. It's like 40x less. The pilot still cost you pretty much the same amount in the airplanes. The insurance and the upfront cost is similar, but the maintenance is significantly less. So you end up relative to an airplane, maybe a 40%, 45% reduction in cost when you move from a traditional turbine aircraft with the same performance to an electric aircraft. But the cost delta is even better when you compare it to a helicopter. When you go to a helicopter, you may take 3/4 of the cost out. And helicopters, as a pilot, the joke always is it's a machine trying to beat the air into submission and shake itself apart. And that's what it's doing constantly. That is wear and tear, life limitation and fatigue on a whole bunch of parts, and they're all safety critical parts with a single rotor head with hundreds of parts working together. So you retire those parts at a very high rate. That is not the case in VTOL aircraft. In our case, for 30 to 50 seconds, you turn the top rotors on, then you shut it down and you fly smoothly like an airplane. And you do the same thing at the other end of flight. That is a small fraction of the time when you're exposing those rotating components to that type of fatigue. Moreover, because they're fixed pitch rotors, there are way less parts. So you end up with a system that has way less maintenance, you get the benefit of the energy and in many cases, you get higher performance. So you have a reduction of cost, higher performance, and that's why your total addressable market goes up so drastically. So in summary, the airplane shines, but the VTOL, it just glows. It really is a much better financial proposition. And this is why we're all over the world flying these things because we have to prove it. In that Aurora mission, I think I mentioned it in the prepared remarks, up in Sweden, we flew 30-plus missions, and we had about $300 of energy that we used, $10 a mission. Compare that to the Black Hawk that we are flying next to.

Your next question is from the line of John Godyn with Citigroup.

This is Max on for John. I just kind of wanted to double-click on the hybrid electric engine with GE and if you could provide an update there as well as just kind of what the future looks like for that partnership with GE.

Sure. So we have multiple programs going on with GE. We showcased for the first time the hybrid turbo generator built around the CT7 at Farnborough. That is a partnership in the power electronics and the electromagnetics to create a 1.4-megawatt turbine that is used in the MV250. It is a segmented high speed. So it's directly coupled to the CT7 mechatronic design where the airflow, the mechanics and the structure all share the same common systems and very lightweight and high-performance systems. So you've got multiple experts in power electronics and controls with GE and BETA working together to produce this hybrid turbo generator. But really, if you look broadly at the future of aerospace, it includes electric. Now in order to include electric, you have to prove high altitude applicability. You have to turn it very high speeds. So the electromagnetics have to be tolerant to high speeds both mechanically and electromagnetically. You have to operate at a very wide temperature range, very cold temperatures to very high temperatures. And you generally want to do that at very high voltages, so you reduce the current and the weight associated with cabling and other such things. So if you kind of piece that together and all the programs that we're doing, the high altitude, high-speed, high-temperature and high-voltage systems, we're covering all those pieces as we build into these products with the first product being the hybrid turbo generator we're building the GE going into the MV250. So that's kind of the nature of the partnership. And I will tell you, working in a lot of partnerships in my past life with Raytheon and big companies like Tesla, the level of integration of the teams between GE and BETA and even with Sikorsky is extremely positive and the rate of production of those technical developments, the flight demonstrations, the ground runs is exceptional. And I have never seen 2 companies come together and make more progress than BETA and GE have since our relationship kicked off, I don't know, 9 months ago or something.

Sounds good. That was great color. And then just kind of switching gears a bit. You mentioned the sale of flight control computers to Horizon. This is pretty interesting. Can you just elaborate on the opportunity for the component sales, kind of the bigger picture there? And are there other components that you think may have a viable market beyond flight control computers and the motor?

Yes, absolutely. I mean, look, there are certain programs we can talk about. Horizon was one that we can talk about and others that we can't talk about. But I can tell you that we have sold motors, propellers, inverters, high-voltage systems, flight control computers, the actual flight controls like the inceptors, the throttles and other such things. Of course, we've sold the batteries. We've sold our lightweight data acquisition systems, and we've sold services associated with those things. And off the airplane, we've provided the services to do flight testing, to do flight test engineering. And of course, we've sold chargers. The strategy behind this is that these are extremely sticky sales. When somebody designs their control laws around a hardware platform or vice versa, then those things are kind of linked. And you don't get to change the constructive mathematical model of the airplane, i.e., the motor torque ramp rates or some parameter without changing what's inside the flight control computer and vice versa in many cases. So they become sticky and they hang together. And so our strategy is, look, find a way to make a lot of margin on those components, get them designed in early, plant those seeds, water them, let them germinate and then they grow into these programs. Now they're not all going to hit, but this is why we have so many programs. The Horizon, awesome company, really, really smart leadership. And we said, you know what, that's one that we want to bet on. You know publicly, we're working with General Dynamics, with Eve, with GE and others. So this is the strategy, and I'll let Herman kind of talk through the margins on those.

Yes. In the aftermarket, as you can imagine, there's a variety of things. So we've got batteries, we've got motors. We've got flight control computers. And what I would say is we typically look at the component business to carry somewhere between a 40% and 60% margin. But when you get into flight control computers, the margin is actually a lot higher.

Thank you for your questions. I will now turn the call over to Kyle Clark for closing remarks.

Awesome. Thank you. I think we covered most of my closing remarks during the meeting. But I just wanted to kind of highlight this EXIM deal, it allows us to use the right color of money for the right thing. EXIM focused on capital -- capital purchases, facilities, equipment, tooling and the equity capital focused on research, development and growth. And as Herman said, it really does extend our runway. Certification is moving at pace, and it's doing it because we have focused, consistent progress. We've been working with a bunch of different companies, GE, Sikorsky, General Dynamics, working with start-up companies like Eve and Horizon and a bunch of others. And we're doing this with cash discipline, consistent. I mean, we landed right in the middle of the guidance, and we kind of blew out of the water our revenue targets -- and this is a product of just doing what we say we were going to do. And we're doing this well-defined, vertically integrated, sticking to the products that build on themselves and going to multiple places. And this is the strategy BETA has been talking about since the IPO less than a year ago. And we just continue to deliver on the eIPP, the defense components, showing up at the airshows with flying aircraft. And we're doing it with, I would say, some of the best partners in the world, both on the customer side at the FAA, the DOT and in technological partnerships. So I'm proud of what the team has done here at BETA, and we are heads down and looking to go forward to actually winding up to be a really, really awesome set of quarters coming up. And we're leaning in hard, sticking to our strategy and getting the job done. So I appreciate everybody getting on the call this morning, especially those guys on the West Coast up early for us, and we'll talk to you in about 90 days.

This concludes today's call. Thank you for attending. You may now disconnect.