Exploring Vertiport Design: A Global Perspective on Infrastructure for Advanced Air Mobility

 1. Introduction

The emergence of Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) marks a paradigm shift in urban and regional transport systems, promising to alleviate congestion, reduce emissions, and expand point-to-point connectivity through vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) aircraft—particularly their electric derivatives (eVTOLs). However, realizing this vision hinges not only on airworthiness certification and operational frameworks but also on the establishment of purpose-built ground infrastructure: 

vertiports.

Vertiports are to AAM what airports are to conventional aviation—critical nodes where flight operations, passenger services, energy replenishment, and data connectivity converge. As the global AAM ecosystem evolves, national regulators and international agencies are defining design standards to ensure safe, scalable, and interoperable vertiport infrastructure. This paper consolidates insights from leading frameworks:

a) U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Engineering Brief (EB) 105A,

b) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) Prototype Technical Specifications,

c) Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) India – Advisory Circular ADAC 01/2024, alongside research guidance from NASA’s AAM Mission.

2. Conceptual Framework of Vertiport Design

Vertiport architecture is defined by three concentric operational zones that balance safety, performance, and spatial efficiency:

1) Touchdown and Liftoff Area (TLOF):
The central, load-bearing pad is designed to accommodate the vertical flight phase. It must support both static and dynamic loads corresponding to the design aircraft’s MTOW, with surface textures that ensure skid resistance under varying weather conditions.

2) Final Approach and Take-off Area (FATO):
The surrounding operational area that provides clearance for vertical transition into and out of the hover. It must remain obstacle-free and large enough to contain the maximum lateral drift during critical phases of VTOL operation.

3) Safety Area:
An additional buffer beyond the FATO is intended to protect people and property from rotor outwash, debris, or control deviations. This zone may extend over terrain, structures, or water, depending on the vertiport’s elevation and urban context.

The design aircraft parameters—specifically the rotor diameter (RD), maximum take-off weight (MTOW), and controlling dimension (D)—determine the dimensional scaling of these areas. These principles ensure that vertiports remain compatible with the operational envelopes of varying eVTOL designs, from multicopters to lift+cruise and tiltrotor configurations.

3. FAA Vertiport Standards – Engineering Brief 105A (December 2024)

The FAA’s Engineering Brief 105A is the first formal guidance document providing quantitative criteria for vertiports accommodating eVTOLs with MTOW ≤ 12,500 lb (5,670 kg) and D ≤ 50 ft (15.2 m). It represents an interim yet comprehensive standard that extends the philosophy of heliport design (AC 150/5390-2C) to electric vertical mobility platforms.

3.1 Dimensional Criteria

Element	Minimum Dimension	Load Bearing Requirement	Design Notes
TLOF	≥ 1 × RD	Static: MTOW; Dynamic: 1.5 × MTOW	Cantered within FATO; textured for traction and drainage.
FATO	≥ 2 × RD	Same as TLOF	Free of fixed obstacles; may include frangible visual aids ≤ 2 in (51 mm) high.
Safety Area	≥ 2.5 × D	Not load-bearing	May overlie water/airspace; no rigid structures permitted on elevated installations.

3.2 Markings, Lighting, and Visual Aids

TLOF perimeter marked with a 12-inch solid white line, FATO with dashed white boundaries, and a central “VTL” identification symbol replacing the traditional heliport “H”. A load and dimension box displays MTOW and D limits.

b) Lighting:
Green omnidirectional perimeter lights (minimum 8 for circular pads) and optional floodlighting ensure visual acquisition during night or low-light conditions.
Wind cones (orange, lighted, visible from ≥500 ft) aid orientation and downwash assessment.

c) Approach/Departure Geometry:
Nominal approach slope: 8:1 extending 4,000 ft from FATO edge, with 2:1 transitional surfaces to maintain obstacle clearance. For urban sites, these slopes may be adjusted through FAA approval under Part 157 coordination.

d) Environmental Considerations:
The FAA introduces the Downwash/Outwash Caution Area (DCA) to mitigate surface winds exceeding 34.5 mph (55.5 km/h), along with mandatory drainage gradients (-0.5% to -2%) and safety nets for elevated pads.

4. EASA Prototype Vertiport Specifications (March 2022)

EASA’s Prototype Technical Specifications for Vertiports adopt a system-level approach prioritizing urban integration, environmental compatibility, and operational flexibility. Unlike the FAA’s prescriptive dimensional model, EASA’s framework remains performance-based and adaptable to diverse VTOL configurations.

4.1 Design Philosophy

EASA emphasizes the concept of an “obstacle-free volume” (OFV) rather than rigid geometric envelopes. The OFV defines a three-dimensional funnel extending upward and outward from the vertiport, tailored to the climb/descent capabilities of specific VTOL types. This allows for omnidirectional approach and departure paths, a critical factor in densely built environments constrained by noise corridors or airspace conflicts.

4.2 Urban and Environmental Integration

EASA’s prototype prioritizes:

a) Modular scalability for integration into rooftops, repurposed heliports, or transport hubs.

b) Noise abatement through operational procedures and trajectory management.

c) Sustainability alignment with the EU’s Green Deal objectives—encouraging renewable power use, life-cycle carbon analysis, and minimal urban footprint.

The forthcoming EASA rulemaking package (2026–2027) aims to codify these specifications into formal European regulatory texts, bridging the gap between conceptual prototypes and certifiable infrastructure.

5. DGCA India: Advisory Circular ADAC 01/2024

India’s Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) released ADAC 01/2024 as one of the most forward-looking AAM infrastructure frameworks in the Asia–Pacific region. It aligns with ICAO heliport standards, FAA EB 105A, and EASA prototype guidance, reflecting India’s intent to harmonize globally while enabling indigenous development.

5.1 Key Provisions

a) Classification: Public or private vertiports; ground-based or elevated; operation under DGCA authorization.

b) Design Scaling: Proportional to the design VTOL’s dimensions; materials must withstand erosion, precipitation, and thermal loading typical of Indian climates.

c) Markings and Lighting: ICAO Annex 14–aligned colour coding, perimeter lighting, and illuminated wind indicators.

d) Operational Safety: Defined ingress/egress corridors with obstacle control; incorporation of UTM (Unmanned Traffic Management) systems for dynamic deconfliction.

e) Sustainability Measures: Mandates for rainwater harvesting, solar integration, and firefighting resilience in compliance with national building codes.

Through collaborations with ICAO and FAA, DGCA envisions standardized certification pathways for multi-city AAM deployments by the late 2020s, focusing on metro clusters such as Delhi–NCR, Bengaluru, and Mumbai.

6. NASA Research Perspectives

NASA’s Vertiport Planning and Design Framework (2022–2024) identifies over 450 design and operational variables, emphasizing that vertiport planning transcends pure geometry—it must integrate urban systems, digital infrastructure, and public policy.

6.1 Key Focus Areas

a) Planning: Siting based on mobility demand, airspace integration, and public–private investment models.

b) Deployment: Power and data infrastructure readiness; cyber-physical security; passenger automation and flow management.

c) Operations: Dynamic scheduling, contingency protocols, and weather-adaptive services.

d) Environmental Resilience: Noise contouring, storm resistance, and wildlife interaction mitigation.

e) Integration: Seamless linkage with surface transport, metro networks, and the FAA’s UTM/AAM airspace services.

NASA’s approach underscores the need for ecosystem interoperability—linking energy grids, air traffic data, and urban mobility analytics.

7. Challenges and Best Practices

Vertiport implementation faces multi-dimensional challenges:

a) Urban density constrains obstacle clearance and noise exposure.

b) Capital costs for power, charging, and structural retrofits remain high.

c) Public acceptance requires demonstrable safety and environmental stewardship.

Best practices emerging from international pilots include:

a) Phased implementation, beginning with single-pad, low-frequency operations.

b) Sustainability-centric design using green roofs, photovoltaic arrays, and lightweight composites.

c) Collaborative regulation, ensuring coordination among civil aviation authorities, municipalities, and private operators.

8. Future Outlook

As performance data from eVTOL flight testing and early AAM demonstrators accumulates, regulators will refine vertiport standards toward type-specific, performance-based certification. By 2030, interoperable vertiport networks—anchored in harmonized FAA, EASA, and DGCA frameworks—could enable scalable, carbon-neutral urban air mobility.

India’s proactive alignment with global norms positions it as a regional hub for AAM innovation and manufacturing, while U.S. and European models continue to shape international benchmarks for design, safety, and sustainability.

References

1. FAA Engineering Brief 105A, Vertiport Design (Dec 2024)

2. EASA Prototype Technical Specifications for Vertiports (Mar 2022)

3. DGCA Advisory Circular ADAC 01/2024, Vertiport Design and Operations (Sep 2024)

4. NASA AAM Mission – Vertiport Planning and Design Framework (2023)

5. ICAO Annex 14, Volume II – Heliports, 2021 Edition

Author: GR Mohan

India's Leap into the Future: DGCA's Collaboration with ICAO for Advanced Air Mobility

 

In a groundbreaking move to revolutionize India's aviation landscape, the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) has forged a strategic collaboration with the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and other global aviation authorities. This partnership, announced in early 2025, aims to accelerate the development and integration of Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) technologies, with a particular emphasis on electric Vertical Take-Off and Landing (eVTOL) aircraft. By aligning India's regulatory framework with international standards, the initiative seeks to address urban congestion, enhance regional connectivity, and foster sustainable aviation solutions tailored to the country's unique challenges.

Understanding Advanced Air Mobility and eVTOL

Advanced Air Mobility represents a paradigm shift in aviation, encompassing a new ecosystem of air transportation that leverages innovative aircraft for on-demand passenger and cargo services. At its core, AAM integrates electric or hybrid-electric propulsion systems, enabling efficient, low-emission operations in urban and regional environments. eVTOL aircraft, a key component of AAM, are designed for vertical take-offs and landings, eliminating the need for traditional runways and allowing operations from compact vertiports—specialized infrastructure akin to helipads but optimized for electric aircraft.

These technologies promise to transform mobility in densely populated nations like India, where traffic congestion costs billions annually (e.g., INR 11.7 billion in Bengaluru alone in 2018). By enabling short-haul flights between cities or within metropolitan areas, eVTOLs could reduce travel times dramatically, support emergency medical services, and boost economic growth through job creation in manufacturing, operations, and maintenance.

The Genesis of the Collaboration

The DGCA's partnership with ICAO stems from the rapid evolution of aviation technologies and the need for harmonized global standards. ICAO established the Advanced Air Mobility Study Group to examine the implications of these innovations on the broader aviation ecosystem. India, as a founding member of ICAO and the world's third-largest domestic aviation market, is actively contributing to this group while adapting insights to its national context.

Key collaborators include not only ICAO but also the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAA Singapore). A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed between EASA and DGCA specifically targets unmanned aircraft systems and innovative air mobility, covering areas like certification, environmental standards, personnel licensing, training, and air traffic management. This multilateral approach ensures that India's AAM framework draws from best practices worldwide, promoting interoperability and safety.

The collaboration was highlighted at ICAO's Advanced Air Mobility Symposium in Montreal in September 2024, where India showcased its initiatives to raise global awareness of AAM's benefits. Domestically, the Ministry of Civil Aviation (MoCA) and DGCA lead the effort, coordinating with stakeholders through events like the Urban Air Mobility Expo 2025 in Greater Noida and the release of strategic reports such as “Skyways to the Future: Operational Concepts for Advanced Air Mobility in India.”

Regulatory Framework and Working Groups

To operationalize AAM, DGCA has constituted six specialized working groups, drawing on national and international expertise. These groups focus on critical areas:

1. Vertiports: Guidelines for design, operation, and authorization, issued via ADAC 01 of 2024 on September 5, 2024.
2. Type Certification of Vertical Take-Off and Landing Capable Aircraft (VCA): Standards for eVTOL-capable aircraft, outlined in AEAC 01 of 2024 on September 11, 2024.
3. Crew Licensing: Training and endorsements for VTOL operations, detailed in FCL 01 of 2025 on April 30, 2025.
4. Air Operator Permits: Requirements for commercial operations.
5. Unmanned Aircraft Systems Traffic Management (UTM): Integration with existing Air Traffic Management (ATM) systems for strategic and tactical deconfliction.
6. Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul (MRO): Ensuring aircraft reliability.

These efforts build on the Drone Rules 2021, which provide a foundation for UTM and the Digital Sky Platform. The regulatory framework emphasizes safety as the paramount enabler, with operations managed through UTM alongside ATM to optimize airspace for multiple small aircraft and autonomous drones.

Sandbox trials in states like Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh are planned to validate operational models, starting with unmanned VCAs and progressing to piloted ones. This phased approach aligns with global maturity levels, targeting initial low-density trials within five years, medium-density shuttles in 5-10 years, and mature autonomous operations in 10-15 years.

Indian Innovations and Industry Involvement

India's AAM ecosystem is burgeoning with indigenous talent. Two companies have secured Design Organisation Approval from DGCA for VCA development: Chennai-based Ubifly Technologies Pvt. Ltd. and Chandigarh-based Nalwa Aero Pvt. Ltd. Other players, such as The ePlane Company, JetSetGo, and Asteria Aerospace, are contributing to vehicle technology, operations, and R&D.

The AVIATE India community, launched at the 2023 Paris Air Show, facilitates collaboration among industry leaders, regulators, and experts. Incentives like Production Linked Incentive (PLI) schemes encourage domestic manufacturing, while Centres of Excellence at institutions like IIT Madras and IISc drive innovation in battery technology, avionics, and automation.

Challenges and Mitigation Strategies

Despite the promise, integrating AAM poses significant hurdles. High population density demands careful vertiport siting to minimize noise and safety risks. Infrastructure deficits, including charging facilities and airspace management in diverse terrains, remain key concerns. Economic barriers, such as high battery costs (comprising 40% of eVTOL expenses), and public acceptance issues like environmental impact and digital divides, must be addressed.

Mitigation includes regulatory harmonization with FAA and EASA frameworks, public outreach campaigns, and subsidies via schemes like UDAN for rural equity. Sustainability is prioritized through renewable energy integration and second-life battery applications, aligning with UN Sustainable Development Goals.

Future Outlook and Potential Impacts

India's AAM roadmap envisions a 15-year transformation, with commercial eVTOL services potentially launching by 2027-2030. This could generate thousands of jobs, alleviate urban congestion, and enhance disaster response capabilities. By leveraging dynamic pricing, subscriptions, and multimodal integration, AAM aims to make air travel accessible and affordable.

The collaboration with ICAO positions India as a regional leader in the low-altitude economy, fostering global synergies and attracting investments. As DGCA continues to refine its frameworks, the skies over India are set to become a hub of innovation, safety, and sustainability.

In conclusion, this partnership marks a pivotal step toward a future where flying taxis and drone deliveries are commonplace, propelling India into the forefront of global aviation advancements.

Author: GR Mohan 

Airworthiness Considerations in Supply Chain Management for Aviation

 Introduction

Airworthiness in aviation refers to the condition of an aircraft, its engines, components, and systems being fit for safe flight, conforming to approved type designs, and maintained in accordance with regulatory standards. Supply chain management (SCM) plays a critical role in ensuring airworthiness, as it encompasses the sourcing, procurement, manufacturing, distribution, and maintenance of parts and materials. Failures in the supply chain can lead to nonconforming parts, delays, or safety risks, directly impacting aircraft operability and compliance with regulations from bodies like the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) of India, and International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). In an increasingly globalized and complex aviation industry, where original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) like Boeing and Airbus rely on multi-tier suppliers, effective SCM is essential to mitigate risks such as counterfeit parts, material shortages, and quality lapses. This review synthesizes regulatory guidelines, challenges, case studies, and best practices to provide a holistic understanding, with expanded coverage on FAA, EASA, and DGCA oversight.

The aviation supply chain typically involves tiers: Tier 1 suppliers (direct to OEMs, e.g., engine manufacturers), Tier 2 (subcomponents), and lower tiers (raw materials). This structure demands end-to-end visibility, traceability, and compliance to maintain airworthiness throughout the lifecycle—from design to post-delivery support.

Regulatory Framework

Aviation regulations emphasize that production approval holders (PAHs), such as OEMs, bear ultimate responsibility for airworthiness, including oversight of the entire supply chain. Key frameworks include:

a) FAA Guidelines: Under Advisory Circular (AC) 21-43A, PAHs must establish a supplier control program, including evaluation, selection, and monitoring processes. This involves maintaining an approved supplier list, conducting risk-based audits, and ensuring traceability of materials and processes. PAHs cannot delegate airworthiness responsibility and must flow down requirements to all tiers, with provisions for FAA access to facilities, including non-U.S. suppliers. For international aspects, bilateral agreements like the Technical Implementation Procedures (TIP) with EASA outline supplier responsibilities in design, manufacture, and service provision.

b) EASA Standards and Oversight: EASA requires robust supplier management under Part 21, particularly Subpart G for Production Organisation Approval (POA), which mandates that production organizations implement a system to control suppliers, ensure conformity to type design, and maintain traceability of parts and materials throughout the supply chain. This includes risk-based oversight, periodic audits, and sharing of surveillance responsibilities for suppliers under bilateral agreements like the FAA-EASA TIP. EASA's oversight extends to global suppliers, with challenges in regulating complex chains, including suspect parts from non-EU regions. Under Part 145 for maintenance organizations, logistics and stores functions are regulated to ensure component traceability and compliance, with safety management systems integrated into production. EASA emphasizes independence in compliance oversight and focuses on continuing airworthiness through Part-M, distinguishing it from initial airworthiness. Suppliers must provide declarations of conformity, and EASA collaborates on shared audits to verify production systems.

c) DGCA (India) Standards and Oversight: The DGCA adopts regulations similar to EASA through Civil Aviation Requirements (CAR) 21, which prescribes procedures for design, production, and airworthiness approvals, including supplier control and traceability. DGCA oversees supply chains by conducting surveillance of production approval holders and suppliers, including those in third countries, under bilateral agreements like the FAA-DGCA Implementation Procedures for Airworthiness (IPA). This includes acceptance of export certificates, standard parts conformity, and assistance in supplier surveillance. Recent initiatives include comprehensive special audits to integrate oversight across the aviation ecosystem, moving beyond siloed inspections to assess safety and compliance in supply chains, amid issues like part shortages. DGCA has proposed stricter rules for wet-leased aircraft and part procurement guidelines to enhance airworthiness amid global supply disruptions.

d) ICAO Standards: ICAO Annex 8 defines airworthiness broadly, mandating that suppliers adhere to quality systems that prevent defects. Traceability is crucial, with documentation proving compliance at every stage to demonstrate airworthiness.

e) Other Considerations: Regulations address special materiel like critical safety items (CSIs), requiring enhanced handling and reporting. Cybersecurity in the supply chain is emerging, with recommendations for managing risks in hardware, software, and data flows.

These frameworks ensure that supply chain practices align with airworthiness directives, such as emergency directives issued for defects.

Key Challenges

The aviation supply chain faces multifaceted challenges that can compromise airworthiness:

a) Workforce Shortages: Skilled labour gaps, exacerbated by post-COVID recovery, competition from other sectors, and hazardous conditions, lead to quality issues like improper assembly or inspections. This results in nonconforming parts and delays in maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) activities, potentially grounding aircraft. Employment in aviation manufacturing remains below pre-pandemic levels, affecting certification and licensing processes.

b) Material and Component Shortages: Reliance on global sources for critical materials (e.g., titanium, semiconductors) creates vulnerabilities to geopolitical disruptions, sole-source dependencies, and supply bottlenecks. This can delay production and introduce risks like using unapproved alternatives, impacting structural integrity and safety. For instance, engine and semiconductor shortages have prolonged maintenance times from 23 to 36 days in some cases.

c) Counterfeit and Nonconforming Parts: Cost pressures may lead to undocumented or fake components entering the chain, undermining traceability and airworthiness. Legacy systems exacerbate this, as parts for older aircraft become scarce.

d) Global Interdependence and Infrastructure Risks: Geopolitical tensions, import dependencies (e.g., 100% foreign reliance on some minerals), and outdated infrastructure (e.g., 30-50-year-old air traffic control systems) threaten resiliency. Disruptions can affect continued airworthiness, especially during pandemics or conflicts.

e) Production and Quality Control Issues: OEMs like Boeing have faced production halts due to defects, such as the 737 MAX-9 fuselage failure, leading to FAA-mandated pauses and enhanced oversight.

These challenges highlight the need for proactive risk management to safeguard airworthiness.

Case Studies

A prominent example is the Boeing 787 Dreamliner battery issue in 2013, where a lithium-ion battery failure led to an emergency landing and FAA grounding of the fleet—the first since 1979. The problem stemmed from inadequate supplier oversight: the battery (Tier 2 supplier Yuasa) was integrated by Thales (Tier 1), but compliance with airworthiness requirements was lacking at lower tiers. During an investigation, no record was found of the final production-standard charging system having been tested with the actual GS Yuasa-made battery. Securiplane, the charging system developer, tested the unit with a simulated electric load instead of an actual battery, apparently as a precaution after an earlier incident of fire at its facility during battery testing. This caused overheating risks, delivery delays, and financial losses, underscoring gaps in regulatory adherence under FAA Part 21.

B787 work sharing

Similar issues affected the Airbus A380, where supplier problems delayed entry into service. Airbus has since adopted an outsourcing model, retaining core technologies, and where the equipment suppliers are required to hold a Production Organisation Approval (POA) or an equivalent granted by a recognised authority acceptable to EASA.

Post-pandemic, IATA guidance addressed airworthiness during aircraft storage and reactivation, emphasizing risk assessments for supply chain disruptions like part availability.

Best Practices and Recommendations

To address these considerations, industry and regulatory bodies recommend:

a) Supplier Evaluation and Oversight: Implement risk-based selection, periodic audits, and performance rating systems. Use tools like SAE ARP9134 for supply chain risk management. Maintain traceability through digital documentation and ensure nonconformance reporting.

b) Enhancing Resiliency: Diversify sources, build inventories, and develop in-house capabilities. Fund national stockpiles for critical materials and promote dual-sourcing to reduce dependencies.

c) Workforce Development: Partner with educational institutions, offer apprenticeships, and fund programs like those in the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 to build skilled talent.

d) Traceability and Integrity Initiatives: Adopt coalitions like the Aviation Supply Chain Integrity Coalition for enhanced accountability and prevention of incidents through better tracking. Use advanced technologies for monitoring and cybersecurity protections.

e) Policy and Collaboration: Streamline export controls, provide clearer certification guidance for innovations like additive manufacturing, and ensure interagency cooperation to mitigate global risks.

These practices aim to prevent airworthiness lapses and foster a robust supply chain.

Conclusion

Airworthiness considerations in aviation SCM are integral to safety, requiring stringent regulatory compliance, vigilant risk management, and adaptive strategies amid global challenges. With enhanced details on EASA's Part 21 and DGCA's CAR 21 oversight, including shared surveillance and comprehensive audits, the frameworks provide strong mechanisms for supplier control. By learning from incidents like the 787 battery failure and implementing recommended practices, the industry can enhance resiliency and ensure safe operations. Ongoing efforts, such as task forces and legislative acts, signal a commitment to addressing these issues proactively.

Author: GR Mohan

Hypersonic Flight Projects: An Overview

 Hypersonic flight is defined as sustained travel at speeds exceeding Mach 5 (five times the speed of sound, or approximately 3,800 mph/6,100 km/h at sea level), where air resistance generates extreme heat and aerodynamic challenges. Unlike supersonic flight (Mach 1-5), hypersonics involve unique propulsion systems like scramjets (supersonic combustion ramjets) or boost-glide vehicles, enabling maneuverability that evades traditional missile defenses. This technology promises revolutionary applications: in military contexts, for rapid, precise strikes; and commercially, for ultra-fast global travel, potentially reducing a New York-to-London flight to under an hour.

The field has seen accelerated development since the 2010s, driven by geopolitical tensions. As of September 23, 2025, major powers like the United States, China, Russia, and India are advancing hypersonic weapons, with operational deployments already in place for some nations. Commercial efforts, led by startups, focus on reusable aircraft for passenger and cargo transport, though they lag behind military programs due to funding and regulatory hurdles. Global R&D investment is booming—the U.S. Department of Defense requested $3.9 billion for hypersonics in FY2026, down from $6.9 billion in FY2025 but still significant—amid concerns over arms races and proliferation. Recent milestones include successful tests of ramjet engines and glide vehicles, highlighting progress in materials, propulsion, and integration.

Military Hypersonic Projects and Developments

Military hypersonics dominate the landscape, emphasizing boost-glide vehicles (HGVs) for unpredictable trajectories and air-breathing cruise missiles for sustained flight. These systems aim to penetrate advanced air defenses, with speeds making interception difficult. As of mid-2025, at least nine countries are actively pursuing hypersonic capabilities, with Russia and China leading in operational systems. Below is a detailed overview by key nations, incorporating 2025 updates.

United States

The U.S. is reenergizing hypersonic efforts after setbacks, focusing on fielding systems by 2027-2030. Key programs include:

a) Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW, "Dark Eagle"): A ground-launched boost-glide system developed by the Army and Lockheed Martin. In 2025, the U.S. Army’s 3rd Multi-Domain Task Force deployed LRHW equipment to Australia for Exercise Talisman Sabre, marking the first overseas deployment. Integration milestones were achieved in August 2025, with initial operational capability targeted for FY2027. Range: up to 1,725 miles at Mach 5+.

b) Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS): Navy-led sea-launched variant, also by Lockheed Martin. A successful end-to-end flight test occurred in May 2025, paving the way for deployment on Zumwalt-class destroyers by 2027 and Virginia-class submarines by the early 2030s. It shares the Common Hypersonic Glide Body (C-HGB) with LRHW.

c) Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile (HACM): Air Force scramjet-powered missile by Raytheon/Northrop Grumman. Ground tests continued in 2025, with airborne trials planned for late 2025. Operational by 2030.

d) Hypersonic Air-Launched Offensive (HALO): Navy air-launched system; early fielding eyed for 2029.

e) Other Developments: GE Aerospace completed the first captive-carry flights of a solid-fuel ramjet (SFRJ) on a supersonic F-104 Starfighter in September 2025, validating performance for hypersonic applications. DARPA's Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon Concept (HAWC) focuses on scramjet tech, though specific 2025 milestones are limited to ongoing demonstrations. NASA's Hypersonic Technology Project supports reusable air-breathing systems. The Next Generation Missiles and Hypersonics Summit in 2025 highlighted integration challenges.

Defensive efforts include down-selecting six interceptor concepts in June 2025, with $157 million annually for countermeasures.

China

China leads in operational hypersonics, emphasizing anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) strategies.

a) DF-17: Medium-range HGV, operational since 2019. Range: 1,200-1,800 km at Mach 5-10.

b) DF-27: Anti-ship variant with extended range; successful tests in 2024-2025. Deployed on warships like Type 055 destroyers.

c) YJ-21: Ship-launched hypersonic cruise missile.

d) New Missiles (2025 Reveals): Recent imagery shows YJ-15 (ramjet supersonic), YJ-17 (waverider hypersonic glide), YJ-19 (scramjet hypersonic), and YJ-20 (biconical aeroballistic), likely for naval vertical launch systems. China has fielded about 80 DF-17 launchers.

China's systems are combat-proven in simulations, with emphasis on carrier-killer roles.

Russia

Russia has deployed hypersonics in combat, notably in Ukraine.

a) Avangard: Intercontinental HGV, operational since 2019. Mach 27 capable, range: 6,200+ miles.

b) 3M22 Zircon: Scramjet cruise missile, entering serial production in 2025 after Ukraine's use. Range: 620 miles at Mach 8-9.

a) Kh-47M2 Kinzhal: Air-launched ballistic missile, widely used but intercepted by systems like Patriot.

Russia maintains a lead but faces production scaling issues.

India

India's DRDO is advancing indigenous hypersonics.

a) Hypersonic Technology Demonstrator Vehicle (HSTDV): Scramjet tested successfully in 2024; full prototype by 2026.

b) ET-LDHCM (Project Vishnu): Long-range hypersonic cruise missile. Set for testing in September 2025; Mach 8 speed, 1,500 km range, 1-2 ton warhead, terrain-hugging for evasion. NOTAM issued for Bay of Bengal test on Sept 24-25, 2025.

c) BrahMos-II: Joint with Russia; hypersonic variant in development, Mach 6-8.

Other Nations

a) Taiwan: Debuted a hypersonic missile in 2025 capable of intercepting ballistics at 230,000 feet (40 miles altitude).

b) United Kingdom: Completed 233 propulsion test runs in the U.S. in early 2025, aiming for a sovereign hypersonic cruise missile by 2030. Collaborating via AUKUS.

c) Turkey: Tayfun Block-4 boost-glide vehicle unveiled in July 2025.

d) Australia/France/Japan: Collaborative R&D under alliances like AUKUS; Japan's HVGP prototypes awarded in 2025.

Country	Operational Systems	In Development	2025 Key Milestones
USA	None fully	LRHW, CPS, HACM	Overseas deployment (LRHW), ramjet flights (GE), end-to-end test (CPS)
China	DF-17, YJ-21	DF-27, YJ-15/17/19/20	New missile reveals, expanded deployments
Russia	Avangard, Zircon, Kinzhal	Upgrades	Serial production (Zircon)
India	None	ET-LDHCM, BrahMos-II	Imminent test (ET-LDHCM)
Others	None	Various	UK propulsion tests, Taiwan debut

Commercial Hypersonic Flight Projects

Commercial hypersonics target passenger flights at Mach 5+, but progress is slower, with most efforts in prototyping. Market projections estimate $5-10 billion by 2033, focused on high-value routes.

a) Hermeus (Quarterhorse/Halcyon): Developing a 20-seat hypersonic jet with a turbine-ramjet hybrid. Engine tests ongoing; Quarterhorse demonstrator flights in 2025. Commercial operations targeted for the 2030s, despite thermal challenges. Raised $100M+ funding.

b) Venus Aerospace (Stargazer): 12-seat craft with rotational-detonation rocket/ramjet. Prototype development; first test flight planned for late 2025. Aims for London-to-Texas in two hours by the 2030s.

c) Invictus (Hypersonic Space Plane): Suborbital vehicle for Mach 5 flights; London-to-NYC in one hour. Expected debut by 2031.

d) Stratolaunch (Talon-A): Reusable testbed; completed second hypersonic flight and recovery in March 2025, proving reusability.

e) Boom Supersonic (Overture): Primarily supersonic (Mach 1.7), but influences hypersonic tech; manufacturing begins 2025, tests 2027.

f) Hypersonix (Dart): 3D-printed scramjet; tests at NASA Wallops in 2025.

g) Destinus: Shifted to defense; prior cargo/passenger plans paused.

GE's ramjet advances could integrate into commercial designs. DARPA's NextRS hypersonic bomber prototype supports dual-use tech.

Company	Project	Speed/Range	2025 Status	Timeline
Hermeus	Halcyon	Mach 5 / Global	Engine/flight tests	2030s ops
Venus Aerospace	Stargazer	Mach 5+ / Transatlantic	Prototype dev	2025 test, 2030s commercial
Invictus	Space Plane	Mach 5 / Intercontinental	Design phase	2031 debut
Stratolaunch	Talon-A	Mach 5+ / Testbed	Flight/recovery success	Ongoing research

Technological Challenges

Hypersonics face extreme heat (up to 3,000°F/1,650°C), requiring advanced materials like titanium/nickel superalloys or ceramics. Propulsion issues include scramjet ignition at high speeds, while guidance systems must handle plasma interference. Costs remain high—U.S. programs like ARRW were canceled due to failures, and environmental concerns like sonic booms persist. Reusability, as demonstrated by Stratolaunch, is key to commercial viability.

Future Outlook

By 2030, military hypersonics will likely be routine, with the U.S. fielding by 2027, India by the late 2020s, and proliferation to more nations risking escalation. Russia and China maintain leads, but U.S. countermeasures (e.g., directed-energy weapons) could balance the field. Commercially, viable flights may emerge in the 2030s if funding bridges the $1B+ gaps, competing with spaceplanes like SpaceX's Starship. Geopolitically, arms control is absent, heightening tensions, while AI integration and reusable tech could democratize access. Overall, 2025 marks a pivotal year of tests and deployments, setting the stage for a hypersonic era by 2040.

Author: GR Mohan