Why Archer Aviation Has Obtained Its ICAO 3LD Code Designator and How It Relates to a Type-Design Piloted Aircraft (Midnight 2.0) and Upcoming Flight Demonstrations - SFAR: Piloted Powered-Lift Aircraft Must Align with ICAO Standards for Certification & Operations "We will be first to launch"
Adam tried to tell us in more ways than one that piloted flight is coming and its not just on an experimental or pre-production aircraft but rather on a real type-design for FAA Certification production aircraft.
TLDR; The ICAO is a big deal and very related to piloted flight and the certification process. The SFAR clearly states, that manned flight is the only flight certifications they're worried about as opposed to unmanned and or remotely piloted flights. As well, when you fly a piloted flight aircraft that has a human pilot controlling the aircraft, unless you are flying a top secret skunk works program, you are going to want and need and ICAO 3LD / call sign designator. It's for safety, number one, and it's also to communicate clearly with the ATC and and more broadly the FAA while flight demonstrations are going on.
If you read the SFAR closely it is kind of apparent that we have not had a real pilot-only flight demonstration yet by any eVTOL player in the United States. Surely, we have not had one that was tightly integrated into the ATC and FAA safety systems.
As far as I am concerned, when Adam made the statements above he effectively was saying, Archer Aviation is ahead. They're ahead on the the piloted flight Type-Designed aircraft front. They may even literally be ahead on the entire Type-Design certification process as well, because they have less things to worry about in the certification process. Even removing the completed Georgia high-volume manufacturing facility from the equation, Archer Aviation maybe ahead on all fronts. Including air-taxis commercialization.
Just this past week, Nikhil said in front of all of his eVTOL/AAM peers at the McKinsey Institute - "We will be first in the world to launch commercial operations."
Also, this past week we learned that Archer Aviation's subsidiary, Archer Air LLC has obtained an ICAO 3LD Code Designator--AXR. Now, some have decided that this isn't a big deal and has nothing to do with upcoming piloted flight. That this is part of some broader business plan taking effect now for some reason. Bluntly, it seems as if Archer Aviation has leaped ahead on this one aspect and it's clear because nobody else has this designation listed with the FAA; Except for Archer Air LLC.
It's true that in the Type-Certification process detailed by the ORDER 8110.4C CHG 7 there is no specific reference to obtaining an ICAO Code Designator or call sign. EXCEPT, it is strongly implied AND, there is this this thing that sort of sits in-between the two most important FAA flight certification documents.
First, we have the ORDER 8110.4C CHG 7 which is the FAA's definitions for Type Certification. I.e. the 5 or less phases to have the aircraft certified. We can also assume the ORDER 8130.2K which is related to Airworthiness Certification of Aircraft is also every important in this process.
If you're wondering how these two frameworks combine think of it like this. The 8130.2K (Airworthiness Certification) relates to 8110 (Type Certification) because 8130.2K governs the issuance of airworthiness certificates (including experimental and special flight permits), while 8110 sets the framework for type certification approval. 8130 is the operational application of 8110’s certification process.
However, there is something that sits on top of all of this and acts as a 3rd wheel or an FAA framework that connects eVTOLs to the existing FAA certifications. That wheel is the SFAR because we have effectively a new form of flight transportation i.e. Powered Lift. Final Rule for the Integration of Powered-Lift: Pilot Certification and Operations (RIN 2120-AL72). This effectively is what binds the 2 other frameworks together for the definitions of eVTOL Type-Certification and Operational Use i.e. Airworthiness certification.
In the SFAR, there are several interesting references to the ICAO in general. In contrast, the 8130 only references ICAO in relation to complying to international standards via the ICAO Annex 8. If you read the 8130 K there are all types of references to the ICAO Annex 8, the SFA (Special Flight Authorization), and the SOR (State of Registry).
The SFAR summarizes:
This final rule adopts permanent amendments and a Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) for a period of ten years to: facilitate the certification of powered-lift pilots, clarify operating rules applicable to operations involving a powered-lift, and finalize other amendments which are necessary to integrate powered-lift into the National Airspace System (NAS). In this final action, the FAA finalizes its alternate framework to stand-up initial groups of powered-lift pilots and flight instructors. Most notably, the FAA adopts alternate frameworks to facilitate the certification of pilots seeking qualifications in a powered-lift with single functioning flight controls and a single pilot station. In response to commenters, the FAA provides clarification for certain operating rules and adopts a performance-based approach to certain operating rules to enable powered-lift operations. In addition to finalizing provisions for powered-lift, this action also makes changes to practical tests in aircraft that require type ratings, including airplanes and helicopters, training center rotorcraft instructor eligibility, training and testing requirements, and training center use of rotorcraft in flight training.
E (SFAR). International Operation of Powered-Lift
In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to conform to International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) to the maximum extent practicable. In this final rule, the FAA amends part 61 to require powered-lift pilots to have a type rating, which meets the standards outlined in ICAO Annex 1, Personnel Licensing. Under parts 91 and 135, the FAA requires U.S. operators to comply with ICAO Annex 2, Rules of the Air, when operating over the high seas or when operating within a foreign country. ICAO Annex 8, Airworthiness of Aircraft, is silent on powered-lift; however, the FAA designates powered-lift as special class aircraft for type certification in accordance with § 21.17(b) and applies airworthiness criteria that meet an equivalent level of safety to the FAA’s existing airworthiness standards and are consistent with the intent of ICAO Annex 8.
VIII (SFAR). International Operations for Powered-Lift: A. Personnel Licensing
The FAA’s policy is to meet the U.S. obligations under the Convention on International Civil Aviation (“Chicago Convention”) by conforming to the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) to the maximum extent practicable. ICAO annexes contain the international SARPs for safety, regulation, and efficiency of air navigation. The Chicago Convention ensures that certificates of airworthiness, certificates of competency, and licenses are recognized by other Member States as long as the issuing States meet the minimum ICAO standards.
The Member States’ Civil Aviation Authorities (CAAs) each integrate the ICAO SARPs into their national legal frameworks and practices and are responsible for regulatory oversight. When unable to integrate the ICAO SARP into their national legal framework, each ICAO Member State CAA is obligated to file a difference to that ICAO SARP and update their CAA’s Aeronautical Information Publication (AIP). When the FAA is notified that ICAO adopted a new standard which is impracticable to comply with in all respects of the standard or procedure, or to bring its own regulations or practices into full accord with any international standard, the FAA will notify ICAO of the differences between its own practice and that established by the international standard.
As these aircraft obtain type certification, the FAA will amend, as appropriate, operational rules and pilot training requirements to support the varied designs being proposed by the manufacturers. Longer term, the agency will continue to develop permanent powered-lift regulations to safely enable powered-lift operations by working with industry and international partners. This process is performed in parallel to the FAA’s international partners’ efforts and in alignment with international safety requirements. This is an ongoing project and relies on data-gathering processes to develop more permanent regulations.
Part 61 prescribes the requirements for the issuance of pilot, flight instructor, and ground instructor certificates, as well as the privileges and limitations of such. Similarly, ICAO Annex 1 provides SARPs for personnel licensing, including those for powered-lift ratings. Specifically, ICAO included a permissive transitional measure in ICAO Annex 1, providing ICAO member States a temporary recommendation for the issuance of a powered-lift type rating.
In the transitional measures, section 2.1.1.4 states that a licensing authority may endorse a type rating for a powered-lift category on an existing airplane or helicopter pilot license (i.e., certificate). Should a licensing authority implement this endorsement, the endorsement must indicate the aircraft is part of the powered-lift category and must result from training during a course of approved training. Additionally, the training must consider previous experience in an airplane or helicopter, as appropriate, and incorporate all relevant operational aspects of a powered-lift.
The FAA has chosen not to implement this permissive transitional measure as written, but rather require a powered-lift category rating in addition to a type rating for each make/model of aircraft. This is due to the wide range of powered-lift being developed that have complex and varied design, flight, and handling characteristics, making the establishment of classes within powered-lift not practicable at this time.
Therefore, pilots with an airplane category or rotorcraft category helicopter class rating may transition and/or add a powered-lift category rating, hence providing a substantial pool of qualified candidates to staff the initial cadre of powered-lift pilots and instructors. This meets the standards in ICAO Annex 1 and establishes a path toward pilot certification with an equivalent level of safety by providing pilots training on the unique designs of powered-lift while leveraging those pilots’ prior experience and advanced training devices to create the first group of powered-lift pilots. These pilots will then go on to form the first instructors for subsequent applicants.
Should the ICAO transitional measure become a standard in the future, the FAA will undertake measures to align with ICAO standards to the greatest extent practicable, which may include filing a difference.
V (SFAR). Certification of Powered-Lift Pilots
Type rating determination
The FAA initiates a Flight Standardization Board (FSB) during the aircraft certification process for aircraft that require a type rating. Since each powered-lift will require a type rating as set forth by adopted § 61.31(a)(3), an FSB will be formed to evaluate each powered-lift to make recommendations for pilot type rating training. This evaluation determines whether the training recommended by the manufacturer will enable the pilot to safely operate the aircraft in the NAS. If a manufacturer later introduces a derivative or variant, such as a new model or series of a type-certificated aircraft, the FAA will conduct another FSB evaluation of the new aircraft. This process helps determine whether certain aircraft warrant the same type rating and what differences training, checking, or special training may be necessary for safe operation.
The FAA’s differences training framework includes multiple levels, specifying requirements based on increasing differences between related aircraft. These processes apply to all aircraft, including powered-lift. In the future, a common type rating could emerge if a single manufacturer produces multiple powered-lift aircraft with similar designs and operating characteristics. The FAA will apply the same procedural steps to powered-lift as it currently does for establishing a common type rating
Relatedly, as discussed in the NPRM, the FAA notes that some powered-lift have been issued special airworthiness certificates for experimental purposes in accordance with § 21.191 and foresees a need to continue this kind of certification in the future. In general, experimental aircraft are not subject to the same airworthiness standards as those aircraft holding standard airworthiness certificates (e.g., regulatory design, build, maintenance, and inspection requirements). In accordance with § 91.319(i), the Administrator may prescribe additional operating limitations for experimental aircraft where necessary for safety and risk mitigation with various hazards inherently introduced by experimental aircraft. The FAA has employed the operating limitations issued with an experimental airworthiness certificate to require pilots to hold category and class ratings for all experimental aircraft and additional authorizations for certain experimental aircraft even when no passengers are carried on board. As with experimental airplanes and experimental rotorcraft, the FAA will apply category ratings and other authorizations (e.g., the authorization to act as PIC) through operating limitations for experimental powered-lift, as warranted.
Type rating determination
Furthermore, although many powered-lift coming to market employ some simplified flight controls, none have currently made it through the aircraft certification process.
The FAA further analyzed this revision during the pendency of this rulemaking and determines that a conforming amendment is necessary to implement paragraph (l)(1) as intended and as it applies to the facilitation of powered-lift pilot certification. Many experimental aircraft have not yet achieved type-certification. As such, prior to removing the term “type-certificated” from paragraph (l)(1), the category and class exception in that paragraph would have applied to those experimental aircraft “not type-certificated.” Therefore, pilots utilizing experimental aircraft are excepted from holding a category and class rating for those aircraft “not type-certificated” set forth in current § 61.31(l)(1), provided no other rule or aircraft operating limitation requires them. The adopted revision to § 61.31(l)(1) clarifies that pilots of such experimental aircraft will, indeed, be required to hold category and class ratings, unless one of the exceptions noted in § 61.31(l)(2) applies. Specific to experimental aircraft, § 61.31(l)(2)(iii)(B) excepts a person operating an aircraft under the authority of an experimental certificate from the rating limitations of § 61.31(c) and (d), provided the person holds a pilot certificate and no passengers are carried. Effectively, a certificated pilot could operate without the relevant category, class, or type, if applicable, provided no passengers are carried, and provided no other rule or operating limitation requires them.
ICAO Annex 1 Summary: Personnel Licensing
Annex 1 outlines the standards and recommended practices for personnel licensing, including the issuance of type ratings. A type rating is an authorization entered on or associated with a pilot license, specifying the pilot's privileges or limitations regarding a particular aircraft type. This ensures that pilots have the necessary training and proficiency to operate specific aircraft models.
ICAO Annex 2 Summary: Rules of the Air
Annex 2 provides the rules governing the conduct of flight operations. While it primarily focuses on operational procedures and flight rules, it also touches upon aspects related to aircraft identification and classification, which are essential for maintaining safety and order in air traffic management.
How the 2 Annex's relate to the SFAR: Annex 1 directly addresses aircraft type ratings by setting the standards for pilot licensing and the necessary qualifications to operate specific aircraft types. Annex 2 complements this by establishing the operational rules that ensure these standards are applied consistently during flight operations.
VII (SFAR). Air Traffic Operations
The FAA proposed leveraging its existing standards and procedures for powered-lift air traffic operations. These standards and procedures include separation protocols managed by Air Traffic Control (ATC) to ensure safe and orderly air traffic flow. The specific standards vary depending on factors such as airspace classification and aircraft type.
FAA Order JO 7110.65 outlines air traffic separation standards, addressing separation procedures for aircraft and helicopters differently. Factors such as aircraft weight, wake turbulence, and radar distance influence separation standards, with ongoing monitoring to maintain safety. The FAA’s Air Traffic Organization is currently working to modify JO 7110.65 to ensure safe and efficient powered-lift operations within the National Airspace System (NAS). While updates are in progress, ATC will continue to use existing aircraft standards for powered-lift operations.
The FAA did not make any changes to the proposed regulatory text and determined no additional rulemaking is necessary at this time to address air traffic procedures. The FAA will use existing traffic management systems to support and manage powered-lift operations as necessary. These aircraft must be type certificated, including those used for carrying passengers, ensuring compliance with FAA safety and reliability expectations.
One of the ways the FAA protects persons and property on the ground is by enforcing minimum safe altitudes, allowing pilots enough time to respond to emergencies. During this rulemaking, the FAA evaluated the application of current minimum safe altitudes to powered-lift. Some powered-lift aircraft have operating characteristics similar to helicopters, including the ability to land in small spaces and perform autorotation or an equivalent maneuver during power-out emergencies. If a powered-lift meets the performance-based requirements outlined in the SFAR, it can follow the helicopter minimum safe altitude regulations without compromising safety. If it does not meet these requirements, it must comply with the minimum safe altitudes established for aircraft other than helicopters.
Regarding passenger notification, the rule does not address powered-lift operations without a pilot onboard, as it does not currently contemplate such operations.
Now, ORDER JO 7110.65BB is effectively the Air Traffic Control Framework from the FAA. In it you won't notice anything specifically about powered-lift. In the JO 7110.65 document you will find everything you need to know about ATC and it's relation to call-signs and ICAO 3LDs for in air traffic control communications. You will notice a few times we have quoted or mentioned the JO 7110.65.
ICAO 3LD−
(See ICAO Term ICAO Three−Letter Designator)
ICAO Three−Letter Designator (3LD)− An ICAO 3LD is an exclusive designator that, when used together with a flight number, becomes the aircraft call sign and provides distinct aircraft identification to air traffic control (ATC). ICAO approves 3LDs to enhance the safety and security of the air traffic system. An ICAO 3LD may be assigned to a company, agency, or organization and is used instead of the aircraft registration number for ATC operational and security purposes. An ICAO 3LD is also used for aircraft identification in the flight plan and associated messages and can be used for domestic and international flights. A telephony associated with an ICAO 3LD is used for radio communication.
2−4−20. AIRCRAFT IDENTIFICATION
Use the full identification in reply to aircraft with similar sounding identifications. For other aircraft, the same identification may be used in reply that the pilot used in his/her initial callup except use the correct identification after communications have been established. Identify aircraft as follows:
Aircraft having an ICAO 3LD and other FAA authorized call sign (U.S. special or local). State the call sign followed by the flight number in group form.
EXAMPLE−
“American Fifty−Two.”
“Delta One Hundred.”
“Eastern Metro One Ten.”Air taxi and commercial operators not having FAA authorized call signs. State the prefix “TANGO” on initial contact, if used by the pilot, followed by the registration number. The prefix may be dropped in subsequent communications.
EXAMPLE−
“Tango Mooney Five Five Five Two Quebec.”
“Tango November One Two Three Four.”
As well, the powered-lift category does have an operational framework order on its own. Specifically there is an Advisory Circular AC 194-1 dated 10.7.2024 entitled Powered-Lift Operations. The AC 194-1 covers many topics of operational procedures like the SFAR, regulations in Title 14 CFR i.e. part 135 Commercial Airline Certification, and ICAO code information. Think of this as the JO 7110 but with additional eVTOL information.
AC 194-1 - Powered-Lift Operations
This AC describes how powered-lift will comply with specific regulations in 14 CFR parts 43, 91, 91 subpart K (part 91K), 97, 135, and 136. This AC does not provide compliance options for every regulation addressed in 14 CFR part 194, as several do not require additional information. Instead, this AC provides clarification for specified regulations within Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) 120, Powered-Lift: Pilot Certification and Training; Operations Requirements, to ensure powered-lift operate safely. This AC can be used to help in understanding some of the part 194 regulations and will remain in effect until permanent rules for powered-lift are developed.
3.9.2 Operations Over the High Seas. U.S. powered-lift operators conducting operations over the high seas must do so in accordance with § 91.703 and the standards outlined in International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Annex 2, Rules of the Air.
3.4.4 Section 91.215, ATC Transponder and Altitude Reporting Equipment and Use (refer to § 194.304). Section 91.215(b) states that no person may operate an aircraft in the airspace described in § 91.215(b)(1) through (b)(5) unless the aircraft is equipped with an operable coded radar beacon transponder. This regulation is applicable to aircraft, and therefore, applicable to powered-lift. All powered-lift are required under § 91.215(b)(1) to be equipped with an operable coded radar beacon transponder.
3.4.5 Section 91.219, Altitude Alerting System or Device (refer to § 194.302(x)). Section 91.219 prohibits the operation of a turbojet-powered U.S.-registered civil airplane unless that airplane is equipped with an approved altitude alerting system or device. Section 194.302(x) requires all powered-lift to comply with the altitude alerting requirements under § 91.219, regardless of powerplant type. To comply with this rule, powered-lift operators should refer to the current edition of AC 25.1322-1, Flightcrew Alerting, for acceptable means of compliance with the 14 CFR part 25 requirements for the design approval of flightcrew-alerting functions. AC 25.1322-1 contains information on the type of alert function elements that should be considered (including visual, aural, and tactile or haptic elements), alert management, the interface or integration of alerts with other systems, and color standardization.
So there you have it. From all of the documentation we have covered I think it is clear that the ICAO 3LD is not just a bureaucratic step—it directly supports piloted flight operations and certification. Unless Archer want's to send Jeff Greenwood in the skies with TANGO - registration number it would only make sense that they follow actual proper FAA regulations and guidelines for operations and Air Traffic Control safety protocols (ATC). Nothing outright says you can't do it but rather why the hell would you do it especially since you literally have the ICAO 3LD already and the only other thing you need is the flight number of the registered flight with the FAA. From the JO 7110.64BB one more time.
An ICAO 3LD is an exclusive designator that, when used together with a flight number, becomes the aircraft call sign and provides distinct aircraft identification to air traffic control (ATC). ICAO approves 3LDs to enhance the safety and security of the air traffic system. An ICAO 3LD may be assigned to a company, agency, or organization and is used instead of the aircraft registration number for ATC operational and security purposes."
It literally doesn't get anymore clearer than that.
A few other things we tracked from the SFAR that I thought noteworthy is that at the time of that document writing which was back in September/October 2024 this statement rings out loudly. Furthermore, although many powered-lift coming to market employ some simplified flight controls, none have currently made it through the aircraft certification process.
Well, perhaps Archer has made it though that portion of the certification process and it would make sense because they literally address this in the Q3 2024 report regarding certification.
This is where they on the earnings call referenced flight-control integration was quoted as currently/still going on... And in their pdf Q3 report made reference specifically to SOI-1 and SOI-2 with the logical SOI-3 that is needed for piloted-only test flights or occurring just prior to those test flights. SOI-4 would occur during and after piloted test flights.
Remember: SOI-3: Focuses on the verification of compliance data (e.g., software and hardware test results), which is often reviewed and validated during FAA certification flight testing authorized under the TIA.
This may be where Archer is currently in the successful initiation of the SOI-3 and why they obtained the ICAO 3LD FAA Designator Code.
This may also explain why Joby doesn't have one. Simply, they are not yet at this stage of the process. Surely they will catch up eventually but I do believe this speaks volumes to where Archer Aviation is exactly in the certification process.
Not only does the ICAO 3LD serve domestic operations but it also serve well for international operations for piloted-flight as well. What also rings out to me is how efficiently Archer is doing this without wasted movements in going all over the world to fly experimental prototypes. In this year, 2025, when Archer does have international flights and demonstrations it will be on a mature and professional footing bolstered by the ICAO standards including Annex 1, Annex 2, and the 3LD airline code designator.
Summary of Key Points:
- ICAO 3LD & Piloted Flight: The ICAO 3LD (AXR) is directly tied to piloted flight operations and certification. The SFAR explicitly states that it only concerns manned flight certifications, reinforcing that an ICAO code is necessary for proper ATC communication and FAA integration.
- First True eVTOL Piloted Flight with ATC Integration: No U.S. eVTOL company has yet demonstrated a true pilot-only flight that is fully integrated with ATC and FAA safety systems. Archer obtaining an ICAO 3LD suggests they may be the first to conduct such a flight.
- Archer’s Competitive Edge: Archer appears ahead in piloted flight readiness and may even be leading the entire Type-Design certification process, possibly surpassing competitors in achieving a commercially viable air taxi operation.
- ICAO 3LD as a Certification Milestone: While not explicitly required in FAA Order 8110.4C CHG 7 (Type Certification) or Order 8130.2K (Airworthiness Certification), it is implied through ICAO Annex 1 and 2 requirements in the SFAR, particularly regarding ATC compliance.
- FAA Regulatory Integration:
- Order 8110.4C CHG 7: Defines Type Certification in 5 phases. Order 8130.2K: Governs Airworthiness Certification, operationalizing Type Certification. SFAR (RIN 2120-AL72): Connects eVTOL certification to existing FAA frameworks, requiring conformance to ICAO standards.
- SOI-3 & ICAO 3LD Link: SOI-3 verifies compliance data (e.g., software, hardware, and test results) and typically occurs just prior to piloted test flights. Archer obtaining the ICAO 3LD suggests they have initiated SOI-3 and are preparing for FAA-certified piloted testing.
- Why Others Don’t Have an ICAO Code Yet: Some companies have focused on pilotless demonstrations and unmanned testing, meaning they aren’t yet at the SOI-3 stage requiring ICAO-registered ATC integration for piloted flights.
- International Operations & ICAO Compliance: The ICAO 3LD is not just for domestic ATC but also crucial for international demonstrations and commercial operations. Archer’s approach ensures piloted test flights follow ICAO Annex 1, Annex 2, and ICAO-compliant flight plan filings.
- Archer’s Efficiency vs. Other Approaches: Archer is progressing efficiently without unnecessary global prototype testing. When they do conduct international demonstrations, they will do so with a certified aircraft, an ICAO 3LD, and full FAA integration, providing a mature and professional presence.
- Final Takeaway: The ICAO 3LD is a major milestone indicating Archer is in SOI-3, preparing for piloted FAA test flights. Their structured, regulation-aligned approach suggests they may lead in Type Certification and commercial launch readiness.