is it's fewer crew. 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 one-tenth of a legacy rotocraft. 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 MV-250 brings to the party. So hopefully that answers your question, sir.

Excellent. Yes, it does. Thank you very much. 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? Thank you.

Yeah, great question as well. You know, 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 a Gulf Stream, right? So we have to get to a standard that we all believe in. And at Gamma, we all came around a standard. That's step one. Step two 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, McQuarrie, customers, and even land developers really starts to shine. There will be high value endpoints off the airports. You know, 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 these 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.

Andreas, it's Herman. 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 timeline. 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.

Excellent. Thank you both. Congrats again on the quarter. We'll pass it on.

Your next question is from the line of Ronald Epstein with Bank of America. Your line is not open.

Please go ahead. yeah hey good good morning kyle and hermit and the team i hope you guys are doing well so kyle i think you laid out pretty well on the call that beta is more than just sort of a an ev talk company but it's a whole suite of technologies that you know build on each other for c tall v tall and um electric propulsion hybrid propulsion you know hybrid electric electricity generation, just a whole basket of technology. So it can be used across a bunch of different kinds. So one of my questions for you is as sort of myself, a little bit of a, you know, an airplane geek watching things flying around the country. It's noticeable that up in Plattsburgh, New York, there's the Hart airplane. And I think, you know, 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's doing.

Hey, 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. um it is uh we are we are as you know huge fans of everybody in this industry specifically that program um but it's uh it's really good and apologies for for not being able to to dive into that one but i can say that um that the strategy of selling these components makes beta a better company you know publicly working with eve on these things embrace 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 you know the best engineers an extremely important asset to our company um interested and and involved in new and diverse programs uh every day but they're all tied back to a common set of technologies um that that are that are germane to betas airplanes so yeah that is our strategy and it's going very well and you know if i may just as a quick follow-on to that and then i just got one more after after this on a different subject but you know i don't know kind of looking at

pictures of their airplanes which i have um you know their their propellers look a lot like what you guys use and a lot of times you know 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 yeah i i i guess i I have to say no comment on that one, but yeah.

Hey, Ron, it's Herman. I want to just pull on a thread that you brought up about multiple ways to win. I think that is really what we're after, and I'm happy that you said it. You know, right now, our current aircraft backlog now sits over 1,000 aircraft. The mix between CETOL and VTOL is about 50-50. And this quarter, the Logan Air 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, you know, building the business with multiple ways to win is something that we are very focused on building.

And then, you know, 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, you know, I don't think it's a secret that, you know, autoclaves are in short supply and different toolings in short supply and so on and so forth. Just from an industrial ramp up perspective, how's 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 XM, 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 and 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 those inspections all in place early days. because, you know, 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 Kailayu with Jefferies. Your line is now open. Please go ahead.

Hi. Good morning, Kyle Herman. Thank you so much. 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 Christine discussed it a bit. What's kind of left as we think about phase four on the engine cert and how we think about that going forward over the next six to 12 months?

Hey, Sheila. So in the phase four implementation phase, it is the execution of our testing. We've completed a large number of the tests. And, you know, 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 one 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 pull in that test is scheduling those witnesses, those teardowns, and the review of that data together with them. So, you know, we have somewhere near 40 different dyno assets here doing different things to the motor continuously. We've got 80 plus thousand hours of runtime. You know, if you compare that to a typical turbine engine, it'll just have a thousand or two hours on it before it's certified. the level of work that we've done here is is pretty remarkable and uh 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 off through the type certification board uh of getting the type certificate we are in pure execution mode having kind of retired that big ominous uh issue around policy interpretation recently.

No, that's great. And great to see all the momentum at the air show 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 CX 300, as we think, you know, same question, you know, how do we think about phase four, the completion of that? Is it just hours of testing, working with FAA, if you could get into the nuances?

Yeah, first off, I apologize if you got kicked out. But you You know, we do need to prioritize customers, and I think that's good for you and for us. On the CX-300, 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 applied or clarified. So in the airplane itself, we had previously kind of chalked up the three 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 one of the early test plans that we had approved with them, it's something called 823 Charlie, 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 one 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 we accepted we we intervided 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, you know, 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, you know, If I look out forward, there's execution risk left on the H-500A. We get through TIA on the CX-300, and then we redo the same types 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 A-250, which is probably your follow-on question, where we introduce 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.

Awesome. Super helpful. Thank you.

Your next question is from the line of Chris Pierce with Needham. Your line is now open. Please go ahead.

Hey, good morning, everyone. Congrats on the progress to date. I guess if we think about, you know, you had your initial EIPP demonstration, And if we look at kind of what you've done globally or in Hawaii, in the UK, 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 and it's hard to say what we should look for going forward as you launch additional sites?

Yeah, 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 a half a day. We dispatched multiple airplanes halfway down the East Coast, picked up a heart. We had a pilot from our customer 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 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 that that was step one. 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 two under 135 operations. Remember that Promer 1 was done under part 91 operations. And those will start to get, and I think I mentioned this before in one of our earnings calls, they aren't demonstrations. Those are true operations that start to go at cadence, multiple flights a day. You know, when we were flying down in Orlando recently, we were doing six, eight, ten 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.

Hey, Chris, it's Herman. You know, 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 the CIPP process. Each operation that we do gives us an opportunity to mature the operating playbook with customers and public sector partners, and then apply that playbook across all of the EIP 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 four to six weeks.

Okay, perfect. And then just going back to Sheila's question on slide 16, can you sort of walk us through what phase four 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, you know, 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 four and slide 16?

Yeah. So really, I would say there are like four major buckets there. We have a conforming article structural test where we twist, bend and break an airframe to show that the structural margins meet the design intent. We, of course, have done that. You know, just by way of example, we've built five 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 break action and other such things on compromised runways and in 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 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 percent commonality between our C-TOL and our V-TOL aircraft. Our V-TOL 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 V-TOL. So it's basically a Part 23 aircraft certification program with the knowledge that we're going to be walking directly into the A-250 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.

I appreciate that from you and the team.

Congratulations. talk soon your next question is from the line of andre madrid with btig your line is now open please go ahead yep thanks good morning team appreciate the uh taking my question i uh i understand you pulled forward the introduction of the mv250 by about like six months back in the fourth quarter but given the updates from farmer i was curious if you could maybe just highlight how conversations with potential customers are progressing on that platform And additionally, I guess, since it's, you know, kind of aligned, you know, I'll also throw on another one there. In light of, you know, recent announcements from peers and your commentary on 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 roadmap for you guys?

Yeah, great, 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 a incredibly keen interest in moving forward. I think the performance specifications speak for themselves. And then, And of course, exercising 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's 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 warfighter 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 Near Earth Autonomy and smaller companies. And on the component side with General Dynamics, it is, you know, I'm just a humdrum 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, you know, the feedback that we got from people like Jim McConville, who was the chief staff of the army, who's now on our board. He walked away really excited to answer your very first question. You know, I guess 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. 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 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 one for you, I guess, could you, I don't know, I might've missed this, but did you maybe outline the exact timing of the expanded XM 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 XM Bank, which began in 2023. And they funded our South 40 facility. So we've been through a lot with the XM 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. You know, think about XM as a strategic financing partner, really an execution enabler. What we're doing with the XM 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 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 XM, where we could use them to fund a lot of the CapEx. So it's really a big enabler for us right now.

So your next question is from the line of Noah Papanek with Goldman Sachs. Your line is now open. Please go ahead.

Good morning. This is Tomas Russo on for Noah Papanek. 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, you know, a higher energy density, higher power density, lower cost battery are all things that every battery manufacturer is working on. We're at a point where all of those things are going towards the better constantly. But 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, you know, 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 then the aircraft volume goes way up and this is all part of kind of the UPS vision of how aviation fits into their their future network so so I I think it's a goodness all around to get to higher energy density you increase in just the math of it if you double the range, you have four times the accessible city pairs. You know, 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.

Thank you. 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 input to that will evolve over the coming years?

Thanks. Yeah. I mean, look, you're absolutely right. I mean, the cost of energy becomes relatively insignificant. It's like 40 times less. The pilot still costs 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 three quarters of the cost out. And helicopters, you know, 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 the in our case you know for 30 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, you know, 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 Blackhawk that we were flying next to.

Thank you for those details and taking my questions. I will pass it back there.

Your next question is from the line of John Godden with Citigroup. Your line is now open. Please go ahead.

This is Max on for John. Thanks for taking my question. 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, you know, what the future looks like for that partnership with GE. Thanks.

Sure. So with 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 at 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 in 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 with 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 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 two companies come together and make more progress than beta and ge have since our relation kicked up i don't know what nine months ago or something sounds good um that was great color and then just kind of switching

gears a bit um you mentioned the sale of flight control computers to horizon you know 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?

Yeah, absolutely. I mean, look, there's 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 sails. 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. You know, 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 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.

Yeah, in the aftermarket, as you could 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.

Great. Thank you.

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, you know, just wanted to kind of highlight this XM deal. It allows us to use the right color of money for the right thing. XM 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 startup 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 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 in the customer side, at the FAA, the DOT, and in technological partnerships. so you know i'm i'm proud of what the team has done here at beta um 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 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 uh and we'll talk to you in about 90 days this concludes today's call thank you for attending you may now disconnect