Bill Peterson: Okay, thanks for that. And knowing you have a lot of go to market opportunities and overseas opportunities. Now, it does feel, at least at a glance said some of your DoD efforts appear to be either deemphasize or in any case, it’d be good to get an update on the $1402 million program. I think in the second quarter last year, you’d expected to deliver actual aircraft to the DOD, are you still planning that? I guess, can you just update us on milestones of DOD? How should we think about the opportunities with the DOD this year, and maybe next year?
Tom Muniz: Sure, so we submitted all the paperwork necessary to begin the delivery process to the DOD, and expect to have our military air worthiness in June, and then delivery afterwards. But that being said, we are balancing the priorities of the entire program. And in the near-term, we actually believe will receive more cash from DOD programs that are not flight test related. So, for example, there’s $5 million to $10 million of payments that we can receive from the DOD, that are related to other items, to testing items to training items simulator work. So, we’ll kind of take it as it comes. But I think those — we’re really trying to prioritize where a lot of the dollars will come from, and a lot of them are coming from some of those other items.
Bill Peterson: Okay, thanks. If I can just take it one more, one of your peers talked about having a kind of full scale testing capability, I guess, in terms of your testing for credit. Do you have the tooling you need? Or do your steer suppliers for your parts and systems as a test capability? Or do you need to access third parties just try to get a sense on your test capabilities, whether it be in house or to partners to your full credit testing programs?
Tom Muniz: No, we have everything we need. Obviously, nice advantage we have is that got this broad range of suppliers and all the capabilities and relationships, they have a sort of leveraging all of those, but now today, we’re executing nothing specific needs.
Adam Goldstein: Let me give you — this is Adam, I’ll give you just a little bit of color. So, the example that Tom talked about what the inceptor right, the side sticks. Those are made by a company called Crouzet, which builds side sticks for some of the large aviation programs. Our side sticks are very similar to the side sticks used on the A220. So Crouzet that has 4,000 people that work there. So you think about if we were to do that in house, we would have I don’t know, five people 10 people that did that. So we get to leverage a company like Crouzet that has 4,000 people to go help do this. So, we have everything in place that we need in house as well as partnership with our with our investors — with our partners and the supply base.
You can see the progress as we are we show in the Shareholder Letter, the buckets keep increasing, where we’re showing you things in progress, and the stuff that’s moving really fast and going really well, especially comes from the stuff that our partners are doing because they have been through this process many, many times with very similar parts over many programs over many decades. And so hopefully that gives you a sense for where this is at. I actually think this is the part of the program where we are most excited where we will accelerate and who knows maybe be the first one to actually get through it?
Bill Peterson: Yes, no, thanks for that sharing insights. Sure. Leave it there.
Adam Goldstein: Thanks Bill.
Operator: We have a question from David Zazula with Barclays. Your line is now open.
David Zazula: Hey ,afternoon, thanks for taking my question. Tom, I just wanted to dig in a little bit into the battery drop testing, whether there was anything unexpected or anything you learned during the battery drop testing, and the feedback you’ve gotten from the FAA on the test? And then when you expect to transition to full credit testing on that one?
Tom Muniz: Yes, absolutely. So as we talked about, in the Shareholder Letter, and early on as gripped, better drop testing went really well. So, just to paint the picture, we take our whole battery pack, it’s like a 300 pound assembly, drop it from a crane actually up 55 feet, because we have to account for drag and kind of rigging the guides aircraft down, and then have to impact concrete on the ground, and not have anything catastrophically fail. And so, we did several drops. After each drop the battery pack, we were really surprised continue to function, meaning we could log on get data, it was it was still working. So huge confidence booster for our team. That was one of the harder tests for us to pass. So really great risk reduction for us getting through that.
To be clear, that was for our own testing. So now we have all the data that we need to do it for credit testing. So, as I mentioned earlier, and we’ve advanced some of the issue papers around this topic, and to tee up quite well to do the four credit testing with a lot of confidence that we’ll be able to get through it here in the coming months.
David Zazula: I know we’re up against time, but maybe quickly on the battery production. I mean, my simple math is that that’s enough for 23 batteries per year for everything coming out of Covington. So is that the plan to be able to support additional facilities on your part? Could you potentially be a battery outsourcer? What I guess what’s the need to have that level of capacity from a battery facility?
Tom Muniz: Yes, that’s a great question. So several thoughts. The first thing is a lot of the automation that you see there is really driven by Safety and Quality, versus production volume. So that production line is really similar to what you’d see in a state-of-the-art automotive plant, you know, supporting automotive levels of production. But we need that robustness and quality control, to be set up for building safe batteries for safe aircraft, and to get our production certificate, you know, to be able to build these things, ourselves. So, we need repeatability. We need all that traceability. And that’s what that system gives us. Also gives us the ability to scale. Absolutely. So one thing to keep in mind is when we’re in production, we don’t need battery packs just for new aircraft coming off the production line, but also for the fleet that’s going to be out there in service needing battery replacements, once maybe twice a year.
So that’s the reason why, if you do that math, it looks like more battery packs than 650 aircraft per year. Hopefully that makes sense.
David Zazula: Thanks Tom.
Operator: We are out of time for questions. So, I will pass it back to Adam Goldstein for closing remarks.
Adam Goldstein: In closing, our strategy is paying off. From the outset, we’ve been clear that our approach is to keep the design of Midnight as simple as possible, while delivering industry leading performance balanced with safety. We’re accomplishing this by partnering with what we believe to be supplier — the best suppliers in the aerospace industry. This capital-light strategy continues to pay dividends that are more clear today than ever, as we continue to make rapid progress towards commercializing electric aviation. I want to take a moment to step back and appreciate not only the progress we at Archer are making, but all the progress across the entire industry. Our partner beta recently demonstrated a pilot in transition flight in Vermont.
Our neighbors [Indiscernible] recently announced their final air worthiness criteria with the FAA as we expect to also do here do so shortly. The electrification of aviation continues to increasingly emerge into the mainstream every day. Thank you for joining us.
Operator: That concludes today’s call. Thank you all for your participation. You may now disconnect your line.
