UAM Market Readiness Index
The AirIndex Score (AIS) measures a market's structural readiness for commercial urban air mobility operations across seven independently verified factors. It is not a forecast — it reflects current, documented conditions.
The Index is designed as a replicable decision-support framework for regulators, municipal planners, operators, and researchers evaluating UAM market entry conditions. The methodology is published in full to enable independent validation and to support its adoption as an industry reference standard.
Factor weights and scoring thresholds are validated through ongoing consultation with infrastructure developers, weather intelligence providers, and vertiport operators active in multiple US markets. The v1.3 methodology reflects field-validated insights on legislative prerequisites and weather infrastructure requirements for commercial eVTOL operations.
What the Score Measures
The AirIndex Score (AIS) is a 0–0 composite index that answers one question: how prepared is this metropolitan area, right now, for commercial eVTOL operations? Each market is evaluated against seven factors spanning physical infrastructure, operator commitment, and regulatory environment.
The score is evidence-based and reproducible. Every factor is verified against public records — FAA databases, federal and state filings, municipal zoning codes, and operator disclosures. Anyone with access to the same sources should arrive at the same number.
This is not an investment recommendation, demand forecast, or prediction of commercial launch timelines. It measures structural readiness: the infrastructure, regulatory framework, and operator engagement that must be in place before commercial operations can begin. It is designed for use by transportation planners, regulatory bodies, and market participants requiring an objective, evidence-based readiness assessment.
The Seven Factors
An active pilot program is scored as a binary factor because it represents demonstrated, verified operator commitment to a specific market — not intent, not a memorandum of understanding, not a press release. Pilot programs require FAA coordination, physical infrastructure, and operational investment. Their presence confirms that at least one operator and one regulatory body have made the market actionable. The weight assigned reflects the significance of this signal relative to the full scoring range. A pilot program in isolation does not indicate a market is ready for full commercial operations, but its absence is a meaningful gap in any market that otherwise scores well on legislative and regulatory factors.
Has the market launched or hosted an active UAM pilot program? Pilot programs demonstrate real-world operational commitment — not just regulatory intent, but aircraft flying in the airspace under FAA-approved conditions. This is the strongest signal of market readiness because it requires simultaneous coordination of regulatory approval, operator participation, infrastructure access, and community engagement.
FAA-approved pilot program active or completed within the market area. Includes UAS Integration Pilot Program (IPP) participation, BEYOND program selection, Part 135 commercial eVTOL operations, or FAA-sanctioned demonstration flights with a defined operational area.
Announced partnerships without FAA operational approval. MOU signings. Feasibility studies. Operator interest without flights in the airspace.
Host or participate in an FAA-sanctioned pilot program. Coordinate with operators who have active type certification programs and need flight test environments.
FAA UAS Integration Pilot Program (IPP) records, BEYOND program designations, operator announcements, local government press releases.
Approved vertiport status is binary because the distinction between a planned vertiport and an approved one is legally and operationally categorical. FAA airspace determination, local permitting, and structural approval represent a completed regulatory process — not a proposal. The weight assigned reflects that physical infrastructure is a hard prerequisite for commercial operations. A market with approved vertiport infrastructure has cleared the most document-intensive, multi-stakeholder approval process in the readiness stack. The absence of approved vertiports in a market that otherwise scores well on legislation and regulatory posture is a specific, addressable gap — and the AirIndex gap analysis engine surfaces that gap explicitly.
Does the market have at least one permitted, under-construction, or operational vertiport site? Vertiports are the physical infrastructure that makes commercial UAM possible. A market with approved vertiport sites has cleared the hardest regulatory and zoning hurdles — environmental review, community input, building permits, and FAA airspace coordination.
One or more vertiport sites that have received municipal permits, are under construction, or are operational. Heliport conversions with documented eVTOL adaptation plans also qualify.
Sites in the planning or feasibility stage without permits filed. Announced locations without municipal approval. Existing heliports without documented UAM conversion plans.
Advance vertiport sites through the permitting process. Fast-track environmental review for vertiport-zoned parcels. Partner with operators on site selection and FAA engineering briefs.
Municipal planning records, FAA vertiport engineering briefs, operator filings, local zoning board decisions. Site counts reflect FAA-registered heliport and landing facilities per NASR 5010 records. Emergency Helicopter Landing Facilities (EHLFs) are excluded as they do not require FAA Form 7480 registration and are not captured in the NASR database. Total vertical flight infrastructure in any market may exceed the registered site count.
Active operator presence is scored as binary because the distinction between stated interest and operational commitment is meaningful to every decision-maker in the platform's audience. Operators are scored as present when they have made a public, verifiable commitment to a specific market — through route announcements, facility agreements, regulatory filings, or demonstrated flight operations. The weight assigned reflects that operator presence is both a market readiness signal and a market readiness driver. Operators accelerate the regulatory and infrastructure development of the markets they commit to. Markets without any operator presence, regardless of legislative posture, remain theoretical deployment candidates rather than active ones.
Is at least one eVTOL manufacturer or air taxi operator actively engaged in the market? Operator presence is a market signal — operators choose launch markets based on regulatory readiness, infrastructure availability, demand projections, and competitive positioning. An operator committing resources to a market validates the other readiness factors.
One or more operators with announced partnerships, signed agreements, test flights, or commercial intent specific to the market. Includes eVTOL manufacturers (Joby, Archer, Wisk), air taxi platforms (Blade), and cargo/delivery operators with UAM-adjacent infrastructure.
General statements of interest without market-specific commitments. Operators listing the market in investor materials without operational plans. Conference appearances or trade show presence.
Establish operator engagement programs. Create incentive packages for eVTOL operators to select the market for early commercial routes. Reduce regulatory friction to attract operator commitments.
Operator press releases, partnership announcements, SEC filings (for public operators like Joby and Archer), airline partnership disclosures.
Vertiport zoning addresses a gap that is distinct from both legislation and approved vertiport status. A state can enact AAM legislation without municipalities updating their zoning codes to accommodate vertical flight infrastructure. An approved vertiport can exist as a one-off variance without any systematic zoning framework. This factor scores whether a market has established a repeatable, codified zoning pathway for vertiport development — not just whether one vertiport has been approved. The weight assigned reflects that zoning frameworks are the infrastructure layer for infrastructure: they determine whether the next vertiport in a market is straightforward or extraordinary.
Has the city or county adopted zoning provisions that accommodate vertiport development? Zoning is the earliest and most controllable municipal signal of UAM readiness. Markets that have proactively updated land-use codes to permit vertiports are removing barriers before operators arrive — signaling institutional readiness and reducing timeline risk for commercial deployments.
Municipality has enacted or amended zoning ordinances to permit vertiport or heliport-equivalent use in at least one zoning district. Includes conditional use permits, overlay zones, or specific vertiport land-use categories.
General aviation zoning without vertiport-specific provisions. Draft ordinances not yet adopted. Study commissions without enacted code changes.
Amend local zoning codes to define vertiport as a permitted or conditional use. Identify suitable zoning districts (commercial, industrial, transit-adjacent). Streamline conditional use permit processes for vertiport applications.
Municipal code databases, city council meeting minutes, zoning board records, urban planning documents.
Regulatory posture captures the orientation of a market's regulatory environment toward advanced air mobility — whether state and municipal agencies and officials are actively engaging with AAM development, passively permitting it, or creating friction. Unlike the binary factors above, regulatory posture is graduated because it exists on a spectrum. A market with a formally designated AAM coordinator, published guidance documents, and active participation in FAA programs scores differently than a market where AAM has not registered with regulators at all. The weight assigned reflects that posture is an enabling condition rather than a prerequisite — a favorable posture accelerates everything else in the stack, but it cannot substitute for legislation, infrastructure, or operator commitment.
What is the overall regulatory stance toward UAM at the municipal level? This is the only graduated factor in the model. Rather than binary yes/no, regulatory posture is assessed on a three-level scale: Friendly (full weight), Neutral (partial weight), or Restrictive (zero). This reflects the reality that regulatory environments exist on a spectrum — a city can be passively permissive without being actively supportive. Note: Regulatory posture scoring reflects the observable framework of state and local regulations governing vertical flight infrastructure. The FAA does not hold enforcement authority over private-use heliports. Conditional and objectionable airspace determinations issued by the FAA carry no mandatory compliance mechanism for private-use facilities. REG scores reflect regulatory framework strength, not verified compliance rates.
Friendly: City has formed a UAM task force, joined federal programs (e.g., NASA AAM National Campaign), issued public statements of support, or allocated staff/budget to UAM planning. Neutral: No active opposition or support; standard permitting processes apply without UAM-specific provisions. Restrictive: City has enacted ordinances limiting drone/eVTOL operations, issued public opposition, or created regulatory barriers beyond standard requirements.
N/A — all markets receive a posture assessment. The assessment is based on documented actions, not inferred attitudes.
Move from Neutral to Friendly: form a UAM advisory committee, participate in federal engagement programs, issue a public statement of support, or designate a point of contact for UAM operators.
City government publications, mayor/council public statements, FAA Community Engagement records, USDOT participation records, local ordinances.
State legislation is the highest-weighted factor in the AirIndex scoring model because it is the foundational legal prerequisite for everything else. Without enacted AAM legislation, operators lack the legal certainty required to commit capital, vertiport developers lack the regulatory framework required to permit infrastructure, and municipalities lack the guidance required to update zoning codes. Legislation is not sufficient for market readiness — but it is the gating condition. The factor is graduated rather than binary because legislative quality varies: a comprehensive framework covering operator permitting, vertiport siting, and airspace coordination scores higher than a single enabling resolution. The elevated weight reflects the asymmetric importance of this factor — a market with enacted legislation and nothing else has a credible path to readiness; a market with strong infrastructure and no legislation does not.
What is the state of UAM-enabling legislation? This factor uses a graduated three-tier model: Enacted (full weight) — UAM-specific legislation signed into law; Actively Moving (partial weight) — UAM-specific bills in late legislative stages with real momentum; None (zero) — no meaningful UAM legislative activity. State-level legislation creates the legal framework that allows (or blocks) commercial UAM at scale. States with enacted legislation signal long-term institutional commitment. States with actively moving bills show community preparedness — a leading indicator of future enactment. This factor was elevated to the highest weight in v1.3 based on field validation showing that legislation functions as a prerequisite — infrastructure developers require a legislative framework before committing capital.
Enacted (full points): State-level UAM or AAM legislation signed into law — enabling acts, task force creation with legislative mandate, state DOT integration directives, or dedicated AAM appropriations. Actively Moving (partial points): UAM-specific bills in late stages — transmit to house, second reading, ordered enrolled, governor's desk, or committee recommendation for passage. Must show coordinated legislative activity, not just a single early-stage referral.
Bills introduced but stalled in early committee without movement. Resolutions without legal force (classified as Actively Moving at most, not Enacted). Executive orders without legislative backing. General aviation or drone legislation without UAM-specific provisions.
Advocate for state-level AAM enabling legislation. Support bills that define vertiports in state building codes, establish state-level UAM task forces, or direct state DOTs to integrate AAM into transportation planning. States with coordinated multi-bill UAM legislative clusters (e.g., Arizona's 2026 pattern) are 12–18 months from enacted legislation.
State legislature records, governor's office press releases, state DOT publications, legislative tracking services.
Weather infrastructure scores the availability of low-altitude meteorological data adequate for automated eVTOL flight operations. Conventional aviation weather infrastructure was built for airports and flight levels above 10,000 feet. eVTOL aircraft operate in the 30–2,000 foot AGL range — the low-altitude boundary layer where commercial weather data is sparse, delayed, and often inaccurate for the precision that autonomous flight requires. The USDOT National AAM Strategy (December 2025) explicitly identifies weather as one of four infrastructure pillars for advanced air mobility, alongside physical infrastructure, energy, and spectrum. The factor is graduated based on proximity of ASOS/AWOS stations to tracked facilities and deployment of low-altitude sensing infrastructure. The weight assigned reflects the current state of the market — weather infrastructure is a universal gap across all tracked markets, but its absence is a deployment constraint rather than a legal or regulatory blocker. This factor is developed in partnership with TruWeather Solutions, whose methodology for ranking weather infrastructure readiness is grounded in FAA NPRM Part 108 standards.
Weather infrastructure readiness tracks low-altitude weather sensing at the city level. The USDOT AAM National Strategy identifies weather as one of four infrastructure pillars alongside physical, energy, and spectrum — making it a federally recognized prerequisite for commercial AAM operations, not an AirIndex-specific judgment. Weather remains the most uncertain and uncontrollable factor that will impact schedule reliability and operator dispatch rates, especially in built-up urban areas where confused winds will impact vertiport vehicle spacing and throughput. Better weather infrastructure will increase weather and wind certainty, contributing to a safer and more efficient airspace and vertiport ecosystem. States are a key enabler in closing the weather infrastructure gap. Weather data at or below 500 feet AGL is critical for eVTOL operations — standard airport weather stations (ASOS/AWOS) report conditions at runway level but do not capture the wind shear, turbulence, and microclimate data required for vertiport approach corridors. This factor uses a graduated three-tier model: Full (full weight) — dedicated low-altitude sensing deployed in the market; Partial (partial weight) — standard airport weather infrastructure exists but lacks UAM-specific coverage; None (zero) — no meaningful weather infrastructure for low-altitude operations. As dedicated sensor networks expand across US markets, this factor will increasingly differentiate markets that have invested in operational weather infrastructure from those relying on general aviation coverage.
Full: Dedicated low-altitude weather sensors, eIPP (enhanced Instrument Performance Products) deployments, or UAM-specific weather observation networks operating within the metropolitan area. Partial: ASOS/AWOS weather stations at airports within the metro area providing surface-level observations applicable to nearby vertiport operations. None: No weather observation infrastructure relevant to low-altitude UAM operations.
Upper-atmosphere weather monitoring without surface/low-altitude component. Weather forecast services without local observation infrastructure. Radar-only coverage without surface wind data.
Deploy dedicated low-altitude weather sensing at planned vertiport sites. Partner with weather technology providers (e.g., eIPP networks) to establish sub-500ft observation coverage. Heliports and vertiports are not currently required to have weather stations — proactive deployment is a competitive differentiator.
FAA ASOS/AWOS station registry, eIPP deployment maps, airport authority records, weather technology provider deployment data.
Scoring Methodology
Binary Model
Four of seven factors use binary scoring: a factor is either present or it isn't. This is a deliberate design choice. Binary scoring eliminates subjective grading, makes scores reproducible across analysts, and provides clear, actionable thresholds for city planners and operators. A market either has an approved vertiport or it doesn't — there is no partial credit for “almost permitted.”
Three factors use graduated scoring: Regulatory Posture (Friendly / Neutral / Restrictive), State Legislation (Enacted / Actively Moving / None), and Weather Infrastructure (Full / Partial / None). These reflect domains where a binary model would lose meaningful signal — regulatory environments, legislative progress, and weather observation infrastructure all exist on a spectrum. As reliable sub-indicators emerge for other factors, the graduated model may be extended.
Differential Weighting
Factors are weighted differentially based on their direct impact on operational readiness. The model uses a three-tier weight structure organized around a thesis about what drives commercial deployment:
State Legislation — elevated to the highest weight in v1.3 based on field validation. Legislation creates the legal framework infrastructure developers require before committing capital.
Pilot Program, Approved Vertiport, Active Operator Presence, Vertiport Zoning — the operational and infrastructure signals. These require real capital, real approvals, and real operator commitment.
Regulatory Posture, Weather Infrastructure — necessary but not sufficient. A favorable regulatory environment and weather sensing infrastructure support operations but do not alone make a market ready.
Specific factor weights and scoring thresholds are available to licensed clients as part of the AirIndex data license agreement.
This hierarchy reflects current market conditions and field-validated insights from infrastructure developers and operators. Infrastructure and operational factors remain the strongest signals of near-term commercial readiness. State legislation was elevated to the highest weight in v1.3 based on field validation showing that legislation functions as a prerequisite — infrastructure developers require a legislative framework before committing capital, and community preparedness, reflected in legislative activity, often precedes and enables operator engagement.
Readiness Tiers
Scores map to four readiness tiers that provide at-a-glance context for where a market stands in its UAM journey.
An ADVANCED market has the foundational legal, regulatory, and physical infrastructure in place to support commercial eVTOL operations. The state has enacted AAM legislation. At least one operator has made a public commitment to the market. Vertiport infrastructure has received formal approval or is in active development. Zoning frameworks address vertical flight infrastructure. Regulatory posture is proactive rather than reactive. Weather infrastructure provides meaningful low-altitude coverage. A market in the ADVANCED tier is not necessarily ready for immediate commercial launch — but the structural prerequisites exist for an operator to execute with manageable risk. These markets are where capital goes first.
A MODERATE market has meaningful progress on multiple readiness dimensions but has not yet assembled the full prerequisite stack. State legislation may be enacted but operator presence is limited, or operator presence exists without supporting zoning frameworks. Multiple scoring factors are substantially satisfied, though the full prerequisite stack is incomplete. A MODERATE market represents an active transition — infrastructure or regulatory gaps exist but are trackable and closeable within a defined timeline. These markets are where developers and city planners are making preparatory investments and where operators are monitoring for trigger events before committing resources.
An EARLY market has one or two meaningful readiness signals — typically enacted state legislation or a favorable regulatory posture — but lacks the operational infrastructure required for near-term eVTOL deployment. No approved vertiports, no active operator presence, and limited or no zoning framework. The market has signaled intent but has not yet translated that intent into infrastructure. EARLY markets are where the gap between legislative ambition and operational reality is most visible. For developers and city planners, these markets represent medium-term pipeline opportunities. For operators, they are watch-list markets, not deployment markets.
A NASCENT market has minimal or no readiness signals across the scoring framework. No enacted AAM legislation, no operator presence, no approved vertiports, no vertiport zoning, and limited regulatory engagement with advanced air mobility. This does not mean the market lacks potential — geography, population density, or infrastructure assets may make it an eventual candidate. But the foundational prerequisites for commercial eVTOL operations have not been established. NASCENT markets require the most investment of time, capital, and regulatory development before they can support operations. Washington D.C. — the nation's regulatory capital — currently scores in this tier, which illustrates that policy familiarity at the federal level does not translate to local market readiness.
Update Frequency
Scores are updated continuously as new evidence is ingested and verified. Weekly snapshots capture the state of all rated markets for historical tracking. When underlying data changes — a new vertiport permit is approved, legislation is signed, an operator announces market entry — the affected market's score is recalculated and the change is logged in the AirIndex activity feed with a link to the source record.
Data Sources and Verification
Every score change is traceable to a specific source document. AirIndex draws from five primary categories of public data:
FAA ASOS/AWOS station registry, eIPP deployment maps, airport authority weather records, and weather technology provider deployment data for low-altitude sensing verification.
Proposed and final rulemaking, airspace designations, notices of availability, and FAA advisory circulars related to UAM and vertiport operations.
Public financial filings and disclosures from publicly traded operators for market commitments and partnership announcements.
Bill tracking via state legislature databases for UAM/AAM enabling legislation, task force creation, and appropriations across all 50 states.
City council minutes, zoning board decisions, planning commission records, and building permit databases for vertiport approvals and zoning amendments.
Verification Process
New evidence enters the system through an ingestion pipeline that classifies source documents against the seven scoring factors. High-confidence classifications (unambiguous evidence matching a single factor and market) are applied automatically. Ambiguous or multi-factor evidence is flagged for manual review before any score change is made.
Source citations for each scored factor are displayed on individual market pages in the AirIndex dashboard. Every citation includes a verification date indicating when the underlying source was last confirmed. Markets are re-verified on a rolling basis, with high-activity markets reviewed more frequently.
This verification architecture is designed to meet the evidentiary standards required for use in regulatory filings, academic publications, and government procurement decisions. All source records are retained and available for audit upon request.
Classifier Prompt Version History
The AI classification engine is iteratively refined based on accuracy audits and pipeline performance. Every prompt version is tracked with a commit hash, enabling precise reproducibility of any historical classification.
Missing Data Treatment Protocol
Purpose
This protocol defines how AirIndex handles situations where a scoring factor cannot be verified, where data is unavailable from primary sources, or where the status of a factor is genuinely uncertain. Consistent, documented treatment of missing data is essential to the integrity of the scoring model. Silent omissions, undisclosed interpolations, or inconsistent handling of data gaps undermine institutional trust in the output.
General Principle
AirIndex applies a conservative default: when a factor's status cannot be verified against primary sources, that factor is scored at its lowest applicable value. This approach deliberately avoids overstating market readiness. An ADVANCED score earned with unverified inputs is a greater credibility risk than a MODERATE score earned with fully verified ones.
Factor-Level Treatment
State legislature official records, enacted bill text, legislative tracking services
If no enacted legislation can be confirmed from primary sources, the factor scores zero. Proposed bills, executive orders, and informal policy statements do not satisfy this factor. If a bill's status is uncertain (e.g., passed one chamber but not yet signed), it is held at the lower confirmed score until enactment is verified. Uncertainty flag: applied when bill status has not been verified within the prior 30-day ingestion window.
FAA program records, operator press releases, regulatory filings
If no active pilot program can be confirmed from a primary source, the factor scores zero. Announced intentions and letters of intent do not satisfy this factor. A pilot program is confirmed only when operational evidence exists — FAA coordination records, facility agreements, or verified flight operations.
FAA airspace determination records, local permitting databases, operator announcements
If no approved vertiport can be confirmed, the factor scores zero. Planned vertiports, vertiports under construction, and vertiports with pending applications do not satisfy this factor. Approval is defined as completed FAA airspace determination plus local permitting clearance.
Operator public announcements, route filings, FAA records, OID (Operator Intelligence Database)
If no operator presence can be confirmed in the OID against primary source verification, the factor scores zero. Speculative route maps, investor presentations without operational commitment, and unverified third-party reports do not satisfy this factor.
Municipal zoning codes, city ordinances, planning department records
If no vertiport-specific zoning framework can be confirmed from municipal primary sources, the factor scores zero. General commercial or aviation zoning that has not been specifically extended to vertical flight infrastructure does not satisfy this factor.
FAA program participation records, state agency publications, RPL (Regulatory Precedent Library)
Regulatory posture is the factor most susceptible to data gaps because it is partially qualitative. Where primary source evidence is insufficient to assess posture with confidence, the factor defaults to the lowest graduated score (minimal engagement). The RPL is the primary evidence base. Markets with fewer than three verifiable regulatory precedents in the RPL default to the lowest tier.
FAA NASR ASOS/AWOS station data, TruWeather deployment records, FAA 5010 heliport coordinates
Weather infrastructure scoring is calculated from measured station proximity to tracked facilities. Where ASOS/AWOS station data is unavailable for a specific metro area, the factor scores zero. Partial credit is calculated from verified station locations within defined proximity thresholds aligned with FAA NPRM Part 108 standards. TruWeather low-altitude sensing deployment data, when available, is applied as an additional scored input under v1.4 methodology.
Data Confidence Flag
AirIndex applies a Data Confidence flag to any market where one or more factors have not been verified against a primary source within the prior 60-day ingestion window. The flag is visible to licensed clients in market detail views and is noted in briefing reports. A Data Confidence flag does not change the score — it signals to the reader that the flagged factor(s) should be independently verified before making high-stakes decisions against that specific data point.
Stale Data Policy
Factor scores are considered current when the underlying primary source has been ingested within the prior 60 days. Where a primary source has not been ingested within 60 days, the factor retains its last verified score but the market receives a Data Confidence flag. Scores are never reset to zero solely due to stale data — the conservative default applies only to factors that have never been verified, not to factors that were verified and have not been superseded by contrary evidence.
Disclosure
This protocol is published as part of the AirIndex methodology documentation. Any change to the missing data treatment for a specific factor constitutes a methodology update and is subject to VDG's Score Change Governance Policy, to be published with Methodology v1.4. Changes are versioned, dated, and reflected in the Methodology Changelog.
Limitations and Future Development
What the Score Does Not Capture
The AirIndex Score (AIS) measures structural conditions, not market dynamics. It does not account for consumer demand, operator financial health, airspace complexity, noise sensitivity, community opposition, or competitive intensity between markets. These factors matter for commercial success but are outside the scope of a readiness assessment. Weather infrastructure is captured as a structural factor (presence of observation equipment), not as a weather pattern or climate assessment.
Binary Model Tradeoffs
The binary model intentionally trades granularity for verifiability. Two markets at the same score may differ in depth of readiness — a market with three committed operators scores the same on the Operator Presence factor as a market with one. This is a known limitation, and it is accepted because the alternative (graduated sub-scoring) would require defining and defending sub-factor weights that don't yet have empirical support.
Regulatory Posture, State Legislation, and Weather Infrastructure all use graduated scoring as of v1.3. As historical data accumulates and reliable sub-indicators emerge for other factors, the graduated model will be extended. Any such changes will be published as a new methodology version with a full changelog.
Geographic Scope
The current index covers 20+ US metropolitan areas selected for existing UAM activity, regulatory engagement, or operator commitments. International markets and smaller US markets are not currently tracked. Coverage expansion will be based on evidence of UAM activity rather than geographic completeness. A phased national expansion to all 50 metropolitan statistical areas is planned as part of Vertical Data Group's ongoing research program.
Research & Policy Applications
The UAM Market Readiness Index is designed to support applied research and policy analysis across the UAM ecosystem. Federal and state agencies, metropolitan planning organizations, and academic researchers may use AirIndex data to:
- —Benchmark municipal UAM readiness against a standardized, evidence-based framework
- —Identify regulatory and infrastructure gaps requiring targeted intervention
- —Monitor market development over time through the historical score archive
- —Support grant applications, transportation studies, and infrastructure investment decisions
Vertical Data Group actively supports research partnerships and data collaborations with government agencies, universities, and policy institutions. For research access or partnership inquiries, contact info@airindex.io
Citing AirIndex Data
AirIndex data and readiness scores are free to cite in publications, reports, and analysis. When referencing AirIndex data, please use the following format:
A formal methodology paper with DOI assignment is forthcoming. Researchers requiring a citable reference should contact info@airindex.io
For press inquiries, data partnerships, or API access, contact info@airindex.io