UK research and technology funding body the Aerospace Technology Institute (ATI) has defended its investment in hydrogen-related projects, arguing that the “direction of travel is correct”, despite the delayed arrival of hydrogen-powered aircraft.

Airbus in early 2025 disclosed that it was slowing development activities related to its hydrogen-powered ZEROe programme on technology and infrastructure concerns; it said that service entry could be pushed back by up to a decade to around 2045.

That decison has cascaded through the supply chain as companies have trimmed their R&T plans, with several ATI-backed projects subsequently curtailed or scaled back.

As a consequence, the ATI has faced questions over its funding strategy and whether it was too quick to embrace an unproven fuel like hydrogen.

But Tom Halhead, the ATI’s head of technology – advanced systems and propulsion, believes the investment in hydrogen is justified.

Its own evaluations, including the FlyZero study, “concluded that hydrogen is an extremely attractive fuel for aircraft use on a range of scales”, he told an ATI webinar on 9 July.

And, says Halhead, many of the ATI’s “international peers” are also running studies which “are coming to those conclusions as well”.

Although there remain some “big challenges” around hydrogen’s deployment, ongoing technical research has not thrown up any “showstoppers”, he adds.

“What we are trying to do is convene industry at the moment to say ‘how do we maintain momentum on this?’.”

But the industry’s short-term focus is on ramping up output to meet production goals on current-generation aircraft and then preparing for the launch of a new single-aisle before the end of the decade, he says.

While Halhead sees hydrogen “to have a significant role” in the period to 2050 and beyond, he concedes “the issue at the moment is just the appetite for investment in it”.

“So we are looking at a range of initiatives to maintain the momentum,” he says.

Halhead argues, based on continued assessments of hydrogen’s “technical merits”, that “the direction of travel is correct”.

“We will keep looking at that, but we want to keep supporting its development and we we’ll look at means to do so.”

David Debney, the ATI’s head of technology – whole aircraft, says hydrogen remains a “really promising zero-carbon energy source” and although “some of the market timelines have moved to the right it doesn’t mean there aren’t things we can do now”.

The ATI’s strategy, he says, is to invest in “technology bricks” – the “critical enablers we are going to need to [unlock] the potential of hydrogen flight in the future”.

He notes that hydrogen distribution systems today are mostly developed for use in the space sector and are consequently “lightweight but with very low life”, designed to last minutes rather than the five to 10 years required for commercial aviation.

Hydrogen storage tanks are another “critical technology” – where “finding ways to make the storage as light as possible makes a huge difference to the capability you can achieve with the aircraft”, Debney says.

“The development is part of the reason the ATI exists: to provide the funding to help progress the research, development and technology at pace,” he adds.

Indeed, recent projects backed by the ATI include a ZeroAvia-led effort to deliver a new liquid hydrogen storage system, and an initiative led by Intelligent Energy to develop its current 300kW modular fuel cell system for use in next-generation aircraft.

Building on work carried out in another ATI-funded scheme – H2GEAR, led by GKN – the three-year project, called HEIGHTS, is particularly focussed on Intelligent Energy’s cooling technology, which should drive a significant reduction in heat-exchanger size.

Funding for the ATI comes from central government and it was recently awarded a 10-year commitment worth £2.3 billion ($3.12 billion) as part of the administration’s Modern Industrial Strategy.