UK urged to back start-ups beyond the prototype stage

John Moffat has urged the UK to move faster to help start-ups commercialise proven technology, warning that British risk aversion is pushing innovative companies towards the US.

Moffat, Founder and Chief Executive Officer of The Structural Battery Company, said the UK performs well in research and prototyping but falls short when companies try to turn tested technology into products that can be certified and sold at scale.

He described this stage as the main weakness in the British innovation system, arguing that the problem is not a lack of ideas but a lack of support once a technology moves beyond early development.

“The UK has many of the ingredients to lead the world in advanced technology, but we need to become better at turning innovation into commercial success.

“The critical issue is risk appetite. The UK is structurally risk-averse, especially when companies move from Technology Readiness Level 6 into commercialisation. We support research and prototypes well, but struggle to back the stage where a proven technology becomes a certified, scalable product.

“Government policy can be well-intentioned but create unintended outcomes. For example, broadening Enterprise Investment Scheme eligibility risks drawing capital away from the smaller, early-stage businesses the scheme was designed to support.

“There are only two places where start-ups can reliably access growth capital: the US and China. For companies with sensitive technology, China is not viable, which is why British companies look to the US, where funding depth and commercialisation pathways are stronger.

“Risk appetite challenges are well documented for UK start-ups in the ‘valley of death’ – the treacherous path between scale-up capital and commercial procurement. In the UK, we know the solutions to these problems. The question is whether they can be implemented with sufficient urgency and precision.”

Moffat is seeking to draw attention to the commercial barriers facing emerging technology businesses in Britain, particularly those in sectors that require long development cycles, regulatory approval and large amounts of capital before revenue can build.

Funding gap

The “valley of death” is a familiar term in the start-up market, referring to the period between technical validation and sustainable commercial sales. For many hardware and deep-tech companies, this can be the hardest stage, as investors grow more cautious and customers often wait for certification, production capacity and procurement frameworks to be in place.

Moffat said the problem is especially acute in the UK, where risk appetite remains weaker than in larger capital markets. He also pointed to the US as the main alternative for British companies seeking later-stage backing.

His intervention adds to a wider debate over how Britain can retain more of the intellectual property and industrial growth created by its universities, engineers and specialist start-ups. Founders in advanced manufacturing, aerospace, energy storage and defence-related technologies have often argued that the UK is better at generating inventions than building large companies around them.

Battery design

Moffat’s company is developing structural battery technology for unmanned aerial vehicles and satellites. The idea is to use parts of an aircraft’s structure, such as crossbeams and panels, to store electrical energy, reducing the need for separate battery packs that add weight and take up space.

The company’s Drone Spine product is aimed at heavy-lift unmanned aerial vehicles. It is designed as a high-voltage structural battery backbone that combines energy storage with a load-bearing role in the airframe.

The company said the design could allow aircraft to travel further and carry more payload by making the battery part of the structure rather than a standalone component. The system has been developed for unmanned aerial vehicle platforms with a maximum take-off weight of up to 600kg in quadcopter configuration and uses a 100s5p battery configuration, with 100 modules connected in series and five cells connected in parallel within each module.

That focus on integration, rather than propulsion alone, is central to Moffat’s argument for the technology.

“The limiting factor with heavy-lift drones is not propulsion, it is integration. Drone Spine is designed to solve that problem by combining structure, energy storage and high-voltage power distribution in one system.”

Strategic uses

He said the implications go beyond engineering efficiency and extend into defence and civilian operations. Demand for drones has grown quickly across military logistics, surveillance, emergency response and industrial support, increasing pressure on manufacturers to improve range, payload and endurance.

Moffat linked those pressures to the strategic value of structural energy systems, while arguing that the commercial and public-service uses could also be significant.

“With drones increasingly becoming a core component of modern warfare, as demonstrated by Ukraine’s ongoing defence against Russian invasion, advances in structural energy systems are strategically significant.

“But this is not just a military opportunity. The same technology can help drones fly further, carry more and operate for longer in applications such as wildfire response, emergency medical logistics, construction support and access to remote areas.

“Flight range, payload capacity and onboard power are becoming decisive factors in the future of uncrewed aviation. If we can make the structure of an aircraft store energy, we change what that aircraft can do.

“The real-world benefits could be transformative: medical supplies reaching critically ill or injured patients faster, small wildfires being tackled before they become major incidents, and armed forces equipped with more capable uncrewed systems that help deter conflict. These are exactly the kinds of technologies the UK should be helping to commercialise and scale.”

His remarks reflect a broader concern among founders that Britain risks losing commercially valuable technologies to overseas markets unless investors, policymakers and procurement bodies move faster to support companies after the prototype stage.

For advanced engineering businesses, the issue is not simply invention but whether enough capital and institutional backing exist to bridge the gap between a proven concept and a viable product.