Boeing 747 AD status
Boeing 747 family Airworthiness Directive status records review
This review verifies that the AD compliance status for a specific Boeing 747 is complete, correctly scoped to the serial, and backed by accomplishment evidence. It is run for a buyer, lessor, or CAMO who needs to know that every applicable AD has a supported position rather than a line on a status list. It covers applicability notes, method-of-compliance selection, accomplishment records, and the recurring or terminating actions each AD requires. You receive an exception list where an AD lacks evidence or applicability is wrong, a source map behind each position, and a plan to close the open items.
When this review is needed
- A 747 is entering diligence and the buyer needs each AD position supported by accomplishment evidence.
- The aircraft is moving CAMOs and the incoming CAMO has to inherit a verified AD position.
- An AD's applicability against this serial is uncertain and the position has to be established.
- A recurring AD's next-due status does not reconcile with the accomplishment history.
The problem
AD status on a long-lived 747 is carried on a list that says complied or not-applicable, but the words on the list are only as good as the evidence behind them. Positions get taken on trust at each transfer, an AD marked not-applicable rests on an applicability call nobody documented, and a recurring AD's next-due date drifts away from the last accomplishment. When a buyer or CAMO looks hard, the list and the records diverge, and each divergence is a position that has to be re-established.
What gets reviewed
- Applicability of each AD confirmed against this serial's configuration and effectivity
- Method-of-compliance selection checked against what the AD permits
- Accomplishment evidence matched to each AD marked complied
- Recurring-AD next-due status reconciled to the last accomplishment and interval
- Terminating-action ADs checked for the modification that closes the recurring requirement
- Superseded and revised ADs traced to the version that governs the current position
Scope this review
Tell us the asset, the event, and the evidence in scope, and we will outline a focused first engagement.
Send a representative, redacted record set and we will scope the review.
What gets validated
- Each not-applicable AD carries a documented applicability basis tied to this serial
- Every complied AD has accomplishment evidence, not just a status-list entry
- Recurring-AD next-due dates trace to the last accomplishment and the correct interval
- Terminating actions show the embodied modification that closes the recurring requirement
- Superseded ADs are reconciled so the governing version drives the stated position
Evidence normally required
Common discrepancies
- ADs marked complied with no accomplishment evidence behind the status-list entry
- Not-applicable calls resting on an applicability basis that was never documented
- Recurring ADs whose next-due date drifted from the actual last accomplishment
- Terminating actions claimed with no embodied modification to close the recurring requirement
What is at stake
An AD position that cannot be supported is a compliance exposure that follows the aircraft into service and into the next transaction. A wrong applicability call can hide a directive that should have been accomplished, and a recurring AD tracked from a wrong baseline can drift past its interval. Buyers discount an AD status they cannot verify, and a CAMO that inherits an unsupported position owns the risk of re-deriving it under deadline.
Move from findings to resolution
Move from findings to a documented resolution path.
How the work runs
Scope applicability
Confirm which ADs apply to this serial from its configuration, effectivity, and conversion state.
Test each position
Match complied ADs to accomplishment evidence and not-applicable calls to a documented basis.
Reconcile the recurring set
Trace recurring next-due dates and terminating actions to their accomplishment and modification records.
Report and sequence
Deliver the exception list, source map, and a closure plan ordered by exposure.
What the buyer receives
Who uses the output
How the work fits into the transaction or program
The AD position is the compliance spine of the records, and it references the configuration, repair, and modification records reviewed elsewhere. Verifying it against accomplishment evidence lets a CAMO manage the recurring workload from a correct baseline and lets a buyer price a position that is known to be supported. This review usually runs early, because a wrong AD baseline distorts the airworthiness-review and export checks that draw on it.
Aircraft-specific considerations
The 747 carries a heavy AD load from decades of service and a large structural program, with numerous recurring inspections and terminating modifications tied to the aging-aircraft rules. Freighter and cabin conversions change applicability for structure-related ADs, and long operator transitions mean positions were taken on trust more than once. The review scopes to this serial's configuration and conversion state rather than a family-wide AD list.
Jurisdiction-specific considerations
An FAA AD and the corresponding EASA directive can differ in applicability, interval, or terminating action for the same condition, so a 747 that has flown under both frameworks needs each position mapped to the directive that governs it. The review records which authority's directive drives each position so the receiving CAMO does not have to reconcile the two.
Regulatory limits
This review verifies the AD records and reports where positions lack support. It does not determine compliance, does not accomplish or sign off any AD, and does not make an airworthiness determination on the aircraft.
What this review does not cover
- Physical accomplishment or sign-off of any AD
- Determination of compliance on the operator's behalf
- Preparation of an alternative method of compliance
Specific to this review
- A not-applicable AD with no documented basis is a silent gap, because the list reads as resolved while the applicability call is unproven.
- Recurring-AD drift is the highest-frequency finding on a 747, since a next-due tracked from a wrong baseline can quietly pass its interval.
- A terminating action only closes a recurring requirement if the embodying modification is itself evidenced, so the two records have to agree.
- Conversion changes AD applicability for structure, so a freighter 747 cannot be assessed against the passenger-configuration AD list it started from.
Sources
U.S. Government (eCFR). The legal basis for issuing and enforcing Airworthiness Directives on U.S.-registered products.
U.S. Government (eCFR). Records an owner or operator must keep, including total time in service, current status of life-limited parts, and AD compliance.
European Union / EASA. Continuing airworthiness, maintenance records, CAMO responsibilities, and the airworthiness review process in the EASA system.
Frequently asked questions
What makes a not-applicable AD a finding rather than a non-issue?
Not-applicable is a position that has to be justified against the serial's configuration and effectivity. If the basis for that call is not documented, the AD is logged as an exception, because an undocumented applicability judgment can hide a directive that should in fact have been accomplished.
Relevant glossary terms
Related pages
Where this fits
Talk to an engineer who has done this work
We will walk through your current state, the records or evidence involved, and a scoped first engagement.
Talk through the aircraft, records, evidence, deadline, and next useful step.