A320 family AD status
Airbus A320 family AD status records review
An A320 family AD status review confirms that the recorded AD compliance for a specific narrowbody aircraft is supported by evidence and reasoned against the directives that apply to this type. It is run for teams evaluating, transferring, or maintaining an A320 family asset, against the AD status list. Each line is checked for applicability, accomplishment evidence, and method-of-compliance basis, with attention to the AD themes that recur on this family. You receive a supported exception list, a source map tying each line to its evidence, and a closure plan for the specific serial number under review.
When this review is needed
- An A320 family tail is entering diligence and the AD position has to be verified against evidence.
- The aircraft is high-utilization and its recurring-AD due dates need reconciling to current cycles.
- State-of-design and operator-register directives overlap and the AD status list has not been cross-checked.
- A prior review flagged AD lines closed without the accomplishment record behind them.
The problem
On a high-cycle A320 family aircraft the AD status list carries a long history of directives, many of them recurring, and the accomplishment evidence behind the older closures is where the file most often thins out. A directive closed by a service bulletin, a repeated inspection whose next-due has drifted from the current cycle count, or a supersession that was never carried forward all read as compliant on the summary while the supporting evidence is missing underneath. The list looks settled until each line is pulled back to its source.
What gets reviewed
- Applicability of each directive reasoned against the specific serial number and its configuration
- Accomplishment evidence pulled line by line from the AD status list to its source record
- Method-of-compliance basis confirmed for each closed directive
- Recurring-AD next-due status reconciled to the aircraft's current time and cycles
- Directives closed by service bulletin cross-checked against the embodiment records
- Superseded directives confirmed compliant on the current mandated action, not the original
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 closed AD line traces to an accomplishment record rather than the status summary alone
- Applicability calls hold against this serial number's configuration and modification history
- Recurring-AD next-due values reconcile to the current time and cycle status
- A directive closed by a service bulletin matches the embodiment record for that bulletin
- A superseded directive shows the superseding action closed with its own evidence
Evidence normally required
- The current AD status list for the aircraft
- Accomplishment records, work cards, and method-of-compliance references behind the closed lines
- Service bulletin embodiment records tied to AD closures
- Current time and cycle status for recurring-AD due calculations
- The configuration and modification records that affect AD applicability
Common discrepancies
- A recurring inspection AD whose next-due date has drifted from the current cycle count
- An AD closed by a service bulletin with no embodiment record to confirm it
- A superseded directive shown compliant on the original action but silent on the superseding one
- An AD applicability call that does not account for a modification carried on this serial number
What is at stake
An AD taken on trust at a deal or a handover, without the accomplishment record, forces a re-inspection when the counterparty or the receiving system asks for the evidence. A recurring-AD due date that no longer matches the aircraft's cycles can put a directive overdue without warning, and a supersession left uncarried leaves the tail exposed on the current mandated action rather than the original one.
Move from findings to resolution
Move from findings to a documented resolution path.
How the work runs
Pull the status list
Assemble the AD status list and the configuration that governs applicability for this serial number.
Evidence each line
Match every closed directive to its accomplishment record and method-of-compliance basis.
Reconcile the recurring items
Recalculate recurring-AD next-due dates against current cycles and confirm supersessions are carried forward.
Build the closure plan
List the exceptions with their source gaps and the evidence that closes each one.
What the buyer receives
Who uses the output
- Asset managers pricing the AD exposure on a specific A320 family tail
- Continuing-airworthiness teams closing the exceptions before the next event
- Records teams assembling the accomplishment evidence behind the status list
How the work fits into the transaction or program
The review takes the AD status list an A320 family asset carries and tests it against evidence before a transaction, a handover, or a program review relies on it. The exception list and source map it produces feed the remediation that closes the open lines while the accomplishment records are still findable.
Aircraft-specific considerations
A320 family assets typically carry high-cycle utilization, so recurring-inspection directives dominate the status list and their next-due dates drift with the cycle count faster than on a low-utilization aircraft. Landing-gear and engine directives interact with the LLP status, and repeated cabin and connectivity modifications change AD applicability, so the review reasons each line against this serial number's actual configuration rather than a family template.
Regulatory limits
The review assembles and reconciles AD evidence so a decision-maker can judge the status. It does not close a directive, determine airworthiness, or return the aircraft to service.
What this review does not cover
- Performing or signing off the inspection or work behind an open directive
- Any airworthiness determination on the aircraft
- Re-issuing or correcting the AD status list on an authority's behalf
Specific to this review
- Because A320 family utilization is high, recurring-AD next-due dates drift with the cycle count, so they are recalculated against current status rather than trusted from the list.
- Landing-gear and engine directives on this family interact with the LLP status, so an AD line can depend on a life-limited part's position to be applicable.
- Repeated cabin and connectivity modifications on A320 family tails change AD applicability, which is why applicability is reasoned against the specific serial number's configuration.
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
Why focus on recurring directives on an A320 family aircraft?
High utilization drives the cycle count up quickly, so recurring-inspection ADs come due often and their next-due dates drift from the status list between updates. Recalculating them against current cycles is where an otherwise clean-looking list most often turns up an overdue or near-due directive.
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.