Airbus A350 family AD status records review

When this review is needed

• An A350 is being priced or transferred and the buyer wants the AD status confirmed against evidence.
• A recurring directive is approaching its next compliance point and the last accomplishment must be verified.
• The aircraft is inducting onto a new operator whose directive baseline differs from the prior one.
• A status list was inherited and the accomplishment records behind it have never been sampled.

The problem

An AD status list is a summary, and a summary can assert a directive is closed without the accomplishment record that would prove it. On an A350 the directive set spans airframe, systems, and the composite structure, and applicability turns on the serial number and the modifications embodied, so a line copied from a fleet template can claim a directive that does not apply or miss one that does. The status looks settled until someone asks for the paper.

What gets reviewed

• The AD status list reconciled to applicability for this serial number and configuration
• Accomplishment records for each directive claimed closed
• Method-of-compliance evidence where the directive offers alternatives
• Recurring-directive intervals and the next compliance point for each
• Terminating-action credit where a modification closes a recurring requirement
• Directives applicable through embodied modifications rather than the base type

What gets validated

• Each closed directive carries an accomplishment record an auditor would accept on its face
• Applicability on the status list matches the serial number and the modifications embodied
• The recorded method of compliance is the one actually used and is supported by the work
• Recurring-directive intervals are tracked from the last accomplishment, not the issue date
• Terminating action claimed against a recurring AD traces to the modification that grants it

Evidence normally required

• The current AD status list or report for the aircraft
• Accomplishment records and work packages for the directives claimed closed
• The modification and configuration status affecting applicability
• Method-of-compliance documentation where alternatives exist
• The airframe, engine, and component records the directives reference

Common discrepancies

• A directive marked complied-with whose accomplishment record cannot be produced
• An applicability line copied from a fleet template that does not fit this serial number
• A recurring AD tracked from the issue date rather than the last accomplishment
• Terminating action claimed without the modification record that grants the credit

What is at stake

A directive asserted closed without its accomplishment record forces a conservative assumption at the next transaction, and the owner pays to re-establish compliance or re-accomplish the work. A recurring AD tracked to the wrong interval can lapse without warning, and a missed applicability line surfaces at induction when the receiving operator runs its own directive review.

How the work runs

What the buyer receives

• An exception list flagging each directive whose status is unsupported
• A source map linking directive positions to their accomplishment evidence
• A closure plan sequencing the unsupported and recurring directives

Who uses the output

• Asset and acquisition teams pricing the directive position the records support
• Continuing-airworthiness teams confirming the status before induction
• Records teams closing the unsupported lines before the next milestone

How the work fits into the transaction or program

The review sets the directive picture that a transaction, an induction, or a review certificate rests on. Its exception list feeds the remediation that recovers the missing accomplishment evidence, and the reconciled status becomes the baseline the receiving operator carries forward.

Aircraft-specific considerations

The A350 carries a composite primary structure and a systems suite whose directives interact with embodied modifications, so AD applicability on this family turns heavily on the modification state of the specific serial number. The review checks applicability against the embodied configuration rather than the base type, because a template-driven status list is where an A350's directive picture most often diverges from the aircraft.

Jurisdiction-specific considerations

An FAA-registered A350 and an EASA-registered one track the same manufacturer directives through different authority channels, and the accomplishment evidence one system accepts may need supplementing for the other. The review notes where the directive status will need rework for the register the aircraft is heading into.

Regulatory limits

The review confirms the AD status is supported and correctly applied to the serial number. It does not accomplish a directive, grant an alternative method of compliance, or make an airworthiness determination on the aircraft.

What this review does not cover

• Accomplishing or re-accomplishing any directive
• Granting or approving an alternative method of compliance
• Any airworthiness determination on the aircraft

Specific to this review

• On the A350, directive applicability turns on the embodied modification state, so a template status list often claims or misses directives the serial number does not match.
• A recurring AD tracked from the issue date rather than the last accomplishment can lapse while the status list still reads compliant.
• Terminating-action credit is only as good as the modification record that grants it, which is a frequent break in the trace.
• A directive marked complied-with whose accomplishment record cannot be produced forces a conservative assumption the owner pays to reverse.
• The composite structure and systems suite generate directives that interact, so a change to one modification can shift the applicable set for another.

Sources

Frequently asked questions

Relevant glossary terms

Related pages

Where this fits