AD compliance status
Geared turbofan engine AD status records review
This review confirms that the AD compliance status claimed on a geared turbofan engine is backed by accomplishment evidence, not asserted on a list. It works through applicability for the specific engine and module build, the accomplishment records that close each AD, and the method-of-compliance evidence behind them. It is run for a party pricing, transferring, or continuing to manage the engine through a high rate of module change. You receive a supported AD exception list, a source map from each status line to its evidence, and a closure plan for positions that cannot yet be proven.
When this review is needed
- A geared turbofan engine is being priced and the AD status list has not been checked against accomplishment records.
- Frequent module swaps have changed which ADs apply and the applicability needs re-confirming for the current build.
- A transfer is pending and the receiving party will test each AD position against its evidence.
- A new AD or a superseding revision has issued and the engine's position against it is unclear.
The problem
An AD status list is a claim that can drift from the engine in two directions. Applicability shifts as modules and life-limited parts move in and out of a geared turbofan, so an AD that did not apply to the original build can apply to the current one, or the reverse. And an AD marked complied-with may rest on an accomplishment record held at a shop, or on a method of compliance that was never captured, so the list reads closed while the proof sits elsewhere or nowhere.
What gets reviewed
- AD applicability determined against the current module and part configuration of the engine
- Each applicable AD traced to the accomplishment record that closes it
- Method-of-compliance evidence confirmed where an AD allows alternative means
- Superseded and revised ADs checked for the position against the current revision
- Recurring-AD intervals confirmed against the engine's time and cycle status
- AD positions carried across a module change reconciled to the incoming module's history
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
- Applicability is assessed against the engine's current build, not the original configuration
- Each complied-with AD carries an accomplishment record that names the engine or module
- Method of compliance is documented where the AD permits an alternative means
- Recurring ADs show the next due point consistent with the engine's time and cycle status
- Superseded ADs are closed against the current revision, not a withdrawn one
Evidence normally required
- The AD status list and any applicability notes for the engine
- Accomplishment records, work orders, and shop reports behind the closed ADs
- Current module and life-limited part configuration for applicability
- Method-of-compliance data where alternatives were used
- Time and cycle status for recurring-AD interval checks
Common discrepancies
- An AD marked complied-with whose accomplishment record was never transferred from the shop
- Applicability assessed against the original build after modules were swapped in
- A recurring AD whose next-due point does not reconcile with current cycles
- A method of compliance relied on but not documented in the engine records
What is at stake
An AD position taken on trust can transfer as an open exposure the new holder discovers at the next check. If the applicability was wrong, the engine may be flying against an AD nobody tracked, or carrying compliance work it never needed. Either way the correction lands under a deadline, and reconstructing a method of compliance after the fact is far harder than confirming it while the shop paper is still reachable.
Move from findings to resolution
Move from findings to a documented resolution path.
How the work runs
Fix the current build
Establish the engine's current module and life-limited part configuration for applicability.
Test applicability
Determine which ADs apply to that build and flag those assessed against an earlier configuration.
Trace the evidence
Match each applicable AD to its accomplishment record and method of compliance.
Plan the closures
List AD positions without evidence and the records needed to prove them.
What the buyer receives
Who uses the output
- Asset managers pricing the AD exposure a geared turbofan carries
- Continuing-airworthiness staff confirming applicability against the current build
- Records teams closing AD evidence gaps before a transfer or check
How the work fits into the transaction or program
AD status is the position most transactions and checks test first, and on a geared turbofan it moves with the module configuration underneath it. Confirming applicability and evidence against the current build means the status list can be relied on, and its exception list drives the accomplishment records that have to be recovered before the next milestone.
Aircraft-specific considerations
A geared turbofan lives in a high-change environment: modules are exchanged often, and each swap can alter which ADs apply and where the accomplishment evidence lives. The review anchors applicability to the current module build and follows AD positions across the swaps, because a status list frozen at an earlier configuration is one of the most common ways a geared turbofan's AD position detaches from the engine in front of it.
Jurisdiction-specific considerations
The FAA and EASA issue and adopt ADs on their own timelines, and a mandatory action in one system may lag or differ in the other. For an engine that has operated under both, the review reconciles the AD position against whichever authority governs the current registration and flags where a position built under the prior authority needs restating for the current one.
Regulatory limits
The review reports whether the AD position is supported and correctly scoped to the configuration. It does not determine compliance on an authority's behalf, approve a method of compliance, or make an airworthiness determination on the engine.
What this review does not cover
- Performing or signing off AD accomplishment
- Approving an alternative method of compliance
- Any airworthiness determination on the engine
Specific to this review
- On a geared turbofan, AD applicability is a moving target, because a module swap can bring in an AD the original build never carried.
- A recurring AD is closed by an interval, not a signature, so the next-due point has to reconcile to current cycles rather than the date it was last worked.
- Method-of-compliance evidence is the quietest gap in an AD file, since the list shows compliance while the alternative means that justified it was never written down.
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
The AD status list shows everything complied-with. What is left to review?
Two things the list cannot show: whether applicability still matches the current module build, and whether each closed AD has an accomplishment record behind it. On a geared turbofan the configuration changes often, so a list that was correct at an earlier build can be wrong now, and compliance without evidence reopens at the next check.
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.