AD compliance status
Pilatus PC-12 Airworthiness Directive status records review
This review checks that the Airworthiness Directive status carried on a Pilatus PC-12 is supported by accomplishment records and applied to the right directives for this serial number. A records specialist runs it for an owner, buyer, or manager who needs the AD position to hold under scrutiny rather than sit on a spreadsheet. It reconciles each open and closed line against method-of-compliance evidence, checks applicability across airframe, engine, and propeller directives, and confirms recurring items show their next due point. You get an exception list tied to individual AD numbers, a source map to the accomplishment evidence, and a plan to close the lines that lack support.
When this review is needed
- A PC-12 is being sold and the buyer will test the AD list against the accomplishment records behind it.
- The aircraft is moving between the FAA and an EASA register and directive applicability has to be re-read for the receiving authority.
- An owner-operated tail has tracked AD compliance informally and wants it confirmed before relying on it.
- A recurring directive is coming due and the status list has to show a defensible next-due point.
The problem
A PC-12 AD list is easy to keep as a summary and hard to keep as evidence. Applicability turns on the airframe serial, the installed PT6A configuration, and the propeller, and a directive can be marked not applicable on a judgment no one wrote down. Closed lines lean on a logbook entry that names the AD but not the method of compliance, so the status reads complete until someone asks for the record that proves it.
What gets reviewed
- Each closed AD line matched to a logbook entry or record that names the method of compliance
- Applicability confirmed against the airframe serial, engine, and propeller for this tail
- Recurring directives carried with their interval and next-due point shown
- Not-applicable calls checked for a written basis rather than an unrecorded judgment
- Superseding directive chains followed so a closed line is not resting on a superseded revision
- Engine and propeller AD status reconciled with the component records, beyond the airframe list alone
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
- Every closed AD cites accomplishment evidence with a recorded method of compliance
- Applicability decisions trace to the serial number and installed configuration, not a generic model list
- Recurring items show the last accomplishment and the next-due point in consistent units
- A not-applicable line carries the reason it does not apply to this aircraft
- The status reflects the current directive revision, not one that has since been superseded
Evidence normally required
- The current AD status list for the airframe, engine, and propeller
- Airframe, engine, and propeller logbooks with the compliance entries
- Method-of-compliance documents and any prior AD research file
- The serial-number and configuration reference that drives applicability
Common discrepancies
- A closed AD entry that names the directive but records no method of compliance
- A not-applicable call with no written basis tying it to this serial number
- An engine directive tracked on the airframe list but never reconciled to the PT6A records
- A recurring item whose next-due point is missing or stated in the wrong units
What is at stake
An AD position asserted without accomplishment evidence forces a conservative reopen at the next transaction, and reopening a directive under deadline can mean re-inspection the owner pays for twice. A misjudged applicability call left undocumented can hide an open directive that surfaces at a ramp check or a register transfer, when the cost of being wrong is highest.
Move from findings to resolution
Move from findings to a documented resolution path.
How the work runs
Split the streams
Separate airframe, engine, and propeller directives so each is read against its own records.
Test each closure
Match every closed line to an accomplishment record that names the method of compliance.
Re-read applicability
Confirm applicable and not-applicable calls against the serial number and installed configuration.
List and map
Flag the unsupported lines and tie each confirmed one to its evidence.
What the buyer receives
- An exception list keyed to the individual AD numbers that lack support
- A source map linking each confirmed line to its accomplishment evidence
- A closure plan for reconstructing or retrieving the missing compliance records
Who uses the output
- Asset managers pricing the AD position the records can actually defend
- Records teams reconstructing the compliance entries that came up short
- Continuing-airworthiness staff confirming recurring items before they fall due
How the work fits into the transaction or program
The AD review anchors the status picture the rest of a PC-12 file depends on. It runs before a sale or a register change so applicability and accomplishment are settled first, and its exception list feeds the remediation that closes the directives a buyer or authority would otherwise reopen.
Aircraft-specific considerations
A PC-12 carries directives against the airframe, the PT6A engine, and the propeller, and on an owner-managed tail these three streams are often tracked in one list without the component records behind them being reconciled. Engine and propeller directive status can lag the airframe list because those components move through shops that report separately, so the review reads all three streams against their own logbooks.
Jurisdiction-specific considerations
When a PC-12 moves between an FAA registration and an EASA member state, directive applicability has to be re-read for the receiving authority, since a directive mandatory in one system may be handled differently in the other. The review notes where the AD list was built to one authority's set and will need rework to satisfy the other.
Regulatory limits
The review measures the AD status against the evidence on file and flags where it is unsupported. It does not determine compliance on an authority's behalf, close a directive, or make any airworthiness determination on the aircraft.
What this review does not cover
- Performing or signing off any AD accomplishment
- Issuing a compliance determination on behalf of an authority
- Any airworthiness determination on the aircraft
Specific to this review
- On a PC-12 the engine and propeller directive status is where the AD list most often detaches from its evidence, because those components report through shops separate from the airframe.
- A not-applicable call is only as good as its written basis: without one, the next reviewer has to redo the applicability research from scratch.
- A closed line resting on a superseded directive revision reads as compliant while a later revision may have changed the required action.
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 check applicability if the list already marks items not applicable?
A not-applicable mark is a judgment, and on a PC-12 it turns on the serial number and the installed engine and propeller. If the basis for that judgment was never written down, the review confirms it rather than carrying it on trust.
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.