Certification path
TSO authorization and STC path choice for an article
avionics suppliers, equipment suppliers, OEMs use this review after choosing a certification path for a new article turns a records question into an acceptance, pricing, or program decision. The work compares article intended function, applicable TSO or ETSO criteria, target installation assumptions with the current claim and any supplied acceptance criteria. Discrepancies are logged where support is missing, dates or serials conflict, applicability is uncertain, or a source document does not prove the asserted status. The package gives the team approval path comparison, article versus installation evidence map, customer burden register for follow-up and decision making.
When this review is needed
- A records decision is needed before acceptance, closing, release planning, or the next review gate.
- The current file contains summaries that have to be tested against source records.
- Outside evidence from a prior custodian, shop, lessee, or authority may be needed.
- The team needs a ranked list of blockers, curable gaps, and residual limits.
The problem
The difficult part is deciding what the records actually prove before the deadline or transaction pressure takes over. The product has a plausible TSO basis but the intended customers still need installation approval support. A one-aircraft STC proves the installation but does not create broad article market access.
What gets reviewed
- Determine whether the article itself can be approved to a minimum performance standard.
- Identify which installation approvals customers will still need after article authorization.
- Compare a single-aircraft STC, AML STC, and article authorization against the sales model.
- Map who owns the installation data, ICA, and continued support duties.
- Check whether environmental and system safety evidence can serve both paths.
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
- Pass when the path decision separates article acceptance from installed configuration approval.
- Fail when a TSO plan assumes customers can install the article without their own approved data.
- Pass when the STC option identifies effectivity, installation drawings, and ICA responsibilities.
- Fail when market reach is estimated without considering installer burden.
Evidence normally required
- article intended function
- applicable TSO or ETSO criteria
- target installation assumptions
- customer installation model
- planned production and support concept
Common discrepancies
- The product has a plausible TSO basis but the intended customers still need installation approval support.
- A one-aircraft STC proves the installation but does not create broad article market access.
- Environmental qualification evidence is planned late although it affects both approval routes.
- ICA ownership is unclear between the article supplier and the installer.
What is at stake
Open items can become delivery delay, disputed value, or rework when the next reviewer asks for source evidence. The review turns the issue into named documents, responsible owners, and a closure path so the team is not negotiating from uncertainty.
How the work runs
Frame Choosing TSO
Confirm the exact event, affected file set, buyer role, and decision standard before any minimum performance standard is treated as sufficient.
Trace Path Guide
Walk the named evidence from index entry to source artifact and mark where the trail supports, conflicts with, or fails to answer the page-specific question.
Sort Authorization Choice
Group exceptions by closure route: document retrieval, data correction, engineering disposition, authority response, or contractual decision.
Package Certification New
Deliver the exception list, evidence map, and owner sequence in a form that can move directly into remediation, submittal cleanup, or transaction negotiation.
What the buyer receives
- approval path comparison
- article versus installation evidence map
- customer burden register
- recommended sequence with decision assumptions
Who uses the output
- Certification manager uses the findings to decide which gaps block the next milestone.
- Product manager uses the evidence map to request, correct, or reserve records items.
- Engineering lead uses the summary to brief stakeholders without reopening the full file.
How the work fits into the transaction or program
A supplier bringing a new airborne article to market must decide whether to pursue a TSO authorization, an STC for a specific installation, or both in sequence, and the choice drives cost, market reach, and who owns the installation-approval burden; This page frames the a TSO approves the article to a minimum performance standard but not its installation, an STC approves a specific installed configuration, and the article's intended market and the customer's installation model determine which path (or. The evidence set centers on the applicable TSO minimum performance standard, the target installations, and the customer base. The likely weak points are pursuing only a TSO when customers need an installed approval leaves every buyer to fund their own field approval or STC, and pursuing a one-off STC forgoes the broad marketability a TSO article carries. Handoff: certification manager, choosing a certification path for a new article, TSO authorization and STC path choice for an article.
Jurisdiction-specific considerations
FAA and EASA references are used as evidence criteria for records completeness and traceability. The review does not treat one authority's records as automatic acceptance by another authority or by a transaction counterparty.
Regulatory limits
The review is an evidence and records assessment. It does not approve data, release aircraft or parts, determine airworthiness, or bind any regulator, authorized person, owner, lessor, operator, applicant, or counterparty.
What this review does not cover
- formal application submission
- test witnessing
- regulator negotiation
Specific to this review
- TSO authorization can make an article marketable while leaving each installation question open.
- An STC can solve the installed configuration but may be too narrow if the sales plan spans many aircraft types.
- Some programs need both paths sequenced, with article evidence reused in the installation package.
- The path choice changes who answers customer questions after delivery.
- The scope uses the Choosing TSO STC Path question as the control point, so the review stays tied to choosing a certification path for a new article and the buyer decision behind it.
- The evidence starts with minimum performance standard and follows Guide Approval Authorization Choice references until every exception has a source location and a reason code.
- The finding logic separates missing paperwork, conflicting status, stale revision data, and unsupported disposition because each class closes through a different owner.
- The timing matters for Certification manager: the output is useful only if the unresolved items are visible before acceptance, submittal, handback, or negotiation pressure fixes the sequence.
- The boundary control keeps Article Certification New Airborne questions in the records or certification lane and sends technical acceptance issues to the authorized people who own them.
- The handoff value comes from approval path comparison; it gives the next reviewer a precise map instead of another broad request for a better file.
Sources
U.S. Government (eCFR). Type certificates, STCs (Subpart E), TSO authorizations (Subpart O), PMA (Subpart K), and export airworthiness approvals (Subpart L).
Federal Aviation Administration. STC application process, certification basis, and continued airworthiness obligations of an STC holder.
European Union / EASA. EASA design and production certification, STCs, ETSO authorizations, and EASA Form 1 release.
Frequently asked questions
What makes this guides review different from a general file audit?
The scope is tied to choosing tso stc path and to the decision named in the request. A general audit can list weak records; this pass ranks the gaps by whether they block choosing a certification path for a new article or can be closed later without changing the decision.
What evidence has to be available before this work starts?
The starting point is minimum performance standard, the current status source, and any index or matrix that tells reviewers where the supporting artifact should live. Missing inputs are logged as findings rather than filled with assumptions.
Who decides whether an open item is acceptable?
The review explains what the evidence supports and gives certification manager a closure path. Acceptance remains with the buyer, operator, authority, delegated engineer, or authorized person responsible for the underlying airworthiness or certification decision.
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.
Adapt the checklist to your asset, event, and jurisdiction.