Digital indexing
Digital records index quality checked inside the maintenance-control export
This review measures whether the digital records index actually delivers usable documents from the maintenance-control export. Structured samples of index entries are resolved to their files and each one is scored for legibility, completeness, correct aircraft attribution, accurate metadata, and searchability where the index claims it. Records leadership commissions it before a bulk digital handover, while originals still exist and re-scanning is possible. You receive quantified failure rates by defect category and a remediation list ranked by what would block the receiving operator's import.
When this review is needed
- A records handover is planned as a bulk digital transfer and the index is the import key.
- Spot checks keep finding index rows that open another aircraft's documents.
- The archive was migrated between records platforms and attribution has never been re-verified.
- Original paper records are scheduled for disposal once the digital set is accepted.
The problem
Nobody opens a scanned record until they need it, so index failures accumulate silently for years. Migration scripts shuffle attribution, metadata gets copied down a spreadsheet column, multi-page documents lose their middle pages at the scanner, and the archive's search function returns confident nothing because the scans were never run through text recognition. The index looks orderly right up until the receiving operator's import job starts throwing errors.
What gets reviewed
- Structured samples of index entries resolved to their underlying files across record categories
- Scan legibility and page completeness assessed for multi-page documents
- Aircraft, date, and document-type metadata verified against document contents
- Search and text-recognition claims tested against actual file properties
- Duplicate entries and orphan files identified on both sides of the index
- Naming and folder conventions evaluated against the receiving side's import requirements
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
- Sampled index entries resolve to files that open, belong to this aircraft, and match the entry's description
- Multi-page documents are complete, in order, and legible at working magnification
- Metadata fields reflect the document itself rather than values inherited from neighboring rows
- Files claimed searchable contain a text layer that actually returns query hits
- Orphan files without index entries are catalogued rather than silently stranded
Evidence normally required
- The digital records index in its native export format
- Access to the underlying file store or its extracted copy
- The receiving operator's import specification, where one exists
- Migration documentation from any previous records-platform change
Common discrepancies
- Index rows resolving to empty files or to documents from a sister aircraft
- Multi-page work packages scanned with pages missing or shuffled out of sequence
- A single date copied down hundreds of metadata rows during a bulk edit
- An archive advertised as searchable whose files are image-only scans with no text layer
What is at stake
A failed bulk import degrades the handover into record-by-record manual retrieval, billed in weeks. Metadata errors multiply downstream because the receiving system distributes records by exactly those fields. Gravest of all, if paper originals are destroyed on the strength of an unverified digital set, every bad scan becomes a permanent gap no retrieval effort can close.
Move from findings to resolution
Move from findings to a documented resolution path.
How the work runs
Design the sample
Stratify index entries by record category, age, and migration history so the sample finds where defects concentrate.
Resolve and score
Open each sampled entry and score resolution, legibility, attribution, metadata, and searchability.
Sweep for orphans
Compare the file store against the index in both directions and catalogue unindexed files and fileless entries.
Report the rates
Publish defect rates with the ranked remediation list and a position on paper-original disposal.
What the buyer receives
- Quantified failure rates by defect category, from broken resolution to bad metadata
- A remediation list ranked by import impact for the receiving operator's specification
- A hold recommendation on paper-original disposal where the digital set cannot yet stand alone
Who uses the output
- Records leadership deciding whether the archive is ready for bulk handover
- The receiving operator's records team configuring its import around known defect rates
- Whoever controls the paper-disposal decision, which should wait on these numbers
How the work fits into the transaction or program
Index quality determines how much the other maintenance-control export reviews can trust what they retrieve, so this check often runs first in the sequence even though its findings are the last to close. Its defect rates calibrate the sampling depth of the status-level reviews, and its remediation list runs in parallel with them.
Jurisdiction-specific considerations
FAA guidance shapes what a digital record set must demonstrate: AC 120-78 addresses electronic recordkeeping and signatures, and AC 43-9C describes the content a maintenance record must carry regardless of medium. EASA accepts electronic records within the Regulation (EU) 1321/2014 framework and its associated means of compliance, and a cross-registry handover has to satisfy whichever expectation is stricter for each record category.
Regulatory limits
The review characterizes the digital archive; it does not certify records, approve an electronic recordkeeping system, or make retention or disposal decisions on the operator's behalf. Acceptance of any record, digital or paper, stays with the receiving party and the applicable authority.
What this review does not cover
- Re-scanning, re-indexing, or repairing the archive itself
- Execution of a records-platform migration
- Design of the operator's retention and disposal policy
Specific to this review
- Index-to-file failure is invisible to targeted retrieval, because people who cannot find a record blame their search terms; only structured sampling exposes the true failure rate.
- Platform migrations are where attribution errors enter, so an archive that has moved twice deserves double the sampling of one that never moved.
- Receiving operators distribute imported records by metadata, which means one bad field value misfiles a record twice, once in each company's system.
- A broken index over good scans is recoverable labor; a good index over bad scans of destroyed originals is a permanent loss, and the review scores the two very differently.
Sources
Federal Aviation Administration. FAA acceptance criteria for electronic recordkeeping systems and electronic signatures.
Federal Aviation Administration. FAA guidance on making and keeping maintenance records and acceptable recordkeeping practices.
European Union / EASA. Continuing airworthiness, maintenance records, CAMO responsibilities, and the airworthiness review process in the EASA system.
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.
Frequently asked questions
Our archive passed its own completeness report. Is sampling still necessary?
A completeness report typically counts rows and files, and counts match even when row three points at the wrong aircraft. Sampling opens the documents, which is the only way to test legibility, attribution, and metadata truthfulness. Archives with perfect counts routinely show measurable failure rates on their first structured sample.
When is it safe to dispose of the paper originals?
After the digital set has demonstrated, through sampling across every record category, that it resolves, reads, and attributes correctly, and after the receiving parties and applicable retention rules are satisfied. Disposal before that point converts every undiscovered scanning defect into a gap that can never be repaired.
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.