Airframe structure
Structural-repair map review
A structural-repair map review reconciles the recorded airframe repairs against the locations marked on the repair map and the approval data behind each one. It is used before a purchase, a lease return, or a heavy check. It checks that each mapped repair carries an approved data source, a substantiation reference, and a record that places it on the correct station and stringer. You receive a repair-by-repair register, the gaps where a mapped repair lacks approval or location detail, and the evidence needed to close each one.
When this review is needed
- An airframe has a long repair history and the map has to be confirmed against the underlying records.
- A heavy check will open zones where prior repairs sit and the crew needs an accurate map going in.
- A buyer wants to know whether mapped repairs are placed correctly and approved before pricing the airframe.
- A repair map was inherited from a prior operator and its accuracy has never been independently checked.
The problem
A repair map is a drawing of where structure was repaired, but the records that justify each mark live in separate repair packages, engineering orders, and approval letters. A repair can appear on the map with no approved data behind it, sit at a station that the record does not confirm, or be missing from the map entirely. Inspectors who open a zone expecting one repair and find another lose time, and a buyer who cannot place a repair cannot judge its effect on the airframe.
What gets reviewed
- Each repair marked on the structural repair map by zone, station, and frame
- The approved data source cited for each repair and its applicability to the location
- Substantiation references tying the repair to a static, fatigue, or damage-tolerance basis
- Repairs recorded in the packages that do not appear on the map
- Overlapping and adjacent repairs where one repair affects another
- Inspection thresholds and intervals attached to repairs that carry continued surveillance
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 mapped repair cites an approved data source appropriate to its location and damage
- The station, frame, and stringer on the record match the mark on the map
- Repairs requiring damage-tolerance substantiation carry the analysis or its reference
- No repair in the records is missing from the map and no map mark lacks a record
- Continued-inspection requirements attached to a repair are captured in the program
Evidence normally required
- The current structural repair map or repair chart for the airframe
- Repair packages, engineering orders, and approval letters for each repair
- Damage-tolerance or substantiation data where a repair requires it
- The structural repair manual sections used as the data basis
- Any prior survey or check findings that opened the repaired zones
Common discrepancies
- A mapped repair with no approved data source identified in the records
- A repair location on the record that does not match the map mark
- A repair present in the packages but absent from the map
- Damage-tolerance substantiation missing for a repair that needs it
- An inspection interval attached to a repair that never reached the program
What is at stake
A repair that the map shows but the records cannot support has to be treated as unverified, which can force re-inspection or re-substantiation at the next check. Repairs missing from the map surface as surprises during work, and an airframe whose repair history cannot be placed and approved loses value in a transaction.
Move from findings to resolution
Move from findings to a documented resolution path.
How the work runs
Index the map
List every mark on the structural repair map by zone, station, frame, and stringer so each repair has an addressable location.
Pull the package per mark
Match each map mark to its repair package, engineering order, and approval letter, and note marks with no package behind them.
Check data and placement
Confirm the approved data source fits the location and damage and that the recorded station agrees with the map.
Register and route gaps
Record map-to-record discrepancies, missing substantiation, and stray inspection intervals, then assign each a closure path.
What the buyer receives
- A repair-by-repair register tying each map mark to its record and approval
- A list of map-to-record discrepancies with the missing element identified
- A recommended closure path for each gap with the data needed to support it
Who uses the output
- Structures engineering judging the effect of repairs on the airframe
- Check planners preparing the zones a heavy visit will open
- Asset and acquisition teams pricing repair history into the airframe
How the work fits into the transaction or program
The review supports a pre-purchase, a redelivery, or a heavy-check planning effort by turning a repair drawing into a supported, placed, and approved repair history. It feeds the structures section of a discrepancy register and the check work scope.
Jurisdiction-specific considerations
A repair approved under one authority is not automatically accepted under another. Where the airframe will move registries, the review notes which repairs rest on approval data the receiving authority will need to confirm.
Regulatory limits
The review confirms that the repair map is complete, consistent, and traceable to approval data. It does not approve a repair, perform damage-tolerance analysis, or make an airworthiness determination.
What this review does not cover
- Physical inspection or measurement of the repairs
- Generation of new repair approval or damage-tolerance analysis
- Any airworthiness determination on the structure
Specific to this review
- A repair map is a drawing; the approval and substantiation behind each mark live in separate packages that the map does not contain.
- A repair that the records support but the map omits is as much a finding as a map mark with no record, because both mislead the next inspection.
- Damage-tolerance repairs often carry their own inspection intervals, which are commonly recorded with the repair but never carried into the maintenance program.
Sources
U.S. Government (eCFR). Maintenance recordkeeping content and approval-for-return-to-service requirements, including 43.9, 43.11, and Appendix B.
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.
Frequently asked questions
Is a repair map the same as the repair records?
No. The map shows where repairs sit; the records hold the approval data and substantiation. The review checks that the two agree and that each repair can be placed and supported.
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.
Walk through your situation with an engineer who has done this work.