Type-design packages
Conformity records support for a type-design data package
This review checks the conformity records in a type-design data package so the articles that generated the evidence were the right articles, in the right configuration, when the tests were run. It confirms each test article and installation has a conformity record tying it to a controlled configuration, and that the article was conforming at the moment the test it supported took place. A certification engineer runs it so a reviewer cannot question whether the tested item represents the type design. You get an assessment of article eligibility, a list of tests whose article conformity is unproven, and a plan to close them.
When this review is needed
- Test evidence is complete and the applicant needs to show the test articles conformed at test time.
- An article was modified between builds and it is unclear which tests it was conforming for.
- An installation used for testing may not match the configuration the type design describes.
- A reviewer will ask whether the tested article represents the type design and the applicant wants gaps found first.
The problem
Test evidence proves something only about the article that was tested, and conformity is what ties that article to the type design. Articles get reworked between tests, engineering units stand in for conforming ones, and installations are adapted for the test rig, so the item that produced a result is not always the item the type design describes. The conformity record that would settle this is often assembled after the fact, when the article has already moved on.
What gets reviewed
- Each test article checked for a conformity record tying it to a controlled configuration
- Article conformity confirmed as of the date each supported test was run
- Installations used for testing checked against the configuration the type design describes
- Rework or modification between tests assessed for its effect on conformity
- Engineering or non-conforming units identified and their test results scoped accordingly
- The conformity records reconciled against the configuration control records for each item
Scope this review
Tell us the asset, the event, and the evidence in scope, and we will outline a focused first engagement.
Identify what is missing against the means of compliance.
What gets validated
- Every test article has a conformity record referencing a controlled configuration
- Each article was conforming on the date of the test it supported
- Test installations match the configuration described in the type design
- Rework between tests is captured so each result maps to the correct conforming state
- No result relied upon for compliance rests on a non-conforming or unproven article
Evidence normally required
- The conformity records for the test articles and installations
- The test reports with their dates and the articles they used
- The configuration control records for each test article
- The type-design definition of the articles and installations
- Any rework, modification, or build records for the test articles
Common discrepancies
- A test result relied upon for compliance where no conformity record exists for the article
- An article reworked after conformity but before the test it supported
- A test installation that differs from the configuration the type design describes
- An engineering unit's result carried as if the article were conforming
What is at stake
Without conformity, a passing test proves nothing the reviewer can rely on, because the tested article may not represent the certified configuration. A missing or weak conformity record can force a retest on a conforming article, which is slow and sometimes impossible once the original setup is gone. If an installation used for testing turns out not to match the type design, every result from that installation is called into question at once.
How the work runs
List the articles
Identify every article and installation behind the test evidence relied upon for compliance.
Match conformity to test dates
Confirm each article had a conformity record and was conforming on the date of the test it supported.
Check installations
Compare test installations against the type design and flag any that differ.
Order the closures
Sequence the gaps, flagging tests that need a retest on a conforming article.
What the buyer receives
- An assessment of article and installation eligibility across the test evidence
- A gap list of tests whose article conformity is missing or unproven
- A closure plan flagging where a retest on a conforming article is required
Who uses the output
- Certification leads who must show tested articles represent the type design
- Configuration managers who tie articles to controlled configurations
- Test and quality staff who reconstruct or complete the conformity records
How the work fits into the transaction or program
Conformity is what lets the compliance map treat a test result as evidence of the type design rather than of one lab article. This review confirms the articles behind the evidence were eligible before that evidence is relied upon, so a reviewer cannot break a result by questioning its article. It runs alongside configuration management and precedes final reliance on the test evidence.
Start with a single asset
Reduce finding cycles by checking the package first.
Jurisdiction-specific considerations
FAA and EASA both require that certification test articles conform to the type design and that conformity is documented, though the roles who witness and attest conformity and the forms used differ between the systems. The review checks the records against the conformity expectations of the target authority rather than assuming a shared process.
Regulatory limits
This work checks whether test articles and installations were eligible and tied to a controlled configuration. It does not perform or witness conformity inspections, does not make a compliance finding, and does not determine airworthiness or grant approval. Those remain with the applicant and the authority.
What this review does not cover
- Performing or witnessing conformity inspections
- Building or reworking test articles to a conforming state
- Making the compliance finding for the test evidence
Specific to this review
- A passing test is only as good as the conformity of the article behind it, so an unproven article can void a result that otherwise looks complete.
- Conformity records assembled after the article has moved on are the weakest, because the state at test time can no longer be inspected, only inferred.
- One non-conforming installation invalidates every result taken on it at once, which makes installation conformity higher leverage than any single article.
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. FAA type certification process, certification basis establishment, and compliance findings.
European Union / EASA. EASA design and production certification, STCs, ETSO authorizations, and EASA Form 1 release.
Frequently asked questions
The test passed, so why do we need conformity records?
A passing test proves something about the specific article tested. Conformity records show that article represented the type design at test time. Without them, a reviewer cannot rely on the result, because the tested article may have differed from the configuration being certified.
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.