Aircraft certification affects the entire supply logistics chain; both on the front end (manufacturing for installation on production aircraft) and the back end (aftermarket support). This is because certification of the aircraft is what triggers production. And it’s not just the aircraft, it’s the engines too and all their subcomponents.

What frustrates the supply chain is the unpredictability in the timing of the granting of these certifications, making production planning and spares planning an exercise in uncertainty. Complicating the certification landscape, and therefor slowing it down, is the global aspect of aircraft certifications. For example, to get an aircraft Type Certificated for worldwide sales and operations would typically involve separate and distinct certifications from EASA, FAA, ANAC, and TCCA among others. News stories of interruptions for newly designed aircraft deliveries due to certification delays are as rife as the privately expressed frustrations with the process. This begs the question, is there any movement to eliminate the duplication and complexity of these procedures?

I first hinted at these issues in a previous article I wrote titled “Will There Ever Be a Single Set of Globally Accepted Certification Standards? You’re encouraged to read this primer at this link:

https://www.aviationsuppliers.org/will-there-ever-be-a-single-set-of-globally-accepted-certification-standards

That article hints at globalization ideas which may be promulgated by independent standard-setting entities such as IATA, but are there any other moves afoot? Albeit incremental, yes there are. Herein is an encouraging summary of what’s occurring, lets connect some dots:

US Senators, Reps Introduce Aviation Innovation and Global Competitiveness Act

• As highlighted in the article “Congressmen Look to Streamline FAA Certification Amid AAM Growth”¹, legislators are introducing the Act in the hope that it would ‘establish clearer timelines for FAA responses to exemption petitions and issue papers, define when additional review documentation is required, and expand delegation authority for routine compliance findings. It also tells the agency to report to Congress on certification workload and reform implementation.’ The Act is represented as one that would increase domestic competitiveness and aid in the timely introduction of new aerospace technologies, bravo, bring it.

Deliberate sidebar. I couldn’t help myself. Notice that the legislator’s summary includes ‘…and expand delegation authority…’ It wasn’t too long ago that this same body was holding hearings on the Max and there was alarming talk about curtailing delegation authority. What a difference a little time can make. For more information in this, read my article titled “MAX, ODAs, BABIES, AND BATHWATER” at this link:

https://www.aviationsuppliers.org/max-odas-babies-and-bathwater

Joint Certifications

• The article “FAA Takes Another Look At Joint Certifications”², Bill Carey (thanks Bill!) does a great job of bringing some interesting insights to the concept of Joint Certifications. The idea of ‘Joint’ being the hope that the various aviation authorities would accept each other’s certifications and therefor simplify and reduce the costs and delays of certification. The idea was put on paper in the form of a charter establishing a Certification Management Team (CMT) in September 2015. The directors of the certification services of the FAA, Brazil’s ANAC, the European Union Aviation Safety Agency, and Transport Canada signed it. When you read press releases whereby OEMs achieve simultaneous certifications from multiple aviation authorities, it is likely facilitated by this process.

The article, however, mainly focuses on the occasional shortcomings of this process owing to geopolitics and the maddening details of perceived risks. Nonetheless the charter is a great move in the right direction, and as it matures things like this will hopefully get sorted.

Country-to-country efforts to accelerate certifications

• The last two decades have seen India make impressive progress in developing its aerospace industry. Pursuant to this, the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) and the FAA have announced a new working arrangement which will establish clearer mechanisms to facilitate aircraft and engine type validation, as well as recognition and acceptance procedures between the two authorities. ‘The arrangement, announced March 5, has been established under the regulators’ Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement and complements the existing Implementation Procedures for Airworthiness already in place between the two agencies. The new cooperation is designed to streamline certification processes and enhance transparency in the management of aircraft and engine approvals between India and the U.S.’³.

Summary:

The actions presented here and in my previous article may seem disparate, but the correlation among these dots is that everyone wants the process to be streamlined, and accelerated, and of course, without compromising safety…

Over ‘n out

Roy ‘Royboy’ Resto

Written without the use of AI

1 - https://www.aero-news.net/FullsizeImage.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=B759A78E-9593-43CA-B325-092C9624AE6F

2 - https://aviationweek.com/business-aviation/safety-ops-regulation/faa-takes-another-look-joint-certifications

3 - https://aviationweek.com/mro/safety-ops-regulation/mro-memo-india-us-regulators-oems-seek-streamlined-cooperation