Tag: Featured Story

Additive manufacturing has moved from a tool for prototypes and shop aids to a process applied, in defined circumstances, to actual hardware. For MRO organizations, the appeal is straightforward: components that are no longer procurable can be regenerated, and damaged metal surfaces can be restored with localized material addition rather than full replacement. What is perhaps less immediate is everything that has to happen before such a part or repair is released to service.

Processes such as selective laser sintering (SLS) and fused deposition modeling (FDM) have found a working niche in cabin component regeneration, where criticality is low to medium and dimensional tolerances are manageable with post-process finishing. Metallic processes, principally directed energy deposition (DED) and cold spray, are being evaluated for structural and heat-sensitive applications but remain considerably harder to qualify, particularly for the substrate adhesion, repeatability and mechanical performance data a design organization must produce.

The qualification requirements are the subject of sustained industry guidance. The Aerospace Industries Association’s (AIA) Additive Manufacturing Working Group has published two documents of direct relevance: “Recommended Guidance for Certification of AM Components” and “Considerations for the Use of Additive Manufacturing in the MRO Space.” Both are referenced throughout this article alongside operator accounts. This article illustrates how organizations are currently applying additive processes, how they test and qualify the resulting parts, what AIA’s guidance says about durability behavior and anomaly classification specific to AM, and how the regulatory chain from type certificate holder to repair station constrains what gets approved.

Additive Repair in Active MRO Environments

At Air France Industries KLM Engineering & Maintenance (AFI KLM E&M), additive manufacturing is currently used primarily to produce replacement components for original ones and to support cabin modifications, according to Jean-Baptiste Le Bideau, components industrial development director at AFI KLM E&M. “One example is the production of new power supply spacers with the same shape, size, and functionality as the original components. We also use 3D printing for repairs; however, in our case, this involves producing replacement components within equipment, rather than directly repairing the original component,” he says. “A good example is the creation of new components for the cabin crew communication system. The technologies we currently use are primarily selective laser sintering (SLS) and fused deposition modeling (FDM).”

FDM and SLS are two distinct 3D printing technologies. FDM extrudes melted plastic filament layer-by-layer, making it highly accessible and cost effective. SLS uses a high-powered laser to sinter powdered polymers, producing robust, complex and isotropic parts without support structures.

For Delta TechOps, additive repair represents a significant advancement in aircraft maintenance. “We see it as a proven approach to improving durability, efficiency, and sustainability, guided by rigorous engineering, safety, and certification standards, rather than focusing on individual component details,” a spokesperson says. “Delta TechOps is represented in the engineering and additive manufacturing fields on the Aerospace Industries Association’s (AIA) Additive Advisory Panel. Additionally, we contributed to and influenced the drafting of guidance documents on additive manufacturing in the MRO industry.”

Among the various additive manufacturing processes currently available, AFI KLM E&M has identified several ones that could potentially be used for repair applications within its maintenance activities, Le Bideau points out. “Some are specifically designed for the remanufacturing of complete components, such as SLS and FDM, while others are more suited to repair applications that involve material accumulation or deposition, such as directed energy deposition (DED) and cold spray. These processes differ from traditional repair methods, such as welding, in that they allow for highly localized material addition and, in the case of cold spray, without melting the material,” he says. “This could make them particularly relevant for our aluminum components, where heat input must be limited to avoid deformation. However, these processes are complex to implement, especially from a component qualification perspective.”

AFI KLM E&M is currently increasingly using SLS and FDM, both to regenerate certain damaged and non-repairable equipment parts and to manufacture alternatives to original equipment manufacturer (OEM) components. “Dimensional accuracy depends on the process used and generally requires additional finishing. One example is the cabin crew telephone unit, which is regenerated using FDM technology because the original component is non-repairable. These telephone units are then painted in different colors to match the interiors of customer cabins,” affirms Le Bideau.

Testing in Additive Aircraft Repairs

Currently, Air France focuses exclusively on cabin components with low or medium criticality levels, explains Damien Jarriault, ALM team project manager of the innovation department. “This means that fatigue resistance is one of the criteria we consider, but it is not the primary factor guiding component design. When required by regulations, we perform mechanical tests in accordance with test plans issued by the design organization approval (DOA) holder and validated by a compliance verification engineer (CVE) to confirm the mechanical integrity of the parts,” he says.

All additive repair methods and applications are rigorously qualified to meet, and in many cases exceed, established performance and inspection standards, according to Delta TechOps. “We rely on advanced testing techniques and non-destructive evaluations to ensure reliability and consistency, although we cannot share detailed technical comparisons,” the spokesperson says. “We have collaborated extensively with a materials scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) on post-processing methods for components manufactured using laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) technology to match the properties of fused single-crystal components.”

Durability and Damage Tolerance

AIA’s report entitled “Recommended Guidance for Certification of AM Components” observes that durability and damage tolerance datasets can support a variety of end uses, economic needs for reliability, or individual design applicant design philosophy, and may influence the scope and type of data package developed. “Durability reflects a broader sustainment perspective that includes not only fatigue cracking but also corrosion, wear, and long-term reliability and service life considerations. Design data used in durability and damage tolerance analysis may be derived using a variety of industry or proprietary standard procedures with associated scale factors,” the report states.

Durability and damage tolerance properties are prone to a high degree of variability, and, because of this, methods of analysis must account for scale and scatter, points out AIA. “The characterization of additively manufactured components may differ from that of conventional products. These differences should be considered before assuming that traditional product behaviors apply and must be understood by the design applicant,” the report illustrates. “The durability and damage tolerance datasets must account for the components in the as used condition after all manufacturing, assembly and installation process steps.”

AIA affirms that difference in AM features and artifacts that should be considered include such aspects as microstructure, geometric features, defect morphology and their distribution. Additional features include surface roughness, morphology, and variation as built and/or final component surface, inherent process anomalies, residual stress distribution and mitigation strategies, performance of chemical post processing and coatings, post printing chemistry, post processing impacts (support removal and powdering techniques, and component extraction) and thermal exposure history throughout the build.

“These features and artifacts unique to additive manufacturing may impact the following aspects of durability and damage tolerance analysis; corrosion, stress corrosion, wear and tribology, corrosion fatigue, stress fields, stress level and stress ratio effects, susceptibility to embrittlement, starting flaw size assumptions, multi-site damage scenarios, cracking patterns, crack growth rate and interaction, inspection type and capability, multimode behavior, scatter, time to initiation, damage coalescence, and microstructural mechanics failure. This list is non-exhaustive and will be subject to the verification and validation of the design applicant,” AIA states.

Anomalies and Defects

Components made using additive manufacturing may exhibit certain internal or surface features that are anomalous compared to the basic structure, according to AIA in the ‘Recommended Guidance for Certification of AM Components’ report. “These features are an artifact of the manufacturing processes. The part requirements shall define acceptable limits for each of these anomalies and be documented in the type design and assured through the build quality plan. Only when these thresholds are exceeded is the anomaly then characterized as a defect and shall be submitted to the material review board (MRB).”

Some examples of material anomalies in additive manufacturing include porosity, i.e., the entrapment of small gas bubbles, common in metal solidification processes. Another anomaly is inclusion, which is a small particle chemically different from that allowed by the specification, according to AIA. “Lack of fusion is a condition in which fusion is incomplete, resulting in a lack of homogeneity in the resulting material. Lack of fusion can happen in both powder and wire deposition processes,” says AIA. “Balling is the instability of the molten material in the melt pool resulting in solidified spherical droplets on the build layer. This artifact can promote increased porosity and inclusions in subsequent layers.”

Regulatory Pathway and Qualified Additive Repairs

Delta TechOps points out that additive repair is also conducted within a highly regulated framework, with oversight from authorities such as FAA and EASA. “Our approach prioritizes full compliance with these regulatory requirements, coupled with ongoing investment in our processes, facilities, and personnel to ensure safety and quality. The FAA also has a representative on the AIA working group for additive manufacturing,” the spokesperson says. “We collaborated closely with them, along with other industry experts in developing the AIA documentation on Additive Manufacturing in MRO.”

Le Bideau observes that there is no true generic approval applicable to MROs for qualifying an additive repair process. “In practice, a design organization must qualify the additive manufacturing process to be used — for example, DED or Cold Spray — and then design and approve the repair to be applied to the equipment in question. The repair is then performed by a Part-145-certified shop,” he says.

To evaluate the use of additive manufacturing in the aftermarket, it is necessary to understand the relationship between the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) and/or design approval holders (DAH), air carriers, and MRO organizations, AIA observes in a document entitled “Considerations for the Use of Additive Manufacturing in the MRO Space.” “The OEM/DAH designs a product and applies for a type certificate (TC); once the TC is approved and issued by the FAA, the OEM is referred to as a TC holder. The TC holder must establish a set of instructions for continuing airworthiness (ICA); this data is often, but not exclusively, published in maintenance manuals and provided to the air carrier,” explains AIA.

The air carrier is responsible for all maintenance performed on an aircraft and maintaining airworthiness. ICAs are an integral part of developing a continuous airworthiness maintenance program (CAMP), created pursuant to 14 CFR Part 135 or 121, explains AIA. “Under a CAMP program, air carriers may allow the use of designated engineering representative (DER) approved repairs and/or alterations to aid in maintaining airworthiness, creating an opportunity for the introduction of additively manufactured components and/or parts in the aftermarket. It is therefore imperative that the DER be cognizant of the process-sensitive nature of AM part manufacturing as outlined in the AIA ‘Recommended Guidance for Certification of AM Components’ document, EASA CM-S-008 Issue 3, and other emerging regulatory framework documents,” AIA affirms. “The repair shop (MRO facility) is required to adhere to all requirements of the CAMP. This includes having the OEM/DAH-generated ICA flow down to the repair station for execution of the maintenance or repair activity. The repair station may request and receive further information from the OEM/DAH through the air carrier or from the OEM/DAH directly.”

There are numerous limitations in qualifying these processes, some of which are beyond the capabilities of MRO companies, especially for metal parts, affirms Le Bideau. “Demonstrating and justifying the key parameters required for qualification, including repeatability, mechanical performance, and substrate adhesion quality, is extremely complex. This requires extensive testing and detailed analysis of parts with widely varying materials, geometries, and damage conditions,” he says. “An MRO can only produce parts that fall within the scope of its Part-145 certification. The manufacturing process itself must be validated through the organization’s quality assurance system. Aircraft components manufactured according to European parts approval (EPA) regulations, however, are produced by Part-21G certified manufacturers, which allows them to issue EASA Form 1 certificates.”

Artificial intelligence is increasingly being integrated in the aircraft MRO environment, and Delta TechOps is committed to promoting the use of data and analytics throughout the repair workflow, from inspection to return to service. “While AI supports our ability to anticipate needs and optimize processes, it is important to emphasize that AI provides insight, not a replacement, for expert human decision-making across all certified repair outcomes,” affirms the spokesperson.

The Emerging Picture

The picture that emerges from operator practice and industry guidance is that where criticality is bounded and the failure consequence is low, as with cabin equipment produced by SLS and FDM, additive repair has already moved into production use. Where criticality rises and the process involves fusion or deposition of metal, the qualification path lengthens considerably: substrate adhesion, residual stress, surface-connected porosity, and the directional dependence of material properties all have to be characterized before a design organization can sign off a repair, and that characterization work sits with the design approval holder rather than with the repair shop alone.

The regulatory architecture gives a clear structure to the division of responsibility, but it does not amount to a generic approval for additive processes. Each repair is qualified against the specific component, material, and damage condition at hand, drawing on instructions for continued airworthiness, CAMP provisions, and either FAA or EASA oversight depending on jurisdiction.

Artificial intelligence has a role in that effort, principally in inspection and process analytics, but for the time being it informs rather than replaces the engineering judgment on which certified return to service ultimately depends. For the wider MRO sector, the practical guidance is to match the technology to the criticality at hand, invest early in the inspection and material data that any qualification will demand, and use AIA’s published guidance as a working reference.

Hangars play a major role in aviation infrastructure. These dedicated structures designed to protect aircraft such as private planes, jets and helicopters are more than just storage buildings or utilitarian boxes. Hangars also provide space for maintenance, fueling, inspections and aircraft preparation before flight. They are carefully engineered aviation facilities that protect valuable aircraft, support maintenance operations and ensure safe daily aviation activity.

To make this happen, AI simulation software with space planning, bay scheduling and MRO capacity management can positively impact a hangar’s success and long-term performance. It can take into account crucial factors including door systems, clear span options, proper ventilation and adherence to building codes for optimal functionality and longevity. With the right software used correctly, aircraft hangar planning allows owners to build facilities that are safe, scalable and cost-efficient.

“One of the most overlooked assets in an MRO operation is the hangar itself,” says Matthew Curry, founder and CEO, Stax Aviation Group, Paso Robles, California. “Powered simulation allows operators to treat hangar capacity as a strategic resource by visualizing, testing and optimizing facility utilization before aircraft ever enter the building. In many cases, operators can increase throughput without adding square footage simply by making better planning decisions.”

AI Simulation Software and Hangars

AI simulation software helps operators turn a complex hangar, ramp or maintenance schedule into a practical operating plan. Greg Lamp, CEO of Airplx in Boulder, Colorado, compares hangar planning to playing 3D Tetris on a calendar: teams need to know where each aircraft fits, when it fits, what has to move around it, and what happens when the schedule changes. “The software helps planners make faster, better decisions without replacing their operational judgment. It reduces manual work, improves team communication and helps operators make better use of the space they already have.”

The aviation MRO industry has made tremendous strides in digitizing maintenance records and operational systems, but Tom Torosian, director of aviation business development at TruVideo in Wellesley, Massachusetts, explains a critical blind spot has remained: real-time visual context at the point of work. “Every minute an aircraft sits in a maintenance bay costs airlines money, and that occupied bay is a bay unavailable for the next aircraft in the queue. Poor communication between technicians, engineers and decision-makers compounds those delays, turning manageable repairs into extended hangar occupancy that cascades across an entire maintenance schedule.”

A video intelligence engine can fill this gap by embedding directly into MRO workflows as the visual layer when existing systems are missing. “AI-powered video enables technicians to instantly capture, annotate and share high-definition footage of maintenance findings — triggering faster diagnostics, sharper engineering decisions and dramatically reduced aircraft-on-ground (AOG) time,” Torosian says. “The faster an aircraft is accurately diagnosed and repaired, the faster it exits the bay, and the sooner that bay is available for the next aircraft. AI-powered video intelligence doesn’t just improve communication; it directly drives hangar throughput, bay utilization, and MRO capacity management in ways that scheduling software alone cannot achieve.”

Next-Generation, Purpose-Built

AI simulation software for hangars is still evolving but some MROs still implement hangar space planning and bay scheduling with tools and resources that really weren’t designed for it. Lamp explains that many operators are still using a mix of general-purpose tools: spreadsheets, whiteboards, Outlook calendars, Visio, Microsoft Paint, ERP/MRO schedules, and sometimes even cardboard cutouts. “Those tools are flexible … and track information …, but they are not built for aviation space planning. They do not understand physical space. An ERP schedule may know when work is due, but it usually cannot tell you where the aircraft should go, what else has to move, or whether the plan actually fits inside the hangar.”

Torosian agrees many MROs still rely on spreadsheets, whiteboards, and Outlook calendars to manage bay scheduling, many also depend on manual, paper-based inspection documentation and fragmented verbal communication between technicians and engineers. “The compounding effect of both is the same: aircraft stay in bays longer than necessary, hangar space gets locked up, and capacity planning becomes reactive rather than strategic.”

Curry explains that previous tools could track schedules and maintenance events, but they could not provide an accurate way to visualize, test and optimize how aircraft physically occupy and move through a facility. “Traditional scheduling systems are excellent at tracking work; they’re not designed to optimize physical space. The real opportunity lies in connecting operational schedules with spatial planning so that both time and space are managed together. Modern platforms create a digital representation of the hangar environment and allow operators to model aircraft movements, maintenance bay assignments, tow paths, clearance requirements, equipment staging areas and future maintenance schedules in real time.”

Next-generation, purpose-built hangar and ramp planning software like AirPlx combines visual planning, aircraft geometry, scheduling, simulation and optimization in one place. Lamp explains this gives MRO teams a visual, shared planning layer on top of the schedule. It helps them move faster, reduce manual rework and turn the plan into something the whole team can understand and execute. AirPlx creates a digital twin of the real hangar, ramp, aircraft and schedule. That gives AI and optimization tools the operational context they need to be useful, instead of asking a generic AI tool to guess how a hangar works.”

Sources at Lincoln, Nebraska-based Duncan Aviation explain that “AirPlx augments our team’s expertise by helping surface planning options, constraints, and fit considerations that are difficult to evaluate quickly with traditional tools.”

Advanced optimization engines can evaluate thousands of possible aircraft placement scenarios in seconds and recommend layouts that maximize space utilization while maintaining required safety margins. “Stax capabilities include capacity planning, fit analysis, conflict detection, scenario modeling and what-if simulations that allow MROs to evaluate future workloads before accepting additional aircraft,” Curry says. “Some platforms can also incorporate historical operational data to identify trends, improve forecasting accuracy, and help management make more informed decisions regarding staffing, facility utilization and growth planning.”

Curry cautions that one important distinction is that today’s hangar software planning tools are decision-support systems, not decision-makers. “Responsibility for operational safety, regulatory compliance, and maintenance execution remains with the operator. The value of Stax software lies in helping organizations consistently apply safety and operational standards while improving visibility into complex planning decisions. The system can help support compliance efforts by documenting aircraft positioning decisions, movement plans, and capacity assessments, creating a more auditable planning process.”

Video Intelligence Engine

A video intelligence engine can modernize the inspection and communication process without displacing the scheduling and ERP systems already in use; in fact, it actually enhances them. “Technicians capture structured, AI-tagged video documentation as a natural part of their workflow,” Torosian says. “Engineers receive real-time visual context and can make repair decisions remotely, eliminating the delays caused by waiting for the right expert to physically arrive at the aircraft. AI within the platform automatically organizes footage by aircraft, task, and finding — feeding structured visual data back into the maintenance workflow and creating a feedback loop that shortens repair cycles. The result is a meaningful reduction in the time each aircraft occupies a bay, which is the most direct lever available for improving hangar space utilization and MRO capacity. What starts as a workflow upgrade quickly becomes a measurable competitive advantage in throughput and bay availability.”

Modern video intelligence solutions leverage artificial intelligence to automatically detect anomalies and flag potential defects during inspections, turning passive footage into active diagnostic data. AI-driven object recognition can identify components, cross-reference known failure patterns, and surface relevant maintenance history in real time — giving technicians and engineers insights that previously required hours of manual review.

Torosian believes the downstream impact of all this on hangar space is direct and measurable: faster AI-assisted diagnostics mean shorter bay dwell times, fewer aircraft waiting for engineering approvals, and a more fluid, predictable flow of aircraft through the maintenance facility. “What video intelligence replaces is a fragmented, delay-prone system of verbal descriptions, handwritten notes, and static photographs that left engineers making critical decisions without the full visual picture — and aircraft sitting idle in bays they should have vacated hours earlier.”

Other Factors

It is nearly impossible to not discuss the cloud when discussing today’s high-tech AI simulation software. The cloud makes hangar planning easier to share, update and use across the team. Instead of passing around files or relying on one local workstation, everyone can work from the same current plan. “It also reduces installation complexity and gives software providers more compute power behind the scenes,” Lamp says. “That matters for simulation and optimization, where the system may need to evaluate many possible planning options quickly.”

Do not forget about customization. Hangars are incredibly complex, especially in MRO environments. The aircraft is only one part of the planning problem; teams also have to account for tooling, equipment, work areas, restricted zones, doors, columns, and all the other real-world constraints inside the hangar.

Every hangar is unique. Curry explains that differences in building geometry, support columns, maintenance docks, office spaces, fire suppression systems, utility locations and door configurations can dramatically impact usable space. “The Stax platform addresses this by creating digital representations of each facility. Operators can model exact hangar dimensions and incorporate permanent infrastructure, restricted areas, maintenance bays, equipment storage locations and custom operating procedures. This customization allows simulations to reflect real-world conditions rather than idealized floor plans. The result is more accurate planning, improved operational confidence and safer aircraft movements.”

Lamp explains that up until now, “The most customizable tools were often general-purpose drawing tools like Visio or Microsoft Paint, but those tools were never designed for aviation planning. AirPlx has taken this problem seriously by building highly customizable hangar modeling into purpose-built planning software, so operators can model real-world complexity with aircraft, schedules, clearances and operational constraints all connected.”

 

For aviation maintenance facilities tasked with any refinishing function, the margin for error is razor-thin. A single misstep in surface prep, paint application or environmental control can trigger costly rework, delaying delivery schedules, straining labor resources and eating into profitability. These aren’t just technical setbacks — they’re operational liabilities.

Facilities that consistently avoid extensive rework aren’t just lucky — they’re disciplined. They invest in proven coatings systems, enforce rigorous training protocols and understand the foundational causes of common paint failures. By getting back to basics, maintenance, repair and operations (MRO) teams can dramatically reduce rework incidents; protect their bottom line; and deliver flawless finishes on time, reinforcing customer trust.

Aircraft refinishing rework is the process of modifying or correcting the refinishing of an aircraft’s exterior to meet specifications. Rework to correct defects of a newly applied coating is inevitable and a crucial part of quality control.

It’s a common misconception that if the paint finish looks flawed, the paint itself must be the root cause. The coatings themselves are rarely the culprit. Most rework issues stem from process controls, whether in surface preparation, application technique, environmental or equipment condition. These foundational elements play a critical role in achieving a durable, high-quality finish and when they’re overlooked or inconsistently executed, the results can be costly.

So, in the grand scheme of things, what does it cost an aviation paint shop when it comes to rework? Plenty.

Aerospace coatings rework requires more than just additional materials. The biggest costs involve wasted time and increased labor. These are practically hidden among other operational inefficiencies, as rework and reactive maintenance issues aren’t factored into most paint job schedules and budgets. Rework can disrupt schedules, cause budget overruns, and increase stress among management and the workforce.

The need for rework can arise from various issues, such as:

• Surface contamination: Dust, dirt or other particles can become embedded in the paint during application, requiring a re-sanding and repainting of the affected area.

• Inconsistent paint application: Improper technique can lead to uneven application, known as “orange peel,” a wavy surface that must be sanded down and recoated, or over- or under-sprayed areas.

• Adhesion problems: If the paint does not properly adhere to the underlying surface or primer, it can flake or peel. This requires removing the paint and re-prepping the surface.

• Masking errors or bleed-through: Mistakes in painting stripes, logos or registration numbers require a precise re-masking and repainting of those sections or correcting where paint seeps under the masking tape.

• Cleanliness: Taking the time to clean the booth and aircraft thoroughly before the painting process starts can help avoid rework. That should be a part of a disciplined process, including regularly changing out paint booth filters, having strict entry protocols and scheduling deep cleaning.

• Minor damage: Small scratches or chips that occur during or after the refinishing process may need to be touched up.

Or … It Could Simply Be an Issue with the Paint Area Environment

Sometimes, even when all the hands-on processes are followed to the letter, Mother Nature steps in and causes an issue. The paint crew needs to be aware of, and deal with, the presence of unfavorable environmental conditions. Subsequently, a controlled environment is advantageous for a high-quality paint job.

Efficient and effective ventilation is an absolute must. Inadequate airflow in the paint booth or hangar can allow airborne dust and debris to contaminate the wet paint.

Refinishers need to be mindful of high humidity. Excessive moisture in the air can cause blushing, a cloudy or milky appearance caused by moisture trapped in the paint film. It can also slow drying time and increase the risk of paint runs.

There could be issues with improper temperature. Temperatures that are too hot, or too cold, can affect wet edge, dry times, and paint flow and levelling consistency.

And finally, there’s even static electricity. Static on a panel can attract dust and other airborne particles, leading to more contamination in the paint finish. Grounding of aircraft is essential.

Training Teaches and Reinforces Proper Techniques and Process Knowledge Why does rework occur?

It’s not done maliciously, but in the course of every aircraft paint job, errors can occur — even with the most seasoned painting teams. Often, the paint job is the final part of an aircraft’s MRO journey and there’s a rush to get back into the field and start making revenue for its owner or brand, especially if it’s a commercial plane that has been out of commission for weeks or months.

This can cause even established paint teams to skip steps, take minor shortcuts or overlook standard maintenance required to produce a flawless finish.

Proper training prevents aircraft refinishing rework by ensuring technicians have the knowledge, skills and discipline to complete the job right the first time. It minimizes common errors that lead to defects, enhances efficiency and ensures compliance with strict aviation safety standards.

When it comes to avoiding rework, following best practices is imperative. Adhering to established application guidelines can help prevent rework by ensuring the correct surface preparation, paint application techniques and post-paint inspection procedures.

Rework occurs due to a lack of training, limited shop resources and consistent mentoring in the paint shop. Thorough training courses (for both novice and seasoned refinishers) focus on the specifics of the aircraft refinishing process, allowing technicians to avoid common pitfalls and reinforcing best practices for every paint job:

• Surface preparation: Trainees learn to properly clean, strip, mask and sand surfaces to ensure optimal paint adhesion and a smooth finish. Without correct surface preparation, paint can peel, flake or fail prematurely.

• Corrosion prevention: Technicians are trained to identify, remove and treat corrosion before painting. Since improperly treated corrosion will grow under the new paint, this step is crucial for avoiding costly future repairs.

• Equipment use: Training covers the correct setup, operation and maintenance of specialized spray equipment. This ensures a uniform coating and avoids issues like improper thickness, which can lead to runs, drips or insufficient coverage.

• Application techniques: Proper training teaches the best methods for applying paint to the complex curves and surfaces of an aircraft. This minimizes defects such as “orange peel,” uneven layers and other visible flaws.

Human Factors and Error Reduction

Training addresses the human element of aircraft maintenance, which is a major contributor to rework and incidents. It also reinforces best practice adherence, which should reduce rework issues and minimize the mistakes. Regular and updated training assists in many ways:

• Attention to detail: Repetitive tasks can lead to complacency. Training emphasizes mindfulness and attention to detail during every step of the process to catch and correct mistakes early.

• Adherence to procedures: Aviation regulations require that all maintenance follow standardized, approved procedures. Training instills the discipline to follow these strict protocols without taking shortcuts.

• Identifying issues: A well-trained refinisher can quickly identify problems — such as dust inclusions, sagging paint or an uneven coating — and rectify them before a new layer is applied, which avoids more extensive rework later.

Operational Efficiency and Cost Savings

Investing in training is a proactive strategy that offers significant returns by avoiding unproductive labor activity and the high costs of rework. Better workforce and cost efficiencies include:

• Reduced downtime: Rework requires taking an aircraft out of service a second time. Getting it right the first time minimizes delays and gets the aircraft back into operation faster. It also assists in significant labor savings — the most expensive part of any aircraft repair or overall job.

• Lower material costs: Fixing a flawed paint job means using additional strippers, primers and topcoats. Proper training reduces wasted materials, contributing to cost savings.

• Increased throughput: When a team is highly skilled and consistently keeps rework to the absolute minimum, it can move on to new projects which increases the shop’s overall capacity.

• Enhanced reputation: A reputation for high-quality work and on-time delivery attracts more business and builds customer confidence.

Since aerospace coating technologies and regulations are always evolving, ongoing training is essential. Recurrent training with refresher courses ensures that technicians remain proficient and up to date with current best and repetitive practices. They can introduce and help refinishers become proficient with new technologies, as well as the latest products and application techniques. And in some cases, they can even provide certifications, which validate a technician’s or the whole team’s competence, offering assurance to employers and customers.

Why You Need to Avoid Rework

The rework process is time consuming, costly and frustrating to all involved. In addition to confirming each day’s paint shop assignment, paint teams should “huddle” every shift before performing tasks to assure all procedures are in place and followed.

As pointed out, consistency breeds good results. MRO maintenance directors and managers need to look closely for preventive maintenance savings and training opportunities to better produce consistent and quality work.

MRO directors of maintenance can learn more about the latest aerospace coatings products, service and training opportunities by contacting their Sherwin-Williams Aerospace representative or its product distributors in their area. To learn more, visit https://industrial.sherwin-williams.com/na/us/en/aerospace/contact-us.html.

ITS was founded in May 2002 and since that time the company says it has refocused its strategy. ITS made their first acquisition of a complete aircraft in 2007. With that experience, ITS’s leaders redirected the company’s focus to support the used serviceable material (USM) market and the global air transport industry. The company says this new strategy began with the MD-80 family and transformed ITS from a parts wholesaler into a global supply chain company. ITS began providing complex components and systems while developing in-house technical expertise on the entire airframe. Throughout the years, ITS has expanded the number of aircraft types they serve and has strategized with current and forecasted market demand to include support for various engines and APUs. ITS is headquartered in Chandler, Arizona, in a 100,000 sq. ft. state-of-the-art facility and holds ISO 9001:2015, AS9120B:2016, and ASA-100 accreditations. Aviation Maintenance spoke with Reid Selover, chief strategy officer to learn more about the company, its business philosophy and its goals.

AVM: ITS has taken an interesting position in the supply chain arena. Tell us more about that and give us more background on the history of ITS.

Reid Selover: We just celebrated our 24th anniversary in the last couple of months. The company was founded by Ryan Kohnke and Scott Tinker, two college buddies who got into this space and the USM market. It is an interesting business. In a nutshell, ITS buys aircraft and helps airlines retire them so we support the remaining active fleet with critical USM components. Aircraft have a certain life expectancy, and at the end of that life, we acquire them and Dismantle them down to their critical components. We have those components returned to service and then sell them back to the airlines. That happens in a couple of different ways. In some scenarios, airlines consign the aircraft to us because they want to receive a little more return on their investment, and they trust ITS to help them do that. Much like a regular acquisition, we take over the aircraft, dismantle it, and manage the components and major pieces across the entire aircraft, from tip to tail. We then have those components returned to service. When we are helping an airline retire an aircraft, it may keep certain components or take some of them back. We may also sell the material into the market and share the value with the airline. That allows the airline to realize a little more from its investment.

AVM: What sets ITS apart from its competitors?

Selover: There is certainly competition in this space, but what sets us apart is our experience and technical know-how. We have torn down well over 300 aircraft, . There are not many companies with that level of experience and know-how. The other thing we do is work closely at the airlines we support. A major airline customer may operate one specific aircraft type or several different platforms. We look at the aircraft that are retiring and available, and we target the types that directly support those customers. We want to make sure we have a steady supply of material for them. Other companies may be more opportunistic. They acquire whichever aircraft becomes available, tear it down, sell the material, and may not know what the next aircraft will be. Some of our competition don’t even buy aircraft. They buy material from ITS or companies like ours and then flip them to the airlines. We are much more intentional about aligning our aircraft acquisitions and material with the platforms and customers we support.

AVM: What is ITS’s strategic mission?

Selover: We want to be the best nose to tail supply chain partner in the market. There is a lot of competition in this space, and you really have to fight for those aircraft. You have to position yourself well with the people who own the aircraft so you have the opportunity to buy them. You also have to do it intelligently so there is still value available for the airlines. That is where we are really strong. We call it “Win the Platform. Earn the Customer.” We do that through our relationships and through a concierge-style, white-glove approach to supporting our customers. We think these things through, look closely at what our customers need, and determine how we can best support them. That is where we perform well.

AVM: How do you determine what your customer’s needs are?

Selover: That’s where our experience comes in. Because we have been doing this for so long, we understand what fails and how often it fails. It comes from touching the parts, knowing what they are, understanding what they do, knowing where they live on the aircraft, and knowing how they work. And we Listen to our customers. To us, it is not just a part number on a page. We know what those parts look like, what they do, where they live, what other parts of the aircraft they affect, and what other systems they touch.

AVM: Give us an example.

Selover: A good example would be the flap carriages on a 747. You have a lot of metal sitting on these large, heavy aircraft, with components that are moving all the time and performing very specific functions that allow the aircraft to fly. We want our team members to understand what they are working with, what they are supporting, and how those components support the aircraft. That knowledge allows them to better educate and support their customers and their counterparts at the airlines.

AVM: You say ITS places a lot of importance on communications and training. Tell us more about that.

Selover: We want to be good communicators. I mentioned earlier that we provide white-glove service, and part of that is being able to clearly communicate exactly what we do and how we do it. Some of the training we bring in is specifically focused on communication. How should we speak to one another? How do different people listen to and receive information? What is important about the value proposition we are offering? When we tell our customers that we are going to take care of them, we want our team to understand exactly how we are going to do that and be able to communicate it clearly. We also want to help the customer understand how we are going to support them.

AVM: Is having the right team also important?

Selover: Having the right team is the Key to our success! We want our team to understand what our history is, our experience and our technical know-how so they can convey that to our customers. So, as I mentioned, we work on communication training. We work on teamwork. We rely on each other very heavily. This business doesn’t turn off. We are available 24 hours a day, seven days a week. There’s AOG support here and understand when you’ve got an aircraft on the ground you need to send parts counter-to-counter to keep that aircraft flying. And so, when the airline is at a work stoppage, you’ve got to know how to handle that. That’s really what the training is for us. It is who we are as an organization — what’s important to us. Internally we talk about our observable behaviors. This is what the best person is on the best day. We use those traits to hold ourselves accountable and to be better. The culture is a big, important thing for us and it’s something that we’re always going to work on. Even when you’re getting it right, you have to be involved in that all the time. You don’t turn that off either. It’s intentional. It’s an intentional culture.

The perception of aircraft maintenance in Latin America has long been shaped by a recurring assumption: that serious maintenance capability still depends on North America or Europe. For decades, many operators viewed the region primarily as a destination for aircraft operations rather than as a center capable of supporting sophisticated maintenance, certification, engineering, and airworthiness management requirements.

That perception is beginning to change.

Across Latin America, maintenance organizations are quietly expanding their technical capabilities, regulatory oversight, and operational sophistication. The conversation is no longer only about whether an aircraft can be maintained in the region. Increasingly, the discussion centers on how much flexibility operators can realistically expect from Latin American maintenance providers, and whether the region can support the growing diversity of fleets operating across business aviation, regional aviation, medevac, and special mission sectors.

This question matters because maintenance flexibility has become increasingly important in modern aviation. Aircraft operators today face tighter schedules, more fragmented supply chains, increasing regulatory complexity, and higher pressure to keep aircraft available. Flexibility is no longer simply about location convenience. It is about whether maintenance organizations can adapt quickly to different aircraft types, certification standards, operational realities, and client requirements without compromising safety or compliance.

In Latin America, achieving that balance presents both opportunities and limitations.

A Region Operating Increasingly Diverse Fleets

One of the defining characteristics of Latin American aviation today is fleet diversity.

Unlike larger aviation markets where fleet standardization is more common, operators across the region often manage mixed fleets that include turboprops, light jets, super midsize aircraft, helicopters, and long-range business jets operating under different regulatory environments and ownership structures.

Corporate operators, charter companies, private owners, medevac operators, mining support aviation, government fleets, and regional airlines often coexist within the same ecosystem. As a result, maintenance providers are expected to support aircraft with entirely different operational profiles, documentation standards, and maintenance philosophies.

This creates a very different environment compared to highly centralized maintenance markets.

A maintenance organization may need to simultaneously support aircraft operating under local authority requirements while also complying with FAA and EASA expectations. In practical terms, this means understanding not only technical maintenance procedures, but also airworthiness documentation, records management, component traceability, service bulletin applicability, and evolving regulatory directives across multiple jurisdictions.

That complexity has pushed several Latin American maintenance providers to expand their internal capabilities far beyond traditional line maintenance.

Maintenance Flexibility Is Not Only Technical

When discussing maintenance flexibility, many people immediately think about the ability to work on different aircraft models. That is certainly part of the equation, but operational flexibility goes much deeper.

True flexibility also involves certification management, engineering support, inspection capabilities, documentation control, airworthiness compliance, and the ability to adapt maintenance planning to operational realities.

Aircraft owners today often require support that extends beyond scheduled inspections. They may need assistance with pre-purchase inspections, first airworthiness certification processes, alterations, supplemental type certificate projects, battery maintenance, pitot-static inspections, transponder testing, or the extension of airworthiness certificate validity for non-commercial aircraft.

These services require specialized personnel, regulatory knowledge, and internal coordination structures that historically were not always available locally within the region.

That dynamic is slowly evolving.

Several maintenance organizations in Latin America are investing in broader technical ecosystems rather than focusing only on hangar-based maintenance work. The goal is increasingly to become operational partners capable of managing the full airworthiness lifecycle of the aircraft.

This evolution reflects the reality that operators increasingly expect integrated support rather than fragmented services spread across multiple countries.

Regulatory Credibility Remains Central

One of the biggest misconceptions about maintenance flexibility is that it somehow implies reduced oversight or lower standards. In reality, the opposite is true.

Flexibility only becomes viable when maintenance organizations operate under strong compliance systems capable of managing complexity without losing control over documentation, traceability, or procedural discipline.

In Latin America, regulatory credibility has become one of the key drivers behind the region’s maintenance development.

Operators increasingly expect maintenance facilities to demonstrate compliance not only with local authorities but also with internationally recognized standards such as FAA and EASA requirements. This is particularly important for aircraft involved in international operations, cross-border ownership structures, leasing arrangements, and multinational charter activity.

As business aviation becomes more globalized, maintenance providers in the region have had to adapt accordingly.

That includes managing airworthiness directives, service bulletins, component life tracking, engineering modifications, and recordkeeping practices that satisfy international scrutiny.

This is especially relevant for aircraft transactions.

Pre-purchase inspections, for example, have become significantly more detailed over the past decade. Buyers are increasingly focused not only on the physical condition of the aircraft but also on the quality and completeness of maintenance documentation. A single missing record or unresolved compliance issue can significantly affect aircraft value, financing conditions, or transaction timelines.

As a result, maintenance organizations capable of managing these processes locally are becoming increasingly important within the regional aviation ecosystem.

Specialized Support is Expanding

Another important shift across Latin America is the growing presence of specialized maintenance capabilities. Historically, operators often needed to reposition aircraft abroad for certain inspections, engine support, or aircraft-specific maintenance requirements. While this still happens for major overhauls or OEM-level work, regional capabilities are expanding in several areas. This includes support for modern business jets, advanced turboprops, avionics systems, battery maintenance, engineering projects, and increasingly specialized regional aircraft platforms.

Recent developments within the region reflect this broader trend. For example, Aerocardal’s appointment as an authorized service center for the L-410 NG aircraft in South America illustrates how manufacturers are beginning to recognize the operational importance of localized support networks within Latin America. Rather than depending entirely on overseas maintenance infrastructure, operators increasingly expect regional solutions that reduce downtime and improve operational continuity. The same applies to business aviation.

Aircraft such as the Gulfstream G150, Gulfstream G280, Gulfstream G550, Pilatus PC-12, Cirrus SR series, and Citation platforms now operate regularly throughout the region. Supporting these aircraft requires more than tooling and hangar space. It requires trained personnel, compliance systems, engineering coordination, and the ability to manage international maintenance expectations locally. This is where maintenance flexibility becomes operationally meaningful.

Flexibility Also Depends on Support Infrastructure

One of the less discussed realities in Latin American aviation maintenance is that flexibility often depends on how many services can be managed internally.

The more maintenance organizations rely on external support for inspections, engineering coordination, battery servicing, component testing, or airworthiness management, the more operational delays can accumulate during an aircraft downtime event. This is why several maintenance providers in the region have expanded beyond basic scheduled inspections into more comprehensive technical support structures.

Capabilities such as engine workshop support, aircraft battery maintenance, weight and balance services, transponder verification, pitot-static testing, engineering projects, and airworthiness certificate management increasingly play an important role in reducing downtime and improving operational continuity.

For operators, particularly those involved in business aviation or special mission flying, the value of this flexibility is often measured less by convenience and more by operational predictability. The ability to centralize multiple maintenance processes under one technical structure can significantly simplify aircraft management, especially in markets where logistics and supply chain coordination remain complex.

Geography Still Creates Limitations

Despite the progress, maintenance flexibility in Latin America still faces important structural challenges. Geography remains one of the largest.

The distances involved across the region can complicate logistics, parts availability, technical dispatch support, and aircraft repositioning decisions. Supply chain disruptions also continue affecting operators worldwide, and Latin America is not immune to those pressures.

Obtaining components, coordinating OEM support, and managing lead times can still prove difficult depending on the aircraft type and country involved. Infrastructure disparities across countries also remain significant.

While some aviation hubs have developed strong maintenance ecosystems with experienced technical personnel and modern facilities, others continue facing shortages in tooling, training access, or specialized support capabilities. This creates an uneven operational landscape where flexibility may exist in some markets but remain limited in others.

Human capital development is another long-term challenge. As newer aircraft platforms enter the region, maintenance organizations must continuously invest in technician training, certification programs, and regulatory education. Modern aircraft increasingly rely on advanced avionics, digital diagnostics, and integrated systems that require specialized expertise. Building and retaining that expertise locally is essential if the region wants to continue reducing dependence on external maintenance networks.

Looking Ahead

So, is maintenance flexibility possible in Latin America? The answer today is increasingly yes, but with important nuance. The region is clearly developing stronger maintenance ecosystems capable of supporting more sophisticated aircraft operations than many outsiders still assume. Technical capabilities are expanding, regulatory standards are improving, and operators increasingly have access to localized expertise that previously required overseas support.

At the same time, flexibility in aviation maintenance will always operate within certain operational limits. Regulatory compliance, safety standards, supply chain realities, and technical complexity cannot simply be bypassed in the name of convenience.

What is changing is the region’s ability to manage those realities more effectively from within Latin America itself. The broader aviation industry often focuses attention on aircraft deliveries, new routes, or charter demand trends. Yet behind every operational aircraft is an increasingly complex maintenance environment that determines whether those operations can continue safely, efficiently, and sustainably.

In many ways, the evolution of maintenance capability in Latin America reflects the maturation of the region’s aviation industry as a whole. The conversation is no longer whether the region can support advanced aviation operations. It is increasingly about how far those capabilities can continue to evolve.

Felipe Fernández, maintenance manager at Aerocardal, a leader in air ambulance, charter, MRO and cargo services in South America. Based in Chile, the company has made a difference by providing aviation solutions to various industries. Focusing on safety, reliability and innovation, Aerocardal says it is constantly pioneering the industry through versatile air transport services that prioritize efficiency.

The 2026 FAA/EASA International Safety Conference presenters understand humor; if the audience laughs, build on the joke.

At the top of the first day, Administrator Bryan Bedford stated the goal of smashing FAA’s “cylinders of excellence.” The sardonic reference to the agency’s “silos,” a persistent target of every modern agency chief, garnered enough of a chuckle to be repeated countless times over the event’s three days.

The Safety Conference convenes senior leaders from regulatory authorities, manufacturers, operators, maintenance providers, and industry associations worldwide. Through keynote addresses, “flash talks” (some flashier than others), and panel discussions, the agenda covers cross-disciplinary topics of regulatory oversight and practical advancement in aerospace.

The days spent with government leaders of aviation safety allow certain truths to emerge. The biggest is that it has all been said before. The FAA and EASA continually restate the excellence of their regulatory partnership. Attendees’ bingo cards quickly fill with utterances of “safety,” “culture,” and “innovation.”

Nonetheless, a few lessons make events like the Safety Conference valuable:

1. Relationships matter. Deputy FAA Administrator Chris Rocheleau made this point celebrating his decade-long cross Atlantic collaboration with Florian Guillermet, EASA executive director. As another statement of agency cooperation, it felt like a throwaway, but it is a reminder that international aviation is valuable. Long networking breaks allow for extensive discussion. The geography of the meeting space supports side meetings. As an ARSA enterprise member representative mused about attendance, the value is in being in the room.

2. Getting out of your lane. International aviation demands being cross-disciplinary. A session on pilot training standards yielded insight on the “negative training” impacts of poor program design and the limitations of training tools. For a maintenance-focused professional, competency outcomes and not the administrative structure of a training program is useful.

3. Validate what you know. Safety management systems can make every point about organizational reporting sound like an echo. Within those echoes are useful reminders, like an admonition against being so process-driven as to forget that outcomes matter more than procedural adherence.

4. Active participation. In addition to the side meetings and personal engagement, take every opportunity to add a voice. Multiple ARSA members asked questions and made comments during the scheduled “flash talk” on foreign drug and alcohol testing requirements. Though the talk was absent “flash” in the form of anything new or unreported by ARSA since the new rule’s promulgation, those questions clearly demonstrated the interest — and attention to the association’s communications — of the global maintenance community. Later discussion of performance-based rules illustrated how the absence of critical thinking imposes burden when the certificate holder shows but the agency can’t find compliance.

5. Industry implementation. The top-level regulators don’t ensure safety. Designers, producers, operators, and maintainers do. An educator and first-time attendee (who joined the event under an ARSA registration), noted that whatever the regulators say about where the industry is going, they don’t know how to get there.

These reminders can serve aerospace professionals every day. While yet another administration seeks to break down the agency’s “cylinders of excellence,” and eyes rolls over the governmental tendency to protect turf and hoard information, a proactive industry can turn the agency’s tragicomedy into practical, safety-focused evolution.

Brett Levanto is vice president of operations of Obadal, Filler, MacLeod & Klein, P.L.C. managing firm and client communications in conjunction with regulatory and legislative policy initiatives. He provides strategic and logistical support for the Aeronautical Repair Station Association.

This digital approach to preventive maintenance is transforming aviation — but how does it work?

“Digital twins” and “digital threads” are transforming aviation maintenance from a reactive stance to a preventive approach. But how are they making this change, and what substance is behind the buzzwords?

Making Sense of the Terms

First things first: What exactly are digital twins and digital threads, and how do they apply to aviation maintenance?

“A digital twin is a living, virtual replica of a physical asset, like an aircraft engine, mirroring its real-time behavior and history through connections to sensor data. It allows for simulation and prediction,” said Paolo Colombo. He is the global industry development lead, aerospace and defense at Siemens Digital Industries Software. “A digital thread is the continuous, connected flow of data that links all information across an asset’s lifecycle, from design to maintenance.”

Siemens Digital Industries Software

In aviation maintenance, a digital twin provides the comprehensive view of an asset’s health, while a digital thread is the essential conduit that feeds data into the twin and disseminates its insights, ensuring seamless information exchange for proactive and efficient upkeep. “They are intrinsically linked, with the digital thread empowering the digital twin,” Colombo said.

Digital Twinning in Action

Now that we have defined digital twins and digital threads, it is time to see how they are being applied in aviation maintenance.

Lufthansa Techniks

Let’s start with Lufthansa Technik, which uses AVIATAR’s software products to help manage its aircraft maintenance program. “Digital twinning in Lufthansa Technik’s Digital Tech Ops Ecosystem is used to know everything about the real-time condition of every aircraft and its components in the air and on ground, at any time and from anywhere, with managed data streams and centrally accessible up-to-date maintenance records,” said Frank Martens, AVIATAR’s senior director global sales and key account management. “The digital twin in this case is the aircraft as the physical counterpart, whereas digital threading means connecting these digital data with the broader IT landscape of an airline. We can use the data of the digital twin aircraft and combine it with other digital twins (e.g., MRO facilities, flight ops information and other aircraft) in order to create automated planning algorithms like AVIATAR’s Line Maintenance Planning solution.”

Dassault Systèmes

James Kornberg is the business consultant, aerospace and defense industry, at Dassault Systèmes. “The ‘digital thread’ is the digital continuity we are able to provide from design engineering to manufacturing, service engineering and maintenance activities,” he told Aviation Maintenance. “It is now possible, with our solutions, to create maintenance instructions and spare parts catalogs that maintain a digital continuity from engineering data with the correct configuration of the aircraft in service.”

According to Kornberg, Dassault Systèmes has advanced the digital twin model to create the “virtual twin” concept. “A virtual twin goes beyond a digital twin by not only mirroring physical objects but also simulating their behavior and evolution in real time,” he explained. “This is a smart and dynamic replica of a product, a process, or a physical system in a virtual environment. The virtual twin is based on a holistic approach, meaning that it encompasses all the lifecycle phases from conception to disposal, on a unified platform, with digital continuity.”

The Importance of Good Input

There is an old adage in the IT world: “Garbage in, garbage out.” In plain language, the quality of any digital system’s output can only be as good as the quality of the data used to create that output.

In the world of digital twins and threads, access to quality sensor and other input data is absolutely vital. Unfortunately, there’s a wide range of aircraft in service today, many built decades ago when this kind of maintenance analysis was unheard of. For companies such as Siemens Digital Industries Software, this presents a problem.

“We tackle this by designing solutions with open architectures and APIs to connect diverse systems,” said Colombo. “We employ robust data harmonization tools from the Siemens Xcelerator portfolio to standardize information from various formats and units. For older aircraft, edge computing and data gateways collect and pre-process data locally before secure transmission. Semantic data models help interpret legacy data, and we often partner with experts for tailored integration strategies.”

AVIATAR’s ability to interconnect with maintenance and engineering systems, records management solutions and ERP systems, “allows our customers to create a single source of digital truth network-of-systems in an airlines operation, which are key to the digital transformation of the aviation industry,” Martens said. “For example, Lufthansa Digital Tech Ops Ecosystem connects the AMOS maintenance system with AVIATAR’s data analytics and flydocs’ digital records and asset management solutions. Through seamless interfaces and secure data exchange, customers can integrate the Digital Tech Ops Ecosystem into their existing environment and extend its capabilities across the organization.”

Of course, if the data from legacy aircraft is not available or not accessible, it is not possible to connect it to AVIATAR, the Ecosystem or any other digital tool. In these circumstances, “it is up to the operator to decide how to proceed, but we have always found solutions for customer challenges,” said Martens. “Some AVIATAR solutions like the digital Technical Logbook do not need data from the aircraft. Instead, they use data coming from pilots, flight ops systems, or the tech ops team of an airline ideally via AMOS — while the ‘paperwork’ is stored digitally in flydocs’ Digital Records Management.”

As for Dassault Systèmes? “Depending on the IT system, some migrations are possible,” said Kornberg. “We are leveraging AI to convert data from legacy aircraft to feed the virtual twin, to enhance the operation of legacy aircraft.”

The Impact on Daily Workflows

So far, we have delved into the big picture view of digital twins and threads. So how does this theory play out on the MRO shop floor?

“Consider aircraft landing gear,” replied Colombo. “For a maintenance technician, the digital twin transforms their work from reactive to proactive. Instead of relying solely on manuals, they receive real-time alerts from the digital twin about potential issues, like an unusual hydraulic pressure. Using augmented reality on a tablet, they can overlay the twin’s data onto the physical component, instantly accessing full historical data, repair instructions, and even precise tool requirements. This drastically reduces troubleshooting time and No Fault Found removals.”

For a fleet engineer in their office, a digital twin can provide a real-time, holistic view of every landing gear across the entire fleet. They can use this overview to predict precisely component lifespans based on actual operational data, enabling highly optimized, condition-based maintenance planning. “This capability also allows for deep root cause analysis across the fleet and provides invaluable feedback for design improvements, moving beyond aggregated reports to granular, predictive insights. Through the full digital backbone Siemens provides, AI can tell operators if spare parts are available or order them, identify who is certified for this repair and much more, all to minimize the downtime of the aircraft,” said Colombo.

On a more general scale, “The daily workflow of a maintenance technician on the ground is changing dramatically in a fully digitalized airline,” Martens said. “While technicians used paper-based systems in the past, they are now using tablets or smartphones to get and sign off on work orders.”

In Dassault Systèmes’ case, their virtual twin console helps fleet engineers to update maintenance assets and technical documentation painlessly. “When a design change or a service bulletin has to be implemented, the fleet engineer has to analyze all the possible in-service configurations to implement a change,” explained Kornberg. “This is a cumbersome task that consumes a lot of time. The virtual twin solves this problem by displaying all the possible configurations. The fleet engineer can then make their choice and implement the change only once.”

ROI: Are Digital Twins and Threads Worth the Cost?

It takes a lot of time and money to implement a digital twin system, and ROI (return on Investment) is a big priority for the aviation industry. So, is this technology worth the expense?

According to Paolo Colombo, the answer is yes. “The ROI is very concrete and measurable,” he told Aviation Maintenance. “Industry studies and airline programs report double-digit reductions in AOG (Aircraft on Ground) time, often 15 to 30 percent; improvements of 10 to 20 percent in spare-parts inventory efficiency; and material reductions in No Fault Found removals, depending on fleet maturity, data quality, and operational scope.”

What makes this ROI tangible is where the value shows up operationally. “AOG improvements are driven by earlier fault isolation and better decision-making before an aircraft ever reaches the gate, which shortens troubleshooting cycles and avoids cascading delays,” said Colombo. “Inventory gains come from higher confidence in parts conditions and demand signals, allowing operators to position the right parts at the right stations instead of buffering uncertainty with excess stock. Reductions in No Fault Found removals stem from improved diagnostic precision — maintenance actions are more targeted, so components are removed because they are likely to be faulty, not simply because there is a suspected issue.”

Most importantly, these benefits are spread across the entire maintenance ecosystem. Fewer AOG events reduce downstream disruptions to crew, schedules, and customer recovery costs. More accurate parts usage improves relationships with MROs and suppliers by stabilizing repair flows.

“Over time, the organization shifts from reactive maintenance to a more predictive, evidence-based model, where each avoided disruption reinforces the business case,” Cervellera said. “The result is not a theoretical ROI, but one that is visible in daily operations, maintenance planning meetings, and network performance outcomes.”

Frank Martens has a different take on this question. From his perspective, the ROI from digital twins can only be calculated by each airline and depends on the processes implemented to react to digital information and how this information is used. “It also depends on aircraft and engine types and other data connected,” he said. “And it is also up to the airline to select the digital solutions they want to use.”

Barriers to Widespread Adoption

Clearly, digital twins and digital threads offer real value to MROs and their customers. However, widespread adoption of this technology has yet to take place. But why?

“Widespread adoption faces a combination of factors,” said Colombo. “Data standardization and integration complexity are major hurdles, as organizations grapple with silos and inconsistent data formats, demanding significant data engineering effort. The initial investment cost for software, sensors, and infrastructure must be budgeted, requiring strong business cases. Organizational change management and potential workforce resistance are also critical, as implementing digital twins fundamentally shifts work processes. There’s also a skills gap in areas like data science and IoT, and significant cybersecurity concerns with connecting OT and IT systems. Finally, a lack of clear strategic vision can hinder successful implementation.”

The “newness” of digital twins is also an obstacle. For many airlines and their MROs, “This is a new land,” Kornberg said. “Since we are in a phase where companies do not want to take many risks, we need to demonstrate the value of technology innovation, and the costs of relying only on legacy IT systems. That said, we are seeing a growing adoption of virtual twin technology across industries. Powered by AI, virtual twin experiences can revolutionize product development, lifecycle management, and supply chains and their operation. Relying on IT legacy systems to bring products and new innovations to market simply cannot be the foundation of a growing business in the age of AI.”

“The digital transformation of an airline is a very complex endeavor that can take many years to be completed, but it’s worth it for many reasons,” added Martens. “Besides efficiency gains it also increases the reliability of an aircraft fleet. This being said, in the process of digital transformation some airlines may face issues with data. Sometimes it’s the quality, the format or the accessibility. Legacy IT systems that do not provide industry standard interfaces could also be an obstacle, but many airlines have proven that digital transformation is not only manageable but delivers great results.”

The Impact of AI

There is no doubt that AI is transforming every industry it touches. The experts we interviewed expect it to have the same significant impact on digital twins.

“AI and predictive modeling will dramatically evolve digital twins, leading to even more sophisticated capabilities,” Colombo predicted. “We’ll see enhanced predictive accuracy, moving beyond simple failure prediction to understand how and when components will fail, enabling ultra-precise, condition-based maintenance. Assets will become more self-optimizing, with digital twins suggesting real-time adjustments for efficiency or extended life. Autonomous data collection and initial analysis by drones and robots, guided by AI, will highlight anomalies for human review. These ‘cognitive’ digital twins will reason through issues and recommend optimal actions. However, the human element will remain absolutely central. AI will serve as a powerful assistant, augmenting the capabilities of technicians and engineers, providing deeper insights and faster information. Their role will evolve from reactive problem-solvers to proactive strategists, leveraging these advanced tools for unprecedented efficiency, safety, and performance.”

“AI will assist technicians and engineers for improved quality and efficiency and will not replace them,” agreed Kornberg. “We believe that technologies like virtual companions will help humans in their daily work, enabling humans and AI to collaborate safely, intelligently, and at scale on the most complex industrial challenges. While AI companions will empower professionals with new expertise, humans will still make decisions especially in the highly regulated aerospace industry where safety is the number one priority.”

Frank Martens believes that nothing is changing the MRO industry and driving the development of new solutions more than digitalization. “It is the only game changer of this decade,” he said. “With 50 times more data being generated by new aircraft types and approximately 50% of airline operating costs consisting directly or indirectly of MRO services, further cost reductions can only be accomplished through MRO and operational optimization through technology.”

But don’t count the humans out quite yet. “Especially in technical operations, the aviation industry will always depend on highly trained and dedicated professionals — no matter how advanced digitalization becomes,” Martens concluded. “While new technologies, data-driven tools, and automation continue to enhance efficiency and precision, they can never replace the deep expertise, critical judgment, and hands-on skill of our people. At Lufthansa Technik, our employees remain our greatest asset: their knowledge, experience, and commitment are what keep aircraft flying and our industry moving forward.”

The widespread adoption of new generation narrowbody engines has driven significant efficiency improvements across commercial aviation, but the maturation of these fleets is now placing substantial demand on global MRO infrastructure. As these engine programs transition to mature operational phases, operators are encountering the realities of maintaining advanced powerplants at scale: longer turnaround times driven by material constraints, growing shop visit volumes and the need for specialized repair capabilities.

The MRO sector is responding through coordinated infrastructure expansion, with engine manufacturers and their partners investing in new facilities and upgrading existing sites to handle increasing workload complexity. Geographic positioning of repair capacity is shifting closer to fleet concentrations, reducing transportation delays and improving responsiveness to regional operators.

Workforce development has emerged as equally critical as physical infrastructure expansion. The specialized skills required to maintain advanced turbofan architectures demand structured training pipelines and partnerships with technical education institutions. Simultaneously, automation technologies are being deployed selectively to improve process repeatability, reduce risk of injury and free experienced technicians for higher-complexity diagnostic and assembly tasks that require human judgment.

This article examines how capacity expansion strategies, workforce development initiatives and automation integration are shaping the MRO response to demand growth driven by the operational success of new generation narrowbody engine programs.

Turnaround Time Increases

GE Aerospace points out that customers have selected CFM LEAP-1A engines to power more than 60% of Airbus A320neo aircraft (for which they have selected engines). “And this is just part of the engine program’s extraordinary success. With over 3,700 LEAP-powered aircraft in service with more than 150 operators worldwide, 60 million flight hours logged, and over 10,000 engine orders in hand, the company faces a growing challenge, how to keep all these engines in peak condition, they say. “Indeed, due to the large number of engines in service, LEAP engine overhauls are expected to increase significantly by the end of this decade.”

Pratt & Whitney continues to see strong demand for the GTF engine, with more than 13,000 engine orders and commitments from 90+ customers worldwide, and over 1,500 orders in 2025. The fleet size is now over 2,600 aircraft across the Airbus A320neo family and A220, and Embraer E2, with 50 million hours flown.

Pratt & Whitney

Material constraints remain the primary driver of lead times, but significant progress is being made, Rob Griffiths, senior vice president commercial engines operations at Pratt & Whitney, observes. “MRO production of the PW1100G-JM GTF increased 26% in 2025 compared to 2024, despite a 40% year-over-year increase in heavy shop visits for more complex repairs. We ended the year particularly strongly, with MRO production increasing 39% in the fourth quarter, thanks in part to a 16% reduction in lead times and a significant increase in component repair volumes, which relieves pressure on the need for new materials, he says. “This puts us in a position to increase MRO production to a similar level in 2026. We are also integrating durability upgrades into the GTF engine that increase in-flight uptime, thus reducing the need for shop visits.”

Closing the Capacity Gap

GE Aerospace has announced a $300 million, multi-year investment plan to enhance its engine component repair capabilities in Singapore by 2029, reaffirming the company’s commitment to strengthening its presence in the Asia-Pacific region. “Supported by the Singapore Economic Development Board, the investment will transform engine repair operations, enabling faster response times, improved connectivity, and a more seamless customer service experience. We plan to establish an AI Center of Excellence to develop automated, AI-enhanced digital inspection solutions, as well as a new registration, evaluation, and authorisation of chemicals (REACH), compliant coatings facility and for the industrialization of such coatings, and a regional centre for critical shaft repair, GE Aerospace says. “The company’s multi-year investment plan is already taking shape with the opening of a new module repair facility at Seletar Aerospace Park. The facility is dedicated to supporting the growth of operations for CFM LEAP-1A and LEAP-1B high-pressure turbine (HPT) modules. This investment is significant for the global engine fleet, allowing the company to perform service closer to operators in the Asia-Pacific and Middle East regions.”

GE Aerospace Component Repair

By expanding the repair of LEAP engine HPT modules locally, GE Aerospace expects to reduce downtime and improve engine flow within its global MRO network. “With the addition of Building 8 to our Seletar campus, we are not only expanding our physical presence but also our capabilities, moving from individual engine component repair to engine module repair on LEAP-1A/1B high-pressure turbine modules, says Iain Rodger, managing director of GE Aerospace Component Repair in Singapore. “As the first of our specialized module repair shops, this facility offers improved connectivity within our engine overhaul supply chains, initially for MRO activities in Asia and the Middle East. Many of the components currently repaired in Singapore will be used in these modules, and the shaft repair capability announced later will also be integrated into these modules, significantly reducing downtime for our customers.”

In early 2026, Pratt & Whitney announced a memorandum of understanding with the Singapore Economic Development Board to add GTF fan drive gear system (FDGS) repair capacity in Singapore, affirms Griffiths. “Additionally, the recent opening of a USD 70 million 81,000-square-foot GTF MRO expansion at our Columbus Engine Center in Georgia that will increase that facility’s annual capacity by more than 25%. We anticipate further expansion of the GTF engine MRO network with the commissioning of the Christchurch and KHI engine centres expected later this year, he says. “In addition to our global engine centres, we have approximately 40 component repair facilities in the GTF engine MRO network. The ability to develop and execute innovative repairs at the individual component level is critical to optimising material flow.”

Over the past decade, CFM and GE Aerospace have continued to expand their MRO shop network worldwide, both by increasing the number and size of their own facilities and by partnering with other top-tier MRO providers, according to GE Aerospace. “Now, with the opening of a shop in Poland and a new partnership with MTU Maintenance in Texas, they are doing the same again. GE Aerospace announced its most recent MRO capacity increase two weeks before MRO Americas, with the inauguration of XEOS, a 35,000-square-meter (375,000-square-foot) facility near Wroclaw, Poland. GE Aerospace operates the facility in a joint venture with Lufthansa Technik, GE Aerospace says. “MTU Maintenance Fort Worth will also service GEnx engines under a GE Aerospace-branded service agreement (GBSA). Thanks to this new partnership, MTU Maintenance will perform performance restoration work and industrialize extensive repair capabilities for the CFM LEAP-1A and -1B engines, as well as for the GEnx-1B engines.”

In Germany, MTU Maintenance Berlin-Brandenburg has expanded its PW800 engine program from a focus on low-pressure turbines to a comprehensive engine MRO service, explains MTU Maintenance. “Additionally, the Ludwigsfelde location is expanding its capacity in the industrial gas turbine (IGT) segment, building a new production facility to achieve its goal of a 30% increase in workshop volume over the coming years. EME Aero, MTU’s joint venture with Lufthansa Technik specializing in the MRO of the GTF engine family, delivered its 1,000th engine to its plant in Jasionka, Poland and inaugurated a second test cell, with plans to increase its operating volume to 500 maintenance interventions per year starting in 2028, MTU Maintenance says. “In the Asia-Pacific region, MTU Maintenance Zhuhai opened a second production facility in nearby Jinwan for MRO of the PW1100G-JM program, creating greater overall maintenance capacity for its portfolio, which also includes the CFM56, LEAP, and V2500 engines at the original Zhuhai site. Once the Jinwan workshop is fully operational, the two sites will have a combined annual capacity of more than 700 maintenance interventions. In São Paulo, MTU Maintenance do Brasil has moved to a larger facility to meet the growing demand for on-site maintenance of aircraft engines and IGTs in South America.”

Pratt & Whitney and its network of workshops continue to invest in the GTF MRO network, consisting of 21 global service centers, to support the growing GTF fleet, and the network will continue to expand, Griffiths affirms. “In 2025, we announced the addition of Sanad to the GTF MRO network, representing the first GTF workshop in the South Asia, Middle East, and North Africa region, with the first induction scheduled for 2028. This workshop will be able to overhaul all three GTF models. In addition, we announced an expanded agreement with Delta TechOps for a more than 30% increase in annual GTF overhaul capacity for the PW1500G engine powering the A220, he says. “Also in 2025, we finalized an agreement to expand GTF overhaul capacity at MTU facilities, increasing MTU’s annual capacity to 600 repairs on all GTF models; ITP joined the GTF MRO network as our 21st workshop and EME Aero announced a USD 37 million expansion of its facility in Poland to service more than 500 GTF engines annually starting in 2028.”

Workforce Pipeline and AI-Assisted Diagnostics

Celma’s new MRO facility in Três Rios in Brazil is expected to usher in a new chapter, nearly doubling its maintenance capacity from 600 to 1,000 engines per year, GE Aerospace points out. “This new growth is expected to create another 400 jobs, bringing the total number of employees at the Brazilian operation to nearly 4,000 in the state of Rio de Janeiro. Many of these new hires will be MRO technicians. This represents many positions to fill, but Celma management is confident in their approach,” GE Aerospace says. “The Celma team’s partnership with the Serviço Nacional de Aprendizagem Industrial (SENAI), a training academy established by Brazilian industrial companies, has been crucial to Celma’ success. The continued collaboration with SENAI will ensure that GE Aerospace employees are well-prepared to address new technical needs.”

“GE Aerospace has historically hired a high percentage of SENAI graduates, affirms Julio Talon, GE Aerospace’s MRO leader for Brazil. “The program provides students with a solid foundation in aerospace technology, and we offer opportunities to develop advanced skills as our technicians gain experience. LEAP engine maintenance will be one of these important career growth opportunities.”

Pratt & Whitney is investing in automation support to improve safety, efficiency and productivity. “Key benefits include safer operations with lower risk of injury, greater repeatability and reliability, reduced rework, shorter process times, and less waste, as well as customized equipment that integrates software and hardware while minimising space requirements, says Griffiths. “In addition to expanding our footprint, we are equipping our MRO facilities with cutting-edge technologies, including automation and robotics, to meet demand while increasing the speed and productivity of MRO operations. For example, at our Eagle Services Asia (ESA) MRO facility in Singapore, our ‘Alfred’ robotic system assembles the rotors of the GTF’s high-pressure compressor, maintaining tight assembly tolerances in a repetitive manner, while recording and analysing key process quality data.”

‘Alfred’ has allowed ESA to halve process times and reduce man-hours by 85%, freeing up three operators for more complex tasks such as rotor balancing, according to Griffiths. “In addition, ESA also uses a collaborative robot (cobot) to assist technicians in photographically documenting external engine components, demonstrating their condition before and after overhaul, he says. “This system replaces the photographic documentation routine previously performed by ESA technicians and enhances their operational skills. At the same time, it has helped ensure process integrity, reducing man-hours by 90%. This level of MRO automation is industry-leading, and we are evaluating the possibility of implementing ESA’s robotic innovations in other shops within the GTF MRO network.”

Summing Up

The narrowbody engine MRO sector is responding to increased demand through coordinated capacity expansion, workforce development, and selective automation deployment. Geographic repositioning of MRO capacity closer to concentrated fleets in Asia-Pacific and Middle East regions reflects strategic infrastructure investment, while network expansion through partnerships continues to broaden overhaul capability distribution. Component repair volume increases and lead time reductions are addressing material constraints that have historically driven turnaround delays.

Workforce pipeline development remains critical to capacity execution, with established partnerships between MRO providers and technical training institutions supporting planned expansion requirements. Automation integration at advanced facilities demonstrates measurable efficiency improvements in repetitive assembly processes and documentation tasks, prioritising repeatability, safety improvement, and operator reallocation to higher-complexity work rather than workforce reduction.

The industry trajectory points toward continued MRO network expansion through the remainder of the decade. Material flow optimisation through component-level repair capability development and durability upgrades designed to reduce shop visit frequency will influence whether capacity additions keep pace with projected overhaul demand as installed fleets mature. The combination of geographic network expansion, process automation, and workforce development represents the sector’s integrated response to demand growth driven by the operational success of new generation narrowbody engine programs.