The AD register that stopped living in a spreadsheet.
Every time new flight hours arrive, a continuing airworthiness engineer opens the spreadsheet and recalculates the repetitive AD due dates by hand. Between visits, the register drifts out of date, and the reasoning behind each applicability call sits in one engineer's head.
Then a CAMO audit lands on the calendar. Weeks disappear into assembling evidence that should have been retrievable at any point in time.
The spreadsheet was never the problem. The problem is that the compliance record should recalculate itself and produce its own audit pack.
CAMP Systems, Swiss Aviation Software AMOS, and Flightdocs serve large commercial operators well. The limitation appears when a CAMO manages a fleet with characteristics outside the platform's assumptions: multiple aircraft types from different registries, older aircraft where the type certificate configuration differs from the current baseline, or engines and components where AD applicability is determined by manufacturer serial number range rather than aircraft type alone.
Custom airworthiness compliance software is built around your fleet's actual configuration, the specific aircraft, engine, propeller, and component combinations you operate, with compliance method recording, due date calculation, and audit preparation matched to your CAMO's evidence requirements.
We have built compliance-critical, audit-facing software since 2015, in regulated domains where records have to survive an auditor's scrutiny. Airworthiness is a specialist regime, and we will be straight about it. Our depth is in building configurable compliance and audit-evidence systems. We scope every aviation engagement with your continuing-airworthiness engineers, so the applicability logic reflects your fleet, not our assumptions. The team that scopes your fleet is the team that builds the system. No bait-and-switch, no offshore handoff after the contract is signed. We scope the work, calculate the cost, and lock it in writing before development starts. Custom software is justified by mixed-registry, legacy-fleet, or non-standard applicability needs, not recommended by default. We will tell you when a commercial CAMO platform is enough.
Custom pays off when your fleet breaks the standard applicability model.
Everything on the left should already be true for your CAMO. Even one thing on the right, and a commercial CAMO platform is the smarter first step.
A fit01A mixed-registry, legacy, or specialist fleet where AD applicability turns on serial number range, not aircraft type alone.
02An AD compliance register living in a spreadsheet that needs manual recalculation every time new hours or cycles arrive.
03A CAMO audit that means weeks of assembling evidence which should be retrievable at any moment.
Not a fit01A standard single-type, single-registry fleet that CAMP Systems, AMOS, or Flightdocs already handles well.
02AD applicability that follows aircraft type alone, with no serial-number or configuration exceptions.
03You want an off-the-shelf platform to configure, not software built around your fleet.
What we build
What airworthiness compliance software covers
01AD applicability determination
Applicability analysis for each registration against type certificate, serial number, engine, propeller, and installed equipment, matched to each AD's effectivity statement. Applicability determinations are recorded with the engineer's reasoning, and configuration changes (an engine change, an STC) trigger automatic re-evaluation.
02Compliance method recording
Each applicable AD's compliance record captures the approved means of compliance, the source document, and any alternative means of compliance approved by the authority. Evidence, the maintenance work order or inspection report, links directly to the compliance record for audit retrieval.
03Due date calculation and tracking
Repetitive AD due dates recalculate automatically on hours, cycles, or calendar time as new utilisation data arrives. Multi-threshold tracking (warning plus mandatory date) lets engineers plan a maintenance visit ahead of the deadline rather than reacting to it.
04Alert generation and escalation
Configurable lead times by AD category (mandatory, alert, routine) trigger pre-due alerts to the responsible engineer, with overdue escalation to the quality manager and aircraft owner. A daily fleet status report shows every AD due in the next 30, 60, and 90 days.
05Continued airworthiness documentation
Continued airworthiness records compile AD history, component life records, and modification records per aircraft into a single retrievable set, the basis for sale documentation. Component time and cycle tracking updates automatically from flight log data.
Audit preparation compiles the compliance evidence package automatically from system records rather than by manual assembly. A pre-audit gap check flags applicable ADs with missing evidence or expired compliance dates before the auditor finds them.
Aerospace and defense compliance is not one framework. A system that only tracks ADs misses the regimes that surround airworthiness. We design the data model, access controls, and audit trail so the same records answer to whichever of these apply to your operation.
- FAA / EASA airworthiness
- Continuing airworthiness under FAA 14 CFR Part 39 (Airworthiness Directives) and EASA Part-M / Part-CAMO. Demands AD applicability per aircraft, recorded means of compliance, and continuous audit-ready records for the life of the aircraft.
- AS9100
- The aerospace quality management standard (built on ISO 9001) for design and manufacturing suppliers. Demands configuration management, traceability, nonconformance handling, and objective evidence a registrar can audit.
- ITAR / EAR export control
- Defense and dual-use articles and technical data fall under State (ITAR) and Commerce (EAR) jurisdiction. Demands access control, data residency, nationality-based authorisation, and a defensible record of who touched controlled technical data.
- DO-178C / DO-254
- Airborne software (DO-178C) and complex airborne electronic hardware (DO-254) assurance for certification. Demands requirements traceability, verification evidence, and configuration control at the design-assurance level assigned to the function.
- NADCAP
- Accreditation for special processes (heat treat, welding, non-destructive testing, chemical processing). Demands controlled process records, operator certification tracking, and audit evidence tied to each accredited process.
We are not a certification authority, and we do not sell an approval. We build the software system that makes the evidence for these regimes retrievable on demand instead of assembled under audit pressure.
Why operators are moving off spreadsheets
- ~$9.45B
- Aviation MRO software market by 2030
- Research and Markets, 2025
- 8.9%
- CAGR for aviation compliance-monitoring software, 2025-2034
- Dataintelo, 2025
- 28.7%
- Share of the aviation compliance software market held by North America, under FAA record-keeping rules
- Dataintelo, 2025
Airworthiness compliance systems fail in predictable ways. We design against the failure modes continuing-airworthiness engineers already know.
The regulators and OEMs are moving toward a digital thread: a continuous, machine-readable record that links a part's configuration, its compliance history, and its maintenance evidence from design through retirement. Model-based systems engineering (MBSE) is pushing the same shift on the design side, where requirements, verification, and configuration live as connected data rather than documents. A compliance system built on structured, exportable records rather than PDFs and spreadsheets is what lets your fleet data plug into that thread later instead of being re-keyed. We build for that destination now, so the records you capture today stay useful as the standard tightens.
Have an airworthiness compliance project?
Tell us about your fleet: the aircraft types you manage, the regulatory authorities you report to, and where your current process creates risk or audit burden. We'll scope a system built around your actual fleet configuration.
How it works
From scope to live compliance system
- Week 1
01Fleet and registry scoping
We map your fleet configuration, registries, and current AD tracking method. You leave week 1 with a written scope document and a fixed-price quote.
- Weeks 2-5
02Applicability and compliance-method design
AD applicability logic and compliance recording structure designed against your actual fleet configuration.
- Weeks 6-15
03Build and integrate
Applicability engine, due date calculation, and audit evidence library built in parallel, tested against real fleet data.
- Final 2-3 weeks
04Launch validated v1 and CAMO training
Engineering team trained on the compliance workflow, then a validated v1 goes live for your primary fleet. CAMO audit support and additional registries are added in later phases as the system proves out.
What the build costs depends on scope, not negotiation:
- Focused build, $50,000-$100,000
- AD applicability determination, compliance method recording, due date calculation, and alert generation, scoped and delivered in 12 to 18 weeks.
- Full build, $100,000-$180,000
- Everything in the focused build, plus CAMO audit support, continued airworthiness documentation, and multi-registry coverage across multiple regulatory authorities.
What it costs
Airworthiness compliance software, starting at $50,000.
AD applicability, compliance recording, due date calculation, alerts, and CAMO audit support, built around your fleet and your CAMO approval.
AD applicability and compliance recording for your primary fleet come first. CAMO audit support and additional regulatory integrations get added as your registry grows.
Starting investment
Starts at $50,000
The final number depends on fleet size and which regulatory integrations you need. Most builds ship in 12 to 18 weeks. Start with AD tracking for your primary fleet, then add CAMO audit support once it's proven.
No hourly billing
Once we scope the build against your fleet, that price is locked in writing, no surprise invoices, no change fees you didn't agree to.
Honest fit
Custom software is justified by mixed-registry, legacy-fleet, or non-standard applicability needs, not recommended by default. We'll tell you when a commercial CAMO platform is enough.
