IATA Aircraft Lease Guidance

Guidance Material and Best Practices for Aircraft Leases
effectively controls and records the total operational life of the part. Although a seemingly simple process, the
Lessee and the Lessor will often have different expectations or approach, and Lessor/market expectations
have also changed over the years, so this can lead to issues at redelivery. While the Lessee will record the
total time of each LLP with the use of their maintenance software, the Lessor often requires a much more
detailed documentation process. The Lessor may want proof of each and every step in the LLP’s life by
means of a dirty fingerprint 2 coupled with the consumed time (flight hours (FH) and flight cycles (FC)). The
reason for this is threefold:
●
●
●
The Lessor wants 100% certainty that there are no errors in the total time consumed by the part and will
want documentation to substantiate this.
The aircraft’s documentation must be of a good standard to maintain the asset value; assuming that
there are two identical parts available for sale, the part with the highest quality documentation may be
more desirable and hence perceived as having a higher value.
The Lessor wants to protect itself against possible more stringent requirements of future operators, parts
sales agents (aircraft teardown) or regulatory agencies.
Lessee providing an airline summary sheet for life used on LLP’s will often not be sufficient to meet Lessor
expectations for BtB (while this may be sufficient for the regulatory authorities 3 ).
The problem of incomplete BtB is specifically apparent in the case of landing gear LLPs. Landing gears, with
their fixed overhaul interval stipulated in FC or years, are quite frequently exchanged (including the individual
subassemblies), and new/used LLPs introduced over the years. In addition, landing gear overhaul shops do
not always hold and supply documentation that meets Lessor expectations for BtB.
The question remains whether it is needed to prove the full BtB and how this requirement is properly defined.
The best way to mitigate this risk is to include in the lease agreement a detailed and very specific description
of all documentation required.
For more detailed information about BtB, please refer to Annex X.
1.2.2 Repairs
Repair documentation and certification is another area where misunderstandings can easily happen. When
the lease agreement requires a Lessee to deliver ‘dirty fingerprints certification of repairs’, what exactly needs
to be included? Does a Lessor require each rework 4 on the aircraft to be recorded, no matter how small, or if
2
DFP (Dirty Fingerprint) is the work card or record in hard copy or electronic format. It can be (1) physically signed and/or stamped and
dated or (2) digitally/electronically signed and dated by approved certifying staff describing the maintenance task or inspection, the
supporting data, associated findings and that further endorses the certifying documents.
3
Most regulatory authorities will require the most recent authorized release certificate (i.e. EASA Form 1 or FAA Form 8130-3) for each
part. Each certificate must clearly make reference to the work carried out and indicate current TSN/CSN of the part.
4
Rework is the terminology used in the SRM. It applies to blendouts, stop-drilling and hole filling.
4 4 th Edition 2017