Airworthiness in 2026: What Operators Need to Know

Airworthiness rarely makes headlines—and that is precisely the point. When the system works as intended, change is gradual, safety performance remains stable, and operators adapt without disruption. Looking ahead to 2026, the airworthiness landscape reflects continuity rather than transformation, shaped by fleet realities, regulatory refinement, digital tools, and evolving workforce needs.

Fleet Age: A Managed Reality

Industry data show that the average age of the global commercial aircraft fleet has increased in recent years. According to IATA, the global fleet’s average age has increased to around 14–15 years, compared with approximately 11–12 years in the mid-2010s. Delivery delays, supply-chain constraints, and production backlogs have led many operators to keep aircraft in service longer than originally planned.

Continuing airworthiness regulatory frameworks are explicitly designed to manage aging aircraft, with long-established requirements covering continuing structural integrity, including fatigue and corrosion monitoring. Aircraft age alone is not a safety indicator; continued compliance with aging approved programs is.

At the same time, industry cost data confirm that older aircraft typically carry higher operating and maintenance costs. More frequent inspections, increased component replacements, and reduced efficiency compared with newer aircraft contribute to higher lifecycle expenses. As fleets age, airworthiness planning and cost control become increasingly linked, requiring strategic airworthiness management.

Navigating New Regulatory Requirements

While most regulatory updates are incremental, new mandatory measures—such as EASA Part-IS for an Information Security Management System and equivalent requirements in other regulatory environments—require operators to adjust established workflows. Implementing these requirements involves integrating new processes, training, documentation, and monitoring into existing airworthiness operations. This may necessitate careful balancing of resources to ensure full compliance without affecting operational efficiency, a challenge that started in 2025 and continues into 2026.

Despite the introduction of Part-IS, the requirements focus on organisational information security systems and do not fully address all aspects of protecting the digital environment of aircraft systems. This distinction is sometimes misunderstood by operators, leaving them responsible for broader technical cyber risk management where it matters most: the Aircraft Information Security Ecosystem.

From Data to Insights: Driving the Future of Airworthiness

As regulatory scope expands and operational complexity increases, data becomes a critical enabler of effective and efficient decision-making.

Condition-Based Maintenance (CBM)

Condition-Based Maintenance (CBM), enabled by Aircraft Health Monitoring (AHM) systems, is reshaping how operators maintain aircraft. MSG-3 already allows credit from AHM data for non-critical safety tasks as an alternative to classic tasks, though this option is applied selectively in modern fleets.

Beyond MSG-3, leading operators and MROs are increasingly supplementing their existing maintenance programs with AHM-driven practices, further enhancing operational reliability and supporting data-driven decision-making.

Safety Intelligence

Safety Intelligence — the systematic collection, processing, and analysis of safety data and information to support proactive risk management — is emerging as a key driver of operational decision-making. ICAO’s Safety Intelligence Manual (Doc 10159) provides guidance on transforming raw safety data into structured insights that help organisations anticipate risks and make evidence-based decisions.

AI and machine learning are increasingly applied to analyze large datasets, including maintenance and safety data. While AI enhances predictive capabilities and identifies trends faster than manual analysis, human judgment remains essential in all safety‑critical decisions.

By integrating safety intelligence, including AI insights, into airworthiness management, operators can prioritise resources, detect emerging hazards earlier, and optimise interventions.

Skills and Capacity: A Structural Topic

The effectiveness of data-driven and regulatory frameworks ultimately depends on people. Authorities and industry bodies recognize a long-term shortage of skilled professionals, not only in engineering and maintenance but also in regulatory oversight. While tools and operational contexts evolve, the fundamentals of airworthiness oversight remain unchanged: approved organizations operate under structured surveillance programs, occurrence reporting and corrective actions continue, and human expertise remains central.

To address these challenges, competency-based training (CBT), Lean training (focused on streamlining processes, eliminating unnecessary complexity, and improving efficiency), knowledge retention programs, and targeted upskilling in digital tools are increasingly emphasized to build both capacity and effectiveness (foundational skills → process efficiency → knowledge preservation → digital adaptation).

• Competency-Based Training (CBT): Ensures mastery of specific, measurable skills and behaviors required for effective job performance, rather than simply completing training hours.

• Lean Training: Focuses on streamlining processes, eliminating unnecessary steps, improving workflow efficiency, and maximizing the value of training and operational activities.

• Knowledge Retention Programs: Capture and preserve critical expertise within the organization, preventing the loss of valuable experience as personnel retire or move roles.

• Targeted Digital Upskilling: Prepares personnel to use modern tools and technologies efficiently, improving operational performance.

Together, these approaches support the development of a skilled, efficient, and adaptable airworthiness workforce, prepared for the challenges of modern aviation.

Continuous Improvement (Beyond Compliance)

Continuous improvement is a foundational requirement across aviation management systems, including Safety and Information Security Management Systems. These frameworks require organisations to monitor performance, manage change, address findings, and implement corrective actions.

In today’s operating context, meeting management system requirements ensures regulatory compliance, but it does not automatically create organisational resilience or long-term competitiveness. This distinction is sometimes misunderstood by operators. True continuous improvement goes beyond closing audit findings or updating procedures; it requires organisations to systematically question whether existing processes remain fit for purpose, efficient, and resilient under stress. This includes identifying structural inefficiencies, reducing unnecessary complexity, improving information flow, and strengthening decision-making at both operational and management levels.

Looking Ahead

Global aviation occurrence data, including incidents and accidents, show that airworthiness regulatory frameworks remain effective. While the system faces operational pressures—aging fleets, key regulatory updates, increasing digital reliance, and workforce constraints—airworthiness continues to depend on the strict application of established frameworks.

In practice, continuing airworthiness relies on competent personnel, clear processes, and sound technical judgment. Data-driven tools can support decision-making, but only when integrated effectively with human expertise. Management systems ensure compliance, while operators should develop and evolve their continuous improvement frameworks to enhance efficiency, operational resilience, and business competitiveness.

Prepare Your Team for 2026

Proud to be the first training provider for aviation professionals to embed practical, hands-on skills in every course—helping your team work smarter, safer, and more efficiently.