Should charter buyers make aircraft age the leading factor in evaluating an aircraft?

Most mechanics will say that age is far less important than a well-maintained aircraft, as well as the hours and cycles (landings and takeoffs) on the plane. While that is true, it may be unrealistic that a charter buyer, including aircraft charter brokers, would have the technical expertise, and time, to review maintenance records and avionics packages for every aircraft they want to use. For the average charter buyer, this makes aircraft age a vital question.

Aircraft Age and Safety

Aircraft age has become a routine, checklist item for charter clients in their evaluation of private operators. The rule of thumb for most is to look for aircraft less than 20 years old, but some require aircraft 10-15 years old or newer. Beyond looks and new interiors, what is the justification for these arbitrary cutoffs in evaluating operator safety? The answer is complicated, but important for private aircraft buyers, and charter buyers to understand.

Most mechanics will say that age is far less important than a well-maintained aircraft, as well as the hours and cycles (landings and takeoffs) on the plane. While that is true, it may be unrealistic that a charter buyer, including aircraft charter brokers, would have the technical expertise, and time, to review maintenance records and avionics packages for every aircraft they want to use. For the average charter buyer, this makes aircraft age a vital question.

Structural Fatigue and Component Failure

Pressure changes, and temperature changes, contract and expand vital aircraft structures leading to metal fatigue, and part failure. Daily wear and tear degrades everything over time.

In 2011, a new FAA rule went into effect requiring airline manufacturers to establish a firm ‘useful life’ for airframes; operators looking to extend that useful life would need special maintenance programs to do so. In the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), the FAA cites that “[widespread fatigue damage (WFD)] appears to have played a role in several safety incidents involving large transport airplanes, although there has not been a catastrophic accident directly attributable to WFD”.

But what about private, passenger aircraft operations like Part 135 charter or fractional? These operations are largely excluded by this rulemaking as they only apply to large category transport aircraft. Many NTSB accident and incident reports cite fatigue cracking, and part failure due to wear and tear (and improper maintenance procedures), but business aircraft also don’t experience as many pressurization and depressurization events over their lifespan and aren’t as susceptible to these issues as busier airliners. The average airline can fly more than 3,000 hrs. per tail in a year, while the busiest fractional operators only average around 1,200 hrs. per tail, with most private aircraft flying a fraction of that.

Very old, or “used and abused” aircraft will have an increasing likelihood of fatigue cracking, but identifying at what age or cycle interval issues will appear is nearly impossible to predict.

System Degradation and Crew Alerts

As aircraft have evolved, the electrical and complex systems powering them has as well. Prior to a fatal crash in 1996 caused by a wiring failure that ignited vapors in a fuel tank, electrical systems were not a key focus of rulemakers. In 2007, a new Advisory Circular was released on the certification and ongoing inspection of Electrical Wiring Interconnection Systems (EWIS), again, for large transport category aircraft. From faulty repairs to leaks dripping on wires, to even rat infestations, damage to wiring systems in aircraft can have devastating impacts.

It’s difficult to see and fully inspect every wire and every tube running through aircraft, making detection systems for failures the ultimate defense against safety issues. Newer aircraft, or older aircraft with upgraded avionics systems, have better access to system data. Crew members can see issues in real-time on electrical, hydraulic, pneumatic, and other systems. Some systems, like Embraer’s AHEAD program, even live-stream maintenance data to mechanics on the ground while the aircraft is in flight. While in its infancy, predictive maintenance technology using live business aircraft data could identify part or system failures before they occur.

Newer, or upgraded, aircraft are safer because pilots have instant access to flight hazards as they occur.

Is Age The Determining Factor?

Age is much less important in the airline-world where there are more complex inspection programs and rules, so private fliers need to dig a little deeper. Age isn’t the only measure of how “safe” an aircraft is...but new airplanes have de facto the latest and greatest technology and engineering, making them potentially "safer" than those that may, or may not, have similar features. Without deep knowledge of avionics packages and components, design improvements and digging through maintenance records of each plane, it’s hard to truly assess the ‘safety’ of older business aircraft without significant expertise.

Jessie Naor is CEO of GrandView Aviation, a Part 135 charter operator. She currently serves on the executive committee of the Air Charter Safety Foundation and is vice chair of the National Air Transportation Association’s Part 135 committee. Jessie has participated in FAA rulemaking committees and has received the NBAA’s Top 40 Under 40 Award in 2020. She holds an associate’s degree in Air Traffic Control, CCBC Catonsville, a BA in aviation business administration, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, and an MBA in Management & Finance from The Johns Hopkins University - Carey Business School.