Getting Comfortable — Tell Us About Your Program

• Who are you and what role do you own for this STC effort? Options: VP Engineering, Head of Programs, Program Manager, Certifications Lead, Director of Maintenance, Other
• Which airframe(s) and fleet variant(s) are in scope for this program? Options: A320ceo, A320neo, B737NG, B737MAX, B777, ATR72, CRJ/SRJT, Regional turboprops, Other (please specify)
• Roughly how many shipsets or aircraft will the STC initially target? Options: Single shipset/aircraft, 2–10, 11–50, 51–200, 200+
• How would you describe your team’s prior experience getting STCs approved on this airframe? Options: Extensive (multiple STCs), Some (1–2 STCs), Minimal (involved but not led), None
• Tell us briefly: what prompted this program now? (fleet need, lease return, new part introduction, cost savings, other)

Are You Racing the Regulator?

• What makes you feel like regulatory timelines are the biggest threat to this program? Options: DER availability, Regulator backlog, Incomplete certification basis, Unclear compliance path, Third‑party dependencies, Other
• How often in recent programs did FAA/EASA back-and-forth materially change your schedule? Options: Almost always, Often, Occasionally, Rarely, Never
• Give one concrete example of a regulatory delay you experienced and how it affected cost, timeline, or operational readiness.
• When timelines slipped, what was the typical root cause (technical rework, missing data, DER availability, regulator interpretation, other)? Options: Technical rework, Missing data/evidence, DER/resource shortage, Regulator interpretation, Supply chain/tooling, Other
• How would an ideal regulator interaction look for you—predictable meetings, single point of contact, parallel review, or something else? Options: Predictable schedule, Single POC at regulator, Parallel review with staged deliverables, On-site joint inspections, Regular technical pre-briefs, Other

Who's Holding the Key?

• Who inside your organization absolutely must sign off before we submit anything to the regulator? Options: Head of Engineering, Certifications/Regulatory, VP Operations/MRO, Legal/IP, Finance/Procurement, Maintenance Director, Other
• Which external relationships or contacts do you already have with FAA/EASA, DERs, or designated organizations, and how active are they? Options: Active FAA contact, Active EASA contact, On-call DERs, Previous DOA engagement, No active contacts, Other
• Describe how decisions are made across engineering, program management, and legal—who carries final authority, and how long does that typically take?
• How do you prefer to work with external engineering partners: integrated teams on-site, phased handoffs, or a fully outsourced certification package? Options: Integrated on-site, Phased handoffs, Fully outsourced, Hybrid
• Which stakeholder’s objection in past programs has most commonly derailed approvals—and why?

Where Have We Already Tried to Fix This?

• What attempts—internal or with other vendors—have you made to get this STC or similar approved, and what was the outcome?
• If a prior submission failed or required redesign, what specifically triggered the failure: analysis gaps, test shortfalls, drawing quality, or regulator interpretation? Options: Analysis gaps, Flight test shortfalls, Conformity/installation issues, Drawing/documentation errors, Regulator interpretation, Other
• How long did the recovery from that setback take, and what was the biggest pain during recovery? Options: <1 month, 1–3 months, 3–6 months, 6–12 months, >12 months
• Who did you involve internally to troubleshoot the failure—and who would you have wanted involved but didn’t have access to?
• What one thing, if done differently at the outset, would have avoided that setback?

What Would Success Actually Change?

• If this STC went through exactly as you need, what operational or commercial metric improves most (time to service, cost per shipset, lease return readiness, dispatch reliability)? Options: Time to service, Cost per shipset, Lease return compliance, Dispatch reliability, Resale value, Other
• What are the non-negotiable acceptance criteria you’ll use to say “this is done” (e.g., FAA/EASA issuance, flight test envelope clearance, zero open conformity findings)?
• How will you measure success internally—who tracks KPIs and what cadence matters (weekly, milestone-based, monthly)? Options: Weekly, Milestone-based, Monthly, Quarterly, Ad hoc
• Beyond the certificate, what deliverables must be in place to make the program truly successful (ICAs, installation drawings, training, spares support)? Options: Instructions for Continued Airworthiness, Installation drawings, Maintenance/repair procedures, Training materials, Spares/repair parts plan, Other
• How important is time-to-market versus minimizing regulatory risk—which would you prioritize if a tradeoff is required? Options: Prioritize speed, Prioritize minimizing risk, Balance equally, Depends on program

What Could Go Wrong—and How Much Can You Live With?

• If we had to be blunt: what single failure mode would cause you to cancel or pause this program?
• Which of these risks concerns you most right now? Options: DER/resource shortages, Regulatory reinterpretation, Design rework after tests, Supply/tooling delays, IP or legal disputes, Other
• What contingency playbooks do you already have—alternate DERs, parallel certification paths, or interim operational mitigations? Options: Alternate DERs, Parallel certification, Interim operational fixes, Supplier redundancies, None
• How much schedule buffer do you realistically have before business impact becomes unacceptable? Options: None (must meet date), 1–2 weeks, 1 month, 2–3 months, 3+ months
• If a regulator raised an unexpected interpretation during flight test, how willing are you to accept a staged approval vs. a single final STC? Options: Prefer single final STC, Open to staged approvals, Depends on scope, Unsure

How Do We Work Together?

• What contracting model would make your procurement and legal teams comfortable (time & materials, fixed price milestones, success fee, retainer + milestone)? Options: Time & materials, Fixed price by milestone, Success fee, Retainer + milestone, Other
• How do you expect IP and design rights to be handled for modifications—do you require exclusive ownership, shared rights, or license-back arrangements? Options: Exclusive to customer, Shared ownership, License to customer, Host retains design data, Undecided
• Which milestone cadence works best for you to approve technical work (weekly stand-ups, bi-weekly reviews, milestone gates, monthly steering)? Options: Weekly stand-ups, Bi-weekly reviews, Milestone gates, Monthly steering, Ad hoc
• What evidence format does your team prefer for regulator submissions—single consolidated package, staged deliverables, or modular submissions per discipline? Options: Consolidated package, Staged deliverables, Modular by discipline, Hybrid
• Are there procurement or invoicing constraints we should know about (PO timelines, release-of-funds milestones, supplier pre-qualification)?

Ready To Move Forward?

• If we provided a proposed path that reduced regulator back-and-forth by X%, what would convince you to proceed with us?
• What is your decision timeline for selecting an STC engineering partner? Options: Immediately, Within 2 weeks, Within 1 month, 2–3 months, More than 3 months
• What documents or data can you share right now to accelerate a proposal (as‑flown configuration, maintenance manuals, previous STC packages, loads data)? Options: As‑flown configuration, Maintenance manuals, Previous STC packages, Loads/analysis data, None available
• Who should be on the kickoff call from your side and what role will each person play?
• What would make a first 30‑60 day plan feel like progress to you (deliverables, regulator pre-brief, flight test plan, DER assignment)? Options: Regulator pre-brief, Assigned DER, Draft certification basis, Flight test plan, Deliverable schedule

• Current State & Consequence Intake
• Solution Experience — Mapping STC to Your Airframe
• Risk & Parallel-Certification Workshop
• Regulatory Engagement & Evidence Path
• Decision Alignment & Next-Phase Commitment

• Seller to produce a regulator evidence checklist mapped to acceptance criteria and share within 3 business days.
• Identify any gaps in proof or additional data required before formal scope definition.
• Confirm decision gateway criteria to move into Solution Scope stage.
• Seller to produce a tailored mapping matrix (deliverable → proof → customer pain eliminated) and share within 48 hours.
• Customer to validate each mapping row and annotate any missing proof or concerns.
• Schedule targeted technical follow-ups for any unresolved proof gaps (list owners and dates).
• Risk Taxonomy & Parallel-Track Principles
• Produce a prioritized risk register with quantified impact and assigned owners.
• Agree a parallel-certification sequencing plan that reduces schedule risk and identifies gating criteria.
• Assign mitigation owners and contingency triggers for top risks.
• Seller to deliver the prioritized risk register and a parallel-cert Gantt with critical-path callouts.
• Customer to confirm DER availability windows and any internal resource constraints affecting parallel work.
• Jointly set a target for schedule reduction and baseline the critical-path milestones for the Solution Scope phase.
• Regulator Context & Historical Inputs
• Agree the certification basis and explicit acceptance criteria for regulator review.
• Produce an evidence mapping that minimizes regulator re-queries and supports parallel-cert execution.
• Confirm DER roles, inspection windows, and named regulator contacts or escalation owners.
• Introductions & Objectives
• Customer to provide any regulator point-of-contact names and past submission notes.
• Agree and schedule a pre-submission regulator briefing session once the evidence bundle is assembled.
• Recap Validated Current & Future State
• Achieve an explicit go/no-go decision or a clear list of conditions required to proceed to Solution Scope.
• Finalize the scope, deliverables, acceptance criteria, and milestone plan to be used for SOW drafting.
• Assign owners and timelines for SOW completion, commercial review, and regulator pre-brief.
• Seller to draft the SOW heads-of-terms and preliminary milestone schedule and circulate for customer review within 5 business days.
• Customer to complete commercial approval and confirm DER/resource commitments or surface limiting conditions.
• Schedule the Solution Scope kick-off meeting once SOW conditions are accepted.
• Produce a single, agreed one-sentence current-state description that the entire team can reference.
• Quantify the primary consequences (time, cost, regulatory risk) tied to the current state.
• Inventory stakeholders, constraints, and parallel certification programs that will affect sequencing.
• Agree on a complete pre-work and evidence list for the upcoming Solution Experience.
• Customer to deliver current configuration summary, recent conformity reports, and any FAA/EASA correspondence within 3 business days.
• Seller to draft the one-sentence current-state and consequence summary and circulate for confirmation.
• Jointly compile a data checklist and assign owners for missing items before the Solution Experience meeting.
• Recap: Current State & Consequence (one-slide)
• Obtain explicit customer validation that the proposed STC program artifacts will produce the defined future-state outcomes.
• Agree a mapping matrix linking each deliverable to the customer's failure modes and consequences.
• Current State Statement (forced)
• Identify Airframe-Specific Risks
• Define Future State (forced)
• Confirm Scope, Deliverables & Acceptance Criteria
• Confirm Certification Basis & Acceptance Criteria
• Evidence Mapping: Item → Regulator Question
• STC Program Architecture (Diagnosis → Proof → Validation)
• Quantify Impact & Likelihood
• Milestone Schedule & Decision Gates
• Consequence Quantification
• Conformity Inspection & DER Plan
• Design Parallel-Cert Sequence & Critical Path
• Resource & Commercial Readiness Check
• Airframe-Specific Proof Cases
• Stakeholders, Constraints & Parallel Programs
• Data & Evidence Checklist
• Tiebacks: How Each Proof Eliminates Your Pain
• Final Validation & Go/No-Go Decision
• Mitigations, Contingencies & Ownership
• Regulator Engagement & Escalation Plan
• Assign Immediate Owners & Next Actions
• Validation & Schedule Implications
• Confirm Next Steps / Pre-work

• Deliver FAA/EASA STC Application Package
• Deliver Structural Stress Report and Calculations
• Provide Detailed Installation Drawings and Wiring Diagrams
• Create Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA) Package
• Perform Conformity Inspection and Issue Conformity Report
• Execute Flight Test Campaign and Publish Flight Test Report
• Conduct Systems Functional Testing and Verification Report
• Obtain DER Signatures and Issue Form 8110-3 Documentation
• Produce Materials List and Installation Kit (BOM & Packing)
• Deliver Environmental and EMI/EMC Test Reports
• Produce Certification Compliance Matrix with Citations
• Provide Supplier and Production Conformity Documentation
• Deliver Maintenance and Installer Training Course Materials

Deliver FAA/EASA STC Application Package

• Which authority(ies) will receive the STC application? Options: FAA, EASA, Both, Other
• What is the exact aircraft model/series and serial number(s) to be covered?
• What certification basis do you expect to use (e.g., FAR/JAR/CS part and amendments)? Options: Part 23/CS-23, Part 25/CS-25, Part 27/CS-27, Part 29/CS-29, Other / hybrid basis
• Do you require the application to include proposed special conditions or equivalent level of safety arguments? Options: Yes, No, Maybe — need review
• Who will be the applicant of record and primary regulatory POC for submissions? Options: Customer (applicant), Seller / engineering firm, Joint applicant, TBD
• What is your target regulatory submission date and any hard milestone constraints (e.g., lease return deadline)?

Deliver Structural Stress Report and Calculations

• Which structural design load cases and limit conditions must be evaluated? Options: Limit flight envelope, Fatigue/damage tolerance, Ground loads (taxi/handling), Special mission loads, Other
• Do you have existing structural data (drawings, FEM models, previous stress reports) available to reuse? Options: Yes — full set, Partial data available, No — need from scratch
• Are dynamic/transfer load analyses required (e.g., flutter, gust, modal)? Options: Yes, No, Undetermined — needs assessment
• What level of analysis deliverable do you require: summary report, full calculations, or DER-signed critical pages? Options: Summary report, Full calculation package, DER-signed certification pages, All of the above
• Will any structural hardware be produced (patches, doublers, fittings) that require detail design validation? Options: Yes, No
• What acceptance criteria or allowable margins should be applied (e.g., 1.4 limit load factor margin)?

Provide Detailed Installation Drawings and Wiring Diagrams

• Does the modification include mechanical installations, electrical/avionics, or both? Options: Mechanical only, Electrical/avionics only, Both
• What is the expected deliverable fidelity: installation sketches, fully-dimensioned drawings, or shop-ready drawings? Options: Sketches / concept drawings, Fully-dimensioned drawings, Shop-ready fabrication drawings
• Are wiring harnesses new, reused, or modifications of existing harnesses? Options: New harnesses, Modified existing, No harnesses
• Do drawings need to comply with a specific customer drawing standard or supplier specification? Options: Customer standard (provide), Our standard, Industry standard (ASME/AS9100), No specific standard
• Will you require 3D models or clearance checks against the as-fitted aircraft model? Options: Yes — 3D and clearance, No — 2D sufficient, Maybe — depends on area
• Who will own & sign off final drawings (customer, seller, or supplier)? Options: Customer, Seller/engineering firm, Supplier, Joint sign-off

Create Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA) Package

• Which ICA elements are required: maintenance manual changes, service bulletin, inspection intervals, repair procedures, or all? Options: Maintenance manual changes, Service bulletin, Inspection intervals, Repair procedures, All
• Do you require customer-specific formatting for ICA (e.g., existing AMM/IPC cross-references)? Options: Yes — provide standard, No — use our template, No preference
• Will the ICA include new consumables, inspections, or life-limited parts requiring tracking? Options: Yes — consumables/inspections, Yes — life-limited parts, No
• Should ICAs include step-by-step illustrated procedures or high-level guidance? Options: Illustrated step-by-step, High-level guidance, Both
• Who will be responsible for incorporating ICA into the operator's continual airworthiness program? Options: Customer maintenance team, Seller to support integration, Third-party support
• Are there specific acceptance tests or pass/fail criteria that ICA procedures must reference? Options: Yes — provide criteria, No — standard acceptance, TBD

Perform Conformity Inspection and Issue Conformity Report

• Will conformity inspections occur at the customer's facility, our facility, or a third-party hangar? Options: Customer facility, Seller facility, Third-party hangar, Multiple locations
• How many aircraft or units require conformity inspections? Options: 1, 2-5, 6-20, 20+
• What level of report detail is required: checklist-only, photographic evidence, or full non-conformance documentation? Options: Checklist-only, Checklist + photos, Full non-conformance documentation
• Do inspections need to be performed by a DER/authorized inspector or can company inspectors perform initial checks? Options: DER/authorized inspector, Company inspector with DER oversight, Company inspector only
• Are there time windows or AOG constraints for inspections that affect scheduling? Options: Yes — constrained windows, No — flexible
• Should the conformity report include signoffs for continued airworthiness items and parts traceability? Options: Yes — include signoffs and traceability, No — basic conformity only

Execute Flight Test Campaign and Publish Flight Test Report

• What flight test points or maneuvers are required (e.g., performance, handling qualities, systems checks)? Options: Performance, Handling qualities, Systems verification, EMI/EMC flight checks, Other
• How many flight hours or sorties do you estimate will be needed for validation? Options: <2 hours / 1 sortie, 2–8 hours / 2–4 sorties, 8+ hours / multiple sorties
• Will a flight test instrumentation package be required and who will supply it? Options: Seller supplies instrumentation, Customer supplies instrumentation, Third-party supplier, No instrumentation needed
• Do you require a witnessed flight-test program with regulator or customer representatives on board? Options: Yes — regulator present, Yes — customer witness, No
• What form of flight test report is expected: summarized report, full raw data annex, or both? Options: Summary report, Full report + raw data annex, Both
• Are there specific environmental or seasonal constraints for flight testing (e.g., icing, high-altitude ops)? Options: Yes — specify, No

Conduct Systems Functional Testing and Verification Report

• Which systems require functional verification (e.g., electrical, avionics, hydraulic, environmental)? Options: Electrical, Avionics, Hydraulic, Environmental, Other
• Do you require hardware-in-the-loop or bench testing before aircraft-level verification? Options: Yes — HIL/bench required, No — aircraft-only testing, Maybe — dependent on assessment
• Should test procedures include pass/fail criteria, test scripts, and acceptance thresholds? Options: Yes — full scripted procedures, No — high-level verification only
• Will system-level testing require supplier support for LRU functional checks? Options: Yes — supplier on-site, Supplier remote support, No supplier support needed
• Do you require formal traceability between requirements, tests, and results (e.g., RTM)? Options: Yes — full traceability, No — summary verification
• What format do you want the verification report in (PDF, test database export, or customer-specific format)? Options: PDF report, Test database export (CSV/XML), Customer-specific template

Obtain DER Signatures and Issue Form 8110-3 Documentation

• Is DER signoff required for structural, systems, or both certification artifacts? Options: Structural only, Systems only, Both
• Do you already have a preferred DER or should we propose one from our network? Options: Customer-provided DER, Seller to propose DER, We need assistance selecting DER
• Are there DER scheduling constraints or blackout dates that could affect signoff timing? Options: Yes — specify dates, No constraints
• Do you require hard-copy notarized forms or are electronic-signed 8110-3 forms acceptable? Options: Electronic signatures acceptable, Hard-copy notarized required, Both
• Should DER documentation include annotated engineering pages and calculation cross-references? Options: Yes — include annotations, No — standard 8110-3
• Who will manage DER submission and retention of certification records? Options: Seller, Customer, Joint management

Produce Materials List and Installation Kit (BOM & Packing)

• Do you require a complete parts BOM including PN, vendor, and shelf life details? Options: Yes — full BOM, Basic parts list only, No BOM required
• Will the installation kit be kitted and packed by the seller or by a third-party supplier? Options: Seller kitting, Third-party kitting, Customer kitting
• Are there plating, material, or sourcing restrictions (e.g., OEM-only parts, export controls)? Options: Yes — restrictions apply, No restrictions
• Do you need spares and consumables included in the kit and BOM quantities defined? Options: Yes — include spares/consumables, No — installation only
• Should packing include special handling or preservation instructions (e.g., corrosion protection)? Options: Yes — include preservation, No special handling
• Do you require serialized part tracking and traceability documentation for the BOM? Options: Yes — serialized tracking, No — batch-level traceability

Deliver Environmental and EMI/EMC Test Reports

• Which environmental tests are required: vibration, thermal, humidity, salt fog, or other? Options: Vibration, Thermal, Humidity, Salt fog, Other
• Is EMI/EMC testing required to a specific standard (DO-160 sections, RTCA, MIL-STD)? Options: DO-160 (specify section), RTCA, Customer-specific standard, No standard specified
• Do you already have lab test reservations or should we coordinate test lab scheduling? Options: Customer has reservations, Seller to coordinate, TBD — need proposal
• Are instrumented test data and raw measurement files required with the report? Options: Yes — include raw data, Summary report only
• Do the installed LRUs require radiated emissions testing in installed configuration or bench-level only? Options: Installed configuration, Bench-level only, Both
• Are there environmental qualification pass/fail criteria or margins that must be demonstrated? Options: Yes — provide criteria, No — standard pass/fail

• Statement of Work (SOW)
• Master Services Agreement (MSA)
• Commercial Terms & Payment Schedule
• Milestones & Acceptance Criteria Schedule
• Regulatory Engagement Plan
• Intellectual Property & Data Rights Agreement
• DER & Key Resource Commitment
• Change Order & Scope Control
• Liability, Indemnity & Warranties
• Export Control & Regulatory Compliance
• Insurance & Performance Assurance
• Confidentiality & Publicity Agreement
• Regulatory Submission Sign-off & Submission Authority
• Termination, Suspension & Dispute Resolution

• STC Issuance Confirmation & Regulatory Close
• Deliverables Handover & Acceptance
• Fleet Transition & Maintenance Handover
• Lessons Learned & Continuous Improvement Workshop
• Issues & Enhancements Backlog Prioritization & Roadmap

• Schedule recurring backlog governance meetings (monthly/quarterly) and invite cross-functional stakeholders.
• Schedule first in-service review 30 days after initial rollout to capture early issues.
• Program Timeline Recap vs Plan
• Capture a consolidated lessons-learned record with clear, actionable items.
• Identify root causes for the top program issues and assign owners for corrective actions.
• Agree measurable improvements and a timeline to validate changes in future programs.
• Set a follow-up cadence to review progress on improvement actions.
• Produce a formal lessons-learned report and circulate to all stakeholders.
• Create and assign corrective action tickets with owners, due dates, and success metrics.
• Update internal process documents (certification playbook, inspection scheduling) per agreed improvements.
• Schedule a 90-day retrospective to review the status of improvement actions and metrics.
• Share anonymized regulator feedback (if allowable) to inform future regulatory interactions.
• Current Open Issues Review
• Create a single prioritized backlog for defects, warranty items, and enhancements.
• Assign owners, SLAs, and target delivery windows for each high-priority item.
• Agree on a governance cadence for backlog reviews and escalation procedures.
• Ensure regulatory-impact items are identified and have mitigation plans.
• Publish the prioritized backlog with owners, priority scores, and target dates to the shared project board.
• Create change requests for enhancement items that require engineering work and schedule scoping sessions.
• Define and publish SLAs for triage, patch delivery, and critical issue response.
• Assign regulatory review owners for items with potential certification implications.
• Introductions & Objectives
• Confirm and record the STC identification, effective date, and formal scope of approval.
• Identify and document any regulator-imposed post-issuance conditions and owners for each.
• Agree commercial/contractual close triggers and timing for final invoice and contractual acceptance.
• Assign immediate communications actions to notify key stakeholders and regulators.
• Upload signed STC and regulator correspondence to the project repository and notify stakeholders.
• Document all post-issuance conditions with owners, due dates, and acceptance criteria.
• Trigger final commercial close actions (submit final invoice upon formal customer acceptance).
• Notify maintenance, DER, and regulatory liaisons of issuance and any immediate obligations.
• Create a 30/60/90-day post-issuance check schedule to monitor open items.
• Deliverable Inventory Walkthrough
• Customer formally accepts the delivered certification package or documents required remediation items.
• Validate as-built configuration matches the regulator-approved package and the acceptance checklist.
• Establish where artifacts are stored and who has edit/view rights going forward.
• Define remediation owners and timelines for any deficiencies identified during acceptance.
• Deliver the final master package (electronic and any physical media) to the customer's document control system.
• Record formal acceptance signature or produce a remediation plan with owners and due dates.
• Set up customer access permissions and revision control processes for all deliverables.
• If discrepancies exist, create non-conformance records and schedule corrective actions.
• Confirm retention and archive schedule for certification artifacts per contract and regulatory requirements.
• ICA & Maintenance Tasks Overview
• Ensure maintenance teams understand ICA obligations and inspection intervals.
• Agree a training plan and schedule for technicians and any affected flight crew.
• Establish tooling/spares provisioning plan and initial order owners.
• Finalize a phased fleet rollout plan with monitoring checkpoints and escalation paths.
• Deliver training materials, quick-reference guides, and schedule on-site/virtual training sessions.
• Provide spare parts list and recommended stocking levels; assign procurement owner and target dates.
• Update Maintenance Control Manual/Task Cards and distribute to affected facilities.
• Establish single point of contact for fleet issues and define initial monitoring KPIs.
• Acceptance Criteria Validation
• Certificate Confirmation
• Enhancement Requests & Change Proposals
• What Went Well / What Didn't (Round-Robin)
• Training Plan for Technicians & Flight Crew
• Tooling, Spares, and Consumables Logistics
• Conformity & Findings Closeout
• Root Cause Analysis (Top 3 Issues)
• Prioritization & Scoring Exercise
• Regulatory Correspondence Review