Methodology
Six phases, applied the same way every time.
The framework exists so that an engagement produces evidence rather than an opinion. Each phase has a defined input, a defined output, and a point at which the work can be compared against what was expected.
- 01
Aircraft & Fleet Assessment
Identify the applicable aircraft configuration, maintenance history, recurring discrepancies, system-specific issues, operational constraints and relevant manufacturer and FAA requirements. Baseline maintenance-performance indicators are established before anything is changed.
- 02
Engineering Diagnostic Review
Review maintenance history, recurring failures, and hydraulic, fuel, structural, landing-gear and component issues alongside available condition-monitoring information, to find opportunities for better root-cause analysis, earlier recognition of recurring conditions, and more consistent maintenance decisions.
- 03
Maintenance Optimization Protocol
Develop project-specific preventive and corrective recommendations, inspection priorities, component-replacement criteria, documentation procedures, decision thresholds, escalation criteria, defined responsibilities and quality-control checkpoints.
- 04
Condition Monitoring & Predictive Diagnostics
Apply existing maintenance information and commercially available sensing or analytical tools where technically appropriate, and use the engagement to build structured condition-monitoring data sets for later evaluation.
- 05
Implementation & Performance Monitoring
Authorized personnel and facilities implement the applicable maintenance process. Actual project outcomes are measured against the previously established baseline and the project-specific target values.
- 06
Post-Implementation Review & Standardization
Compare expected against actual results, document technical lessons, identify deviations, revise procedures where warranted, and convert validated practices into reusable workflows, checklists, decision protocols, training modules and implementation materials.
No project-specific recommendation supersedes an applicable FAA requirement, Airworthiness Directive, manufacturer limitation or certificate-holder procedure.
Measurement
What gets measured, and what does not get claimed.
Four categories are kept distinct: the baseline established before intervention, the target set for the engagement, the result actually measured, and any longer-term projection that remains contingent on validation.
GB Aerotech does not assume a fixed percentage reduction in cost, downtime, labor hours or component failures before pilot evidence exists. The theory of change is that disciplined baseline measurement, engineering review, standardized intervention and post-implementation measurement turn individual engagements into reusable organizational knowledge.
Maintenance performance
- Unscheduled maintenance events and repeat discrepancies
- Maintenance turnaround time
- Aircraft downtime and availability
- Recurrence of previously identified problems
- Maintenance labor hours for selected tasks
- Component replacement and rework frequency
Quality and diagnostics
- Diagnostic accuracy where objectively measurable
- Documentation and compliance quality
- Deviation between expected and actual outcomes
Workforce and replication
- Training completion rates
- Pre- and post-training competency scores
- Technician progression toward applicable certification pathways
- Subsequent adoption or replication of standardized protocols
How We Work
How an engagement works.
Five steps from the first call to a procedure your team keeps. Nothing starts without an agreed baseline, and nothing finishes without a written result.
- 01
Technical call
Tell us the aircraft, the system and what keeps coming back. No sales deck. A working conversation with the engineer who will scope the job.
- 02
Scoped assessment
We review the configuration, maintenance history and recurring discrepancies, then tell you honestly whether the work can produce measurable evidence. If it cannot, we say so.
- 03
Baseline and protocol
We document the starting indicators and agree a written protocol: inspection priorities, component-replacement criteria, decision thresholds, responsibilities and quality-control checkpoints.
- 04
Implementation
Regulated work is carried out by appropriately certificated personnel and facilities. We coordinate it, review the technical outcome and stay accountable for the protocol.
- 05
Measured result and handover
You receive the outcome compared against the baseline, the technical lessons, and the written procedure your team keeps and reuses on the next aircraft.
Before an Engagement
Maintenance-optimization readiness check.
A pilot engagement only produces usable evidence if certain things exist at the start. These are the six we look for in a first conversation.
Aircraft and configuration data
Applicable A320 or A330 configuration, effectivity and current operating constraints.
Maintenance history
Accessible records covering the systems in scope, far enough back to show patterns.
A recurring problem worth solving
Repeat discrepancies, a system that keeps coming back, or a task whose labor hours are hard to predict.
Measurable baseline indicators
Turnaround time, downtime, labor hours or repeat-discrepancy counts that can be established before anything changes.
An authorized implementation path
The certificated personnel, repair station or certificate-holder procedures through which regulated work will be performed.
A reason to standardize
More than one aircraft, more than one station, or a team that would use the resulting protocol after the engagement ends.
Bring us a recurring problem.
If an A320 or A330 system keeps coming back, that is the engagement worth scoping first.