Good morning, and welcome to IATA's first World Maintenance and Engineering Symposium in Madrid.
Let me start with the reality facing airlines.
Aircraft are not being delivered on schedule, engines are not staying on wing as long as expected, spare parts are hard to secure, repair turnaround times have skyrocketed, and maintenance capacity is constrained.
The cost to airlines was estimated to exceed $11 billion in 2025 alone.
That includes:
- $4.2 billion in delayed fuel savings because airlines are being forced to operate older, less efficient aircraft.
- $3.1 billion in additional maintenance costs because older aircraft require more work to keep them flying.
- $2.6 billion in excess engine leasing costs because engines are spending longer in maintenance
- And $1.4 billion in additional spares inventory because airlines are stockpiling parts to protect themselves against disruptions.
That's money that should have been available for networks, people, decarbonization and other important projects.
IATA's new study with Emerton on single-aisle engine MRO illustrates the most acute example.
In March 2025, 648 Pratt & Whitney GTF-powered aircraft were grounded while awaiting engine shop visits, spare engines or parts. That's 28% of the GTF-powered fleet.
The bigger challenge is what comes next. As latest-generation single-aisle fleets expand, annual shop visits will increase dramatically
- For CFM LEAP engines, from 600-800 in 2025 to over 5,000 by 2040, and
- For Pratt & Whitney GTF engines, from 1,000 to 2,000 over the same period.
There is no excuse not to be prepared for this—we know it's coming.
This is just one illustration of a much wider supply chain challenge. The aircraft order backlog has passed 18,000, delivery shortfalls exceed 5,000 aircraft, and the average fleet age is now above 15 years.
Airlines will need to improve efficiency, reliability, and environmental performance with fleets that are less capable than what they have planned. The impact on costs, capacity, resilience, and sustainability is real and will impact both passengers and shippers.
The causes include production bottlenecks, engine durability issues, certification delays, raw material shortages, tight labor markets, geopolitical disruption, and commercial models that give airlines too little flexibility when things go wrong.
There is no single solution. But there are four priorities that can make a real difference.
- First, enhance supply chain visibility.
- Second, open up the aftermarket.
- Third, unlock the value of data, digitalization and AI.
- And fourth, build human capacity.
Enhance Supply Chain Visibility
The first priority is visibility. Airlines can't run global networks on guesswork, but too often that is what they are being asked to do.
Airlines may know if a delivery has slipped, an engine is unavailable or a part is unserviceable but not have a reliable timeline for resolution or a clear view of where the bottleneck sits.
We all know that a problem deep in the supply chain—a chip, part, certification delay—can stop delivery. So, visibility matters. And too often the airline only knows what's happening when it's too late to do anything about it. That's not acceptable.
The ask is straightforward. Manufacturers across the supply chain — from major aircraft and engine manufacturers to the specialist companies supplying critical components — must provide airlines with clearer, earlier and more reliable information on delivery delays, repair turnaround times, parts availability and known bottlenecks. Airlines need facts they can plan around, not rolling uncertainty.
Open Up the Aftermarket
The second priority is opening up the aftermarket. Airlines need more choice, more competition and more access.
In too many areas, airlines have limited alternatives. They may need an engine part, a repair or an approved alternative solution, but access can be restricted by control over repair instructions, tooling, approved repair networks, or spares distribution.
Too often, commercial licensing practices make it harder for airlines to use safe, certified alternatives. The result is fewer choices, less competition, longer waiting times, and higher costs.
Safety must always come first. Airworthiness is defined by regulation, not by the commercial model of the supplier. Any part, repair or maintenance process must be approved, traceable, and compliant. But safety cannot be used as a blanket justification to lock up the aftermarket.
A more open aftermarket for approved parts, used serviceable material, alternative repairs and competitive MRO services would allow airlines to source safe and certified solutions without unnecessary restrictions.
This is not about attacking OEMs; it is about creating more choice, competition and resilience.
IATA's agreement with CFM is a good example of progress and collaboration. It supports greater competition in engine maintenance by reinforcing access to third-party MRO services, alternative parts and approved repairs. It shows that a more competitive aftermarket can be consistent with safety, reliability and active OEM participation.
Others should follow CFM's lead—and not just engine OEMs. The same principles apply equally to airframe equipment and other critical aircraft systems.
Unlock the Value of Data, Digitalization, and AI
The third priority is unlocking the power of data, digitalization and AI.
The aviation supply chain is not only suffering from a shortage of physical assets. It is also suffering from a shortage of connected, trusted, and usable data when it comes to the supply chain.
Data is fragmented, systems don't communicate, decisions are made with incomplete information, and valuable time is lost moving information manually between airlines, MROs, OEMs, suppliers, and service providers.
Take a simple example: an aircraft has a component issue. The airline needs to know whether the part can be repaired, replaced, or deferred; whether material is available; whether the MRO has capacity; and whether the cost should sit with the airline or be recovered under a warranty or product support agreement.
There is no single source for this critical information. Finding the answers is slow and takes time—time that is precious when you have an aircraft on the ground and passengers waiting.
Better data and digital tools can change this.
A well-integrated Maintenance Information System (MIS) can show what is installed on the aircraft, what has failed, what inventory is available, what demand is coming and what procurement action is needed.
External market intelligence can then show whether material is available elsewhere, how scarce it is, what a reasonable price looks like and whether there are alternative sourcing options.
AI can support that process by identifying patterns, predicting demand, flagging shortages, suggesting repair-or-replace options and reducing manual work.
As we all know, any system, indeed even AI, is only as good as the data behind it.
If the part number is wrong, or interchangeable parts are not properly recognized, the recommendation will be wrong. If inventory data is incomplete, the forecast will be weak. If repair data is fragmented, the decision will be slower. And if warranty evidence is poor, the airline may not recover what it is owed.
So the first step is not magic. It is data quality, standardization, and integration.
Industry cooperation also has an important role to play. IATA's cooperation with the International Airlines Technical Pool (IATP) is a practical example. It combines IATP's long-standing experience in technical materials pooling with IATA's technical expertise and data capabilities to help airlines improve access to serviceable aircraft materials and strengthen maintenance resilience.
Pooling helps airlines share critical technical resources. Digital visibility helps airlines identify what parts are available and where. Together, they can help airlines access the parts and support they need when supply chain disruption threatens operations.
To support this, IATA will make the core features of MRO SmartHub available at no cost for airlines through a data participation program. These tools will help airlines identify available used serviceable material, request quotes from suppliers more efficiently, and assess approved alternative parts, including PMA parts, that can reduce cost and improve resilience.
Airlines also need more approved repair solutions to reduce unnecessary scrapping, shorten lead times and keep serviceable material in circulation.
The point is practical: a part sitting unused in one location may be the part that keeps an aircraft flying somewhere else. The challenge is to identify it, validate it and move it faster.
Data also matters for accountability.
OEM product support frameworks must work in practice, not just in contract wording. If airlines are entitled to warranty support or compensation, they need evidence to claim it. That means connecting maintenance events, component performance, repair history and contractual terms.
This is also about fairness. Airlines should be able to exercise the rights they have under OEM product support agreements, including the ability to delegate those rights to third-party MROs of their choice, where such arrangements already exist.
Build Human Capacity
The fourth priority is people. We need mechanics, engineers, planners, reliability specialists, procurement experts, instructors and digital talent. And we do not have enough of them.
Boeing forecasts that the industry will need 710,000 new maintenance technicians over the next 20 years. That is a huge number. And the challenge is not only recruitment. It is training, licensing, retention and global recognition of skills.
For a licensed mechanic, the time from recruitment to full deployment can take years. And qualifications or experience are not always easily recognized across borders.
The pressure on maintenance teams is only increasing. Older aircraft are staying longer in service. Engine shop visits are rising. Fleets are more complex. Digital systems demand new skills. And supply chain disruption means teams are constantly planning around parts shortages and shifting timelines.
We need to be able to train more people and faster to make better use of their skills across jurisdictions. That means expanding training capacity and removing unnecessary qualification bottlenecks.
All this will help inspire the next generation with maintenance and engineering careers built on safety, technology, problem-solving and global impact. Importantly, we must recruit from the widest possible talent pool. Breaking down barriers—be they by gender or other underrepresented community or group—are hard operational constraints which we must overcome by making M&E careers more visible.
Aircraft Mandates
There is one further pressure point that deserves attention: mandates requiring new aircraft equipment or avionics upgrades.
These mandates are often safety-driven, and IATA supports strong global safety standards. But when compliance depends on certified equipment, installation capacity and supply chain readiness, timelines must reflect reality.
A mandate may require aircraft to be fitted with new avionics or safety equipment by a certain date. But airlines cannot comply by intention alone. The equipment must be certified, enough units must be available, installation capacity must exist, states must implement the requirement consistently, and the supply chain must be able to deliver at global scale.
If any of those elements fail, the airline still carries the final compliance responsibility.
We have seen challenges with requirements linked to GADSS, including autonomous distress tracking, as well as ROAAS and ADS-B implementation. Further pressure may come from potential radio altimeter upgrade requirements for aircraft operating in US airspace.
Airlines operating global networks need to know which states have adopted a requirement, when it applies, which aircraft are affected, and whether equipment and installation capacity are available.
The safety objective may be global, but the implementation burden becomes national, uneven and complex.
IATA has raised this issue with ICAO because global safety improvements need global coordination. States should set realistic applicability dates based on certification capacity, equipment availability, installation capacity and global supply chain conditions, with flexibility to adjust timelines when global disruptions make compliance impossible.
Retrofit programs should also be actively coordinated with aircraft manufacturers to manage supply chain capacity by fleet type.
This is not about delaying safety. It is about making safety deliverable.
Conclusion
The supply chain is under real pressure, but this is not a reason for pessimism. It is a reason for action.
The priorities are clear: better visibility, a more open aftermarket, smarter use of data and AI, stronger human capacity, and mandate timelines that reflect operational reality.
Airlines are doing their part. They are investing, managing disruption and serving growing demand. But they cannot solve this alone. OEMs, suppliers, MROs, lessors, regulators and airlines all need to work together.
We know the pressure points. We know where cooperation is needed. And we know what has to change.
I wish you a productive conference and look forward to the progress we can make together.
Thank you.
