Question about the FAA's new rule on using aftermarket parts from non-OEM suppliers

I was reading the latest FAA Advisory Circular 20-142 about parts suppliers, and it got me thinking about a big debate. On one side, some mechanics at my local MRO in Phoenix say using approved aftermarket parts from places like Aircraft Spruce saves money without cutting corners. On the other side, a lead inspector I know swears only OEM parts from the original manufacturer guarantee true airworthiness. Where do you all stand on this for routine maintenance, like replacing a Cessna 172's nose wheel assembly?

3 comments

3 Comments

sage522mo ago

My buddy's PMA alternator failed after three flights.

walker.rowan3d ago

A PMA alternator failing after three flights... that's honestly hard to get my head around. You'd think with all the testing those parts go through before they get approved, something that basic wouldn't crap out that fast. Makes me wonder if that buddy got a bad batch or if the install was sloppy.

gibson.sean2mo ago

Honestly, I was totally on the OEM-only side for years. What changed my mind was seeing the paperwork trail for a PMA part from a good supplier. The FAA doesn't just hand out those approvals, the part has to prove it meets the exact same type design. So now I'm convinced a proper PMA part is just as airworthy. It really comes down to the shop's paperwork and making sure the part has that legit approval.