Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 0 Download : 0

Main Article Content

Abstract

The Minimum Equipment List (MEL) is an operator-specific document that establishes the conditions under which an aircraft may temporarily operate with specified instruments, equipment, or systems inoperative. Its implementation is intended to maintain an acceptable level of aviation safety while supporting operational continuity and effective aircraft maintenance planning. This study analyzes the role of MEL in improving aircraft operational safety and efficiency, its contribution to aircraft dispatch and maintenance decision-making, and the implementation challenges identified in aviation regulations and previous studies. A narrative literature review was conducted using international aviation regulations and peer-reviewed studies related to MEL, aircraft maintenance, continuing airworthiness, operational reliability, and aviation safety. The reviewed literature indicates that MEL provides a structured reference for evaluating technical defects, determining dispatch eligibility, applying maintenance and operational procedures, and controlling defect-rectification intervals. Proper implementation may reduce unnecessary aircraft grounding, delays, cancellations, aircraft substitutions, and unplanned maintenance. However, MEL effectiveness depends on regulatory compliance, personnel competence, accurate technical documentation, interdepartmental coordination, and continuous monitoring of deferred defects. MEL should therefore be understood as an integral component of continuing airworthiness, maintenance management, and aviation safety management.

Keywords

Minimum Equipment List aviation safety operational efficiency aircraft maintenance continuing airworthiness

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Putri, T. R., Devi, M. M., Ramadhan, G. ., & Prayitno, H. (2025). THE ROLE OF THE MINIMUM EQUIPMENT LIST IN IMPROVING AIRCRAFT OPERATIONAL SAFETY AND EFFICIENCY. Jurnal Penelitian : Politeknik Penerbangan Surabaya, 19(4), 352–363. https://doi.org/10.46491/jp.v19i4.1877

References

  1. Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
  2. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
  3. Clare, J., & Kourousis, K. I. (2021). Learning from incidents: A qualitative study in the continuing airworthiness sector. Aerospace, 8(2), Article 27. https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace8020027
  4. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
  5. Denzin, N. K. (2012). Triangulation 2.0. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6(2), 80–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689812437186
  6. European Union Aviation Safety Agency. (2025). Certification specifications and guidance material for Master Minimum Equipment List (CS-MMEL) (Issue 4).
  7. Federal Aviation Administration. (2023). Development and use of an operator’s MEL, NEF program, and CDL for operations under 14 CFR parts 91K, 121, 125, and 135 (Advisory Circular No. 120-125). U.S. Department of Transportation.
  8. Habib, K. A., & Turkoglu, C. (2020). Analysis of aircraft maintenance-related accidents and serious incidents in Nigeria. Aerospace, 7(12), Article 178. https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace7120178
  9. Insley, J., & Turkoglu, C. (2020). A contemporary analysis of aircraft maintenance-related accidents and serious incidents. Aerospace, 7(6), Article 81. https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace7060081
  10. International Civil Aviation Organization. (2022). Annex 6 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation: Operation of aircraft—Part I: International commercial air transport—Aeroplanes (12th ed.).
  11. Lee, J., & Mitici, M. (2022). Multi-objective design of aircraft maintenance using Gaussian process learning and adaptive sampling. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 218, Article 108123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2021.108123
  12. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.
  13. Mendes, N., Vieira, J. G. V., & Mano, A. P. (2022). Risk management in aviation maintenance: A systematic literature review. Safety Science, 153, Article 105810. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105810
  14. Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
  15. Obadimu, S. O., Karanikas, N., & Kourousis, K. I. (2020). Development of the Minimum Equipment List: Current practice and the need for standardisation. Aerospace, 7(1), Article 7. https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace7010007
  16. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
  17. Wild, G. (2023). A quantitative study of aircraft maintenance accidents in commercial air transport. Aerospace, 10(8), Article 689. https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace10080689

Most read articles by the same author(s)