Airlines and overhaul shops are using more parts manufacturer approval (PMA) material and the trend shows no signs of slowing down, results from a recent survey by Aviation Week’s Inside MRO and consultancy Naveo show.
The survey of more than 100 aftermarket executives, conducted at the end of the first quarter 2025, touched on various aspects of PMA usage. Among the key takeaways: Nearly half of all respondents report an increase in PMA usage over the last three years, including about one-third that say the upward shift has been greater than 10%. Most of the rest say PMA usage has stayed about the same, leaving only 5% that report a reduction.
The trends appear poised to hold in the short term. Nearly 60% of respondents see PMA purchases increasing during the next three years, while 25% of those expect to boost it by more than 20%.
“There’s no question this is good news for PMA suppliers,” Naveo MD Richard Brown said. “Nearly 60% expect usage to rise, while only 8% expect their usage to fall.”
Another area of interest is the motivation behind using PMA parts. They are generally—though not always—less expensive than the OEM parts they replace. But how prevalent is the desire to save money for the average purchaser of PMA? The survey suggests price is a leading factor, but hardly the only important one.
Respondents were given a list of factors that influence PMA parts purchasing and asked to assign one of five priority levels—ranging from not important to extremely important—to each.
Among respondents, 88% rate price versus comparable OEM parts as being either moderately, very or extremely important—the three top choices.
But availability weighed significantly as well, with 91% citing challenges getting OEM parts as being at least moderately important in their PMA purchase decisions.
Long lead times are a major factor as well, with 94% citing that as at least moderately important in prompting them to look at PMA alternatives. This figure includes 50% labeling it as very important and 32% as extremely important, the highest single percentages in the top two categories. Among airline respondents, the lead-time issue matches “items beyond economical repair” as the most influential factors, with 91% of carrier respondents ranking each as at least moderately important.
“Poor OEM part availability is a major driver of customers having to turn to PMA parts, even if they have a preference for OEM parts,” Brown said. “Long OEM new-part lead times drive PMA usage. It’s a sobering thought for OEMs. Unsatisfactory delivery performance might drive customers to PMA parts.”
While PMA parts are common in non-safety applications such as interiors, the survey suggests usage is broadening. The survey shows that 31% of respondents are using hot-section parts, followed closely by consumable airframe parts, such as fasteners.
But responses highlighted notable variations based on geography.
Usage in North America is widely distributed among part types, with engine hot section and airframe parts at the top of the list, for instance. Conversely, respondents based in the Middle East have much narrower applications for PMA usage, with an emphasis on interiors.
PMA parts usage decisions are not always made by operators. The opposition of aircraft lessors to using them outside of common interiors parts is well known. But survey responses suggest the boundaries are not ironclad.
One question asked respondents whether they have negotiated with lessors about installing PMA on leased equipment. Among the total responses, 62% say “yes.” Among the subset of airlines that responded, 59% report negotiating with lessors directly about PMA parts.
“This supports the notion that lessors may be open to using PMA parts,” Brown said. “It’s just a case of the operators having to discuss it with them.”
Inside MRO readers can read a more in-depth review of the Aviation Week/Naveo PMA survey in the magazine’s recently released April issue.
Related Content
