Comparison

Six ways to keep aircraft maintenance records

This compares approaches, not products — no vendor is named here, and none is being described sideways. We wrote the table about ourselves, so the useful part is where we put ourselves last. There are three of those, and they're called out below.

Comparison of six approaches to keeping general aviation maintenance records
AxisPaper + a filing cabinetA spreadsheetPhotos on your phoneA human digitization serviceA flight-school ops platformMyTailLog
Time to searchable recordsNever — you flip pagesHowever long you spend typingInstant to store, never searchableDays to weeks, hands-offHowever long you spend typingMinutes per page, plus your review time
CostFree (a binder)FreeFreePer aircraft, in the hundreds — it is labour, so it can't be cheapA monthly subscriptionFree; there is no billing in the app at all
Who holds the dataYou, physicallyYou — it's a fileYou — it's a camera rollYou, once it's deliveredThey do, on your behalfYou; MIT-licensed, so you can hold the server too
What you leave withNothing to leaveThe fileThe photosWhatever was delivered to youWhatever their export gives youA ZIP of every row as JSON + the original scans, re-importable
If it shuts downDoesn't applyDoesn't applyDoesn't applyYou keep the delivered filesYou migrate on their timelineRun the same code yourself
Answers questions, or just stores files?StoresAnswers only what you built formulas forStoresStores — accuratelySome: status and due listsAnswers: plain-English Q&A citing the entries, gap audit, equipment rebuilt from the logs
Tracks what's dueYou and your A&P rememberIf you built the formulas and keep them currentNoNo — it's transcription, not trackingYesYes: Part 91 recurring items, ADs, email reminders with your own lead times
Per-entry correctness guaranteeThe entry is the recordExactly what you typedThe image is exact; nothing is structuredStrongest — a person read every entryExactly what somebody typedWeaker — a model reads it, scores its own confidence, and you review it against the scan
Scheduling, dispatch, invoicingYes — that is the jobNo, and not planned. Explicitly out of scope
Works with no signalPerfectlyIf the file is on the deviceYesNoUsually web-onlyiOS app (TestFlight beta) browses everything offline and captures offline; no Android app
Open source / self-hostableDoesn't applyDoesn't applyDoesn't applyNoNoYes — MIT
Is it the legal record?Yes — this is the recordNoNoNoNoNo — an index of the paper, never a replacement for it

Where we lose

A comparison table whose author wins every row is an advertisement. These are the rows we don't win, stated in full rather than buried:

  • A human beats a model on per-entry certainty.Paying someone to read every entry gives you a person's guarantee on each one. We give you a confidence-scored draft: a percentage on every field, the scan cropped to where each value was read from, and the flagged ones held back from bulk-confirm. That catches what the model knows it's unsure about — it cannot catch what the model was confidently wrong about. Your review is what closes that gap, and it is real work.
  • No scheduling, dispatch, or billing — ever.If you run a club, a school, or a leaseback and you need a booking calendar, tach-to-invoice dispatch, rental rates, or membership dues, an ops platform does that and we deliberately do not. It is on the out-of-scope list, not the roadmap, because building a second-rate scheduler would cost the records depth that's the entire point of this.
  • Mobile is a beta, and iOS only. The native app is in TestFlight: it browses every entry, document and scan fully offline and captures pages offline, but editing existing entries is still done on the web, and there is no Android app.

When to pick something else

  • An ops platform — if the thing keeping you up at night is who has the plane on Saturday and whether the renter got billed.
  • A digitization service— if you would rather pay money than spend evenings reviewing, and you want a person's name attached to every entry.
  • Paper and a binder— if you fly a hundred hours a year, one book covers it, and you can find what you need in it. It is still the legal record either way, and there's no shame in that being the whole system.
  • The spreadsheet you already have — if it already answers your questions. Switching costs you the evenings; only do it if the answers are missing.

Where this approach is genuinely different

One thing, mostly: what happens to a record after it's captured. A photo is storage. A transcription is accurate storage. Here, extraction is the beginning — the entries feed a searchable cross-logbook timeline, a status grid, a Part 91 forecast, AD/SB compliance with FAA reference lookup, an equipment list rebuilt from what the logs say was installed and removed, weight & balance revisions, oil wear-metal and consumption trends, a records-gap audit, and plain-English questions answered with the source entries cited.

The second thing is the exit. MIT license, a full ZIP of your rows and original scans on demand, and a read-only public API you consent to per-app. Portability that survives us losing interest is a stronger promise than portability that depends on us staying nice.

The row that resets the table

Only one column answers “yes” to is it the legal record, and it's the filing cabinet. Under 14 CFR 91.417 the physical logbooks are the system of record, and every other column here — ours included — is an index, a convenience, or a search tool sitting on top of them. Whatever you choose, keep the paper.

More on how the pieces work in Help & documentation, and on cost, privacy and export in the FAQ.