The claim
"The logbooks are complete" is the most common assurance in an aircraft sale, and the least examined. Complete against what? The word has a regulatory meaning. 14 CFR 91.417 defines the two kinds of records an owner must keep, and a stack of logbooks can be thick, continuous, and still fail the definition.
What the regulation actually requires
91.417 splits the records into two categories, and buyers routinely check only the first. Under 91.417(a)(1), each maintenance, preventive-maintenance, and alteration entry — and each 100-hour, annual, and progressive inspection — must carry a description of the work (or a reference to acceptable data), the date of completion, and the signature and certificate number of the person approving the aircraft for return to service. That is the running narrative most people flip through.
The second category is where value and risk actually live. Under 91.417(a)(2), the records must also establish, on a current basis: the total time in service of the airframe, each engine, each propeller, and each rotor; the current status of all life-limited parts; the time since last overhaul of every item required to be overhauled on a specified time basis; the current inspection status; the current status of every applicable airworthiness directive — the method of compliance, the AD number and revision date, and for recurring ADs the time and date when the next action is required; and copies of the FAA Form 337 for every major alteration.
Why the two categories matter differently
They have different lifespans. 91.417(b)(1) lets the running (a)(1) entries be discarded a year after the work, or once it is superseded. But the (a)(2) status records "shall be retained and transferred with the aircraft at the time the aircraft is sold." Those are the records a buyer is actually purchasing. When a seller hands over a crate of receipts but cannot produce a current AD status, a life-limited-parts status, or the 337s for visible modifications, the aircraft is missing exactly the records the regulation says travel with it.
An inspection sign-off is not the same as complete records
A fresh annual is reassuring, but read what it certifies. Under 43.11, the entry states only: "I certify that this aircraft has been inspected in accordance with [type] inspection and was determined to be in airworthy condition" — as of that date. If the aircraft was found unairworthy, the alternate 43.11 statement instead points to "a list of discrepancies and unairworthy items" provided to the owner. Neither statement certifies that the (a)(2) status records are complete, that every AD was researched, or that a gap two owners ago was ever closed. The FAA's current records guidance, AC 43-9D, treats record-making and record-keeping as an ongoing owner responsibility — not something an annual retroactively cures.
What cannot be concluded
A records review documents what the 91.417(a)(1) and (a)(2) records show and where they are missing, internally inconsistent, or unsupported. It is not an inspection under 43.11, it does not establish airworthiness or AD compliance, and it does not transfer airworthiness responsibility. The responsible IA verifies status against the original logbooks and current FAA and manufacturer data before any return to service.
What to request or verify next
- A current, written 91.417(a)(2) status set: total times, life-limited-parts status, times since overhaul, inspection status, AD status, and the 337 package — not just the running log entries.
- The original airframe, engine, and propeller logbooks, not a summary sheet.
- Continuity across ownership changes — the years buyers skip are the years sellers hope they will.
- Independent verification of AD and life-limited-parts status by the responsible IA against primary documentation before funds move.