Skip to content
Aerospace Federation

Aerospace Federation

Find your direction.

Explore the Federation. Connect with its work.
Federation sections6 areas

Choose an area to see its pages. Shortcuts are in Quick access.

Applied Aerospace InitiativeActive Development

AF Circular Aerospace Programme

Close a material loop without opening a safety gap.

An aerospace programme under active development examining circular material pathways in manufacturing and maintenance, with safety and traceability integrated into the method.

Explore the programme
Editorial illustration of segregated aluminium offcuts, a machined specimen and a carbon-composite offcut.
Programme focusMaterial value, retained responsibly

Recovery value must be judged alongside material control.

Aerospace material streams combine high-value metals, composites, batteries, consumables and tightly controlled components. A route that appears attractive by mass alone may introduce contamination, traceability gaps, additional processing or a use that the recovered material cannot safely support.

The programme is developing a material-stream approach that compares a documented baseline with controlled reduction, recovery or reuse pathways. Non-flight-critical streams provide a focused setting for examining yield, process burden, data quality and traceability.

Programme development priorities

  • Map one material flow and its current control points.
  • Compare feasible reduction, recovery or reuse pathways within a stated boundary.
  • Keep safety, traceability and environmental trade-offs visible in the decision.

A structured approach to the question.

01Material-flow baseline
Identify inputs, outputs, stock changes and waste categories. Record material identity, segregation practices, contamination risks and the evidence needed for a credible mass balance.
02Recovery and reuse options
Assess scrap reduction, metal recovery, composite waste routes and repair or reuse feasibility. Battery lifecycle considerations require stream-specific handling and safety review.
03Lifecycle boundaries
Define the functional comparison, process stages and data assumptions for any lifecycle assessment. Include transport, energy, yield and displaced material only where supported by evidence.
04Controlled process model
Describe traceability, acceptance checks, documentation and restrictions on destination use. Identify the material qualification and engineering decisions associated with each destination use.
Technical frameworkConnected workstreams, interfaces and review evidence.
  1. 01Defined material inputIdentity and controlled boundary
  2. 02Manufacturing or maintenanceConsumption and segregation
  3. 03Recovery routeYield, quality and traceability
  4. 04Permitted destinationDocumented use and feedback

A non-flight-critical manufacturing scrap stream.

Material-stream development focuses on a segregated metallic offcut stream from a representative manufacturing workflow. The assessment framework compares the baseline route with a recovery pathway, records processing and transport assumptions and follows material identity to its permitted destination. Flight-critical suitability remains a separate engineering and qualification question.

  1. Characterize the stream

    Record composition, quantity, contamination and traceability using authorized or representative data. Define what is excluded.

  2. Compare the pathways

    Assess recovery yield, handling, processing and likely destination requirements. State lifecycle boundaries and data quality rather than inventing savings.

  3. Review feasibility

    Consider resource efficiency, safety controls, documentation and operational burden. Recommend further study only where evidence supports it.

Development connects a defined application, measurable criteria and a traceable technical review.

Outputs and evaluation.

The development workstreams connect these deliverables to reviewable evidence and application-specific evaluation criteria.

  • Material-flow map
  • Waste-stream characterization
  • Traceability approach
  • Lifecycle assessment boundary
  • Improvement feasibility report
  • process model

Evaluation priorities

Resource performance
Consumption, waste generation and recovery yield within a defined material balance.
Material control
Identity, segregation, quality evidence and destination traceability remain intact.
Environmental evidence
Any impact comparison uses explicit boundaries, documented inputs and uncertainty.

The right expertise. Clear responsibilities.

The participation framework brings together manufacturing and maintenance knowledge, materials engineering, recovery-process expertise and lifecycle analysis. Responsibilities follow the material boundary, its traceability and the evidence needed for a comparison.

Scope and safeguards

Recovered material requires appropriate identification, control and qualification for its intended use. Regulated aerospace parts and materials remain subject to applicable safety, engineering, quality and airworthiness requirements.

Environmental comparisons require documented boundaries, inputs and uncertainty. Hazardous streams, battery handling and disposal need competent review and the appropriate permissions.

Participation and technical decisions remain separate.

Participation does not automatically confer membership rights, AF Recognition, accreditation, certification, standards-setting authority or procurement preference. Sponsorship must not determine technical conclusions, evaluation results or governance decisions.

Development, grounded in evidence.

Technical objectives, responsible coordination and application needs shape the development process. Resources, safety, confidentiality, data protection, intellectual property and reporting arrangements are reviewed alongside the methods and deliverables, keeping progress focused and accountable.

A structured development pathwayExplore the seven connected development stages

Programme development connects technical requirements, responsible coordination and reviewable evidence. Each stage informs the next, while review findings refine the scope, methods and priorities.

  1. Requirements & Objectives

    Define the technical problem, user need and scope.

  2. Feasibility & Evidence

    Examine methods, resources, interfaces and dependencies.

  3. Scope & Responsibilities

    Align workstreams, coordination and review arrangements.

  4. Pilot Development

    Connect the evaluation plan to funding, safety, data and intellectual-property controls.

  5. Controlled Implementation

    Maintain the agreed technical boundary and responsible delivery arrangements.

  6. Technical Evaluation

    Review evidence and outcomes against application-specific criteria.

  7. Knowledge & Further Development

    Translate reviewed findings into useful outputs and the next development priorities.

Bring your expertise into the programme.

Introduce one material stream, its current route and the improvement question. Share the scope and available evidence without controlled material specifications or unsupported environmental claims.

Contact the FederationBack to Applied aerospace