Is there software built specifically for a Part 145 repair station or Part 147 AMT school?

Yes, but it's rare: most maintenance software is built for fleet operators tracking their own aircraft, not for the certificate-holder obligations a Part 145 repair station or Part 147 AMT school actually carries (ratings/capability lists, RSQM document control, technician or instructor authorizations, ACS-based competency tracking). A small number of platforms are purpose-building dedicated Part 145 and Part 147 modules rather than adapting generic tools, though most of that work is still rolling out rather than fully live.

Most software marketed to aircraft maintenance shops and AMT schools is either a general fleet-maintenance tracker (built for operators tracking their own aircraft, not for running a certificated repair station's compliance obligations) or a generic school/LMS platform with FAA fields bolted on. FAR Part 145 and Part 147 each carry recordkeeping requirements that don't map cleanly onto either category, so shops and schools end up stitching together a maintenance tracker, a spreadsheet for the capability list, a binder for technician authorizations, and a separate billing tool. Here's what to look for if you want something actually built around those two Parts, and where the market currently stands.

Why the answer is what it is

Part 145 obligations are narrower than generic maintenance tracking

A Part 145 repair station's core obligations — ratings and limitations, a self-evaluated capability list, RSQM document control, technician authorizations, and work-order/return-to-service records — are specific enough that generic maintenance trackers usually handle only the work-order piece and leave the rest to spreadsheets or binders.

Part 147 schools need curriculum and competency tracking, not just a gradebook

Part 147 governs curriculum and competency against the FAA's Airman Certification Standards, plus attendance and instructor records — requirements a generic student-information system or LMS wasn't built to track, since it has no concept of ACS-based competency or FAA-approved curriculum versioning.

A handful of platforms are purpose-built rather than adapted

Some vendors are actively extending purpose-built platforms to cover Part 145 and Part 147, on top of maintenance and training modules already built for other FAR Parts. AviationAlley is one example: its maintenance suite (work orders, MEL deferrals, parts inventory, AD/SB import, and a deterministic AOG-risk score) runs today, and a dedicated Part 145 certificate layer — ratings and limitations, a self-evaluated capability list, RSQM document control, and 8130-3 return-to-service records — is a separate module in development, targeted for the first quarter of 2027. Part 147 (enrollment, ACS-based competency tracking, attendance, billing) is on the same one-platform roadmap.

8130-3 issuance is a separate function from maintenance-release recordkeeping

None of this replaces your own maintenance-release authority. Whatever system you use, the shop's own return-to-service entries are made under 14 CFR 43.9 — software can assemble and store that paperwork, but issuing or electronically signing an FAA Form 8130-3 is a separate function handled through a dedicated third-party integration, not something a general ops platform does on its own.

Ask whether risk scoring is deterministic or a black box

If a maintenance or scoring feature claims to flag risk (an AOG-risk score, an inspection-due alert), ask whether it's a deterministic rule engine — same inputs, same answer, every time, with the contributing factors shown — or an opaque prediction. For anything you'd have to defend to an inspector, deterministic and auditable beats a black box.

What to look for

List what your certificate actually requires: ratings/limitations, capability list, RSQM (or Part 141/142 curriculum + ACS competency standards for a Part 147 school), technician/instructor authorizations, and work or training records.
Map each requirement to a system of record today — spreadsheet, binder, generic maintenance tracker, or student-information system — and note which ones don't talk to each other.
Flag every place a record only exists on paper or in one person's head; that's what an FAA inspector or auditor will ask for first.
Check whether your current tool treats certification data (ratings, capability list, technician authorizations, competency records) as first-class fields or as free-text notes bolted onto a generic work-order or gradebook screen.
If you bill B2B (airlines, charter operators, corporate flight departments, other schools), confirm your billing system reconciles to client accounts and incoming wires, not just card-on-file invoices.
Ask any vendor pitching 'aviation maintenance software' whether it was built around FAR Part 145/147 obligations specifically, or adapted from a general fleet-maintenance or school-management product.
If you're evaluating a pre-launch platform, ask exactly which modules are live today versus on the roadmap, and get a specific date or milestone for anything not yet built.

Related questions

Can I just use a generic aircraft maintenance-tracking tool for a Part 145 shop?

Not usually as a first-class feature. Most fleet-maintenance software is built around operators tracking their own aircraft — work orders, parts, and inspections — not around the certificate-holder obligations a Part 145 repair station carries: a capability list, ratings and limitations, RSQM document control, and technician authorization records. You can often force those into custom fields or a linked spreadsheet, but the software wasn't designed around them.

What records does an FAA inspector actually check at a Part 145 repair station?

At minimum: a capability list mapped to your ratings and limitations, a current Repair Station Quality Manual (or equivalent document control), technician certification and training records tied to the work they're authorized to sign off, and complete work-order/return-to-service records for every job. An inspector will also want to see how you control document revisions and how you know who is currently authorized for what.

Is AviationAlley built for Part 145 and Part 147 today?

AviationAlley's maintenance suite (work orders, MEL deferrals, parts inventory, AD/SB import, and a deterministic AOG-risk score) already runs on the platform. A dedicated Part 145 certificate layer — capability list, RSQM document control, and 8130-3 return-to-service records — is in development, targeted for the first quarter of 2027, and Part 147 (enrollment, ACS-based competency tracking, attendance, billing) is on the same roadmap. AviationAlley is pre-launch, so neither module has live customers yet; founding-cohort access is open to shape the build.

How Roffik addresses this

The platform for FAA-approved Part 142 training centers — simulator scheduling, FAA compliance records, client-account billing, and SWIFT wire reconciliation. Learn more about AviationAlley.