Platform
Modules
By sector
By sector
By standard
Blog
News
Events
AAMedP-1.7
Medical officers and national Aircraft Accident and Incident Investigation Boards investigating a NATO aviation accident or aeromedical incident
AAMedP-1.7 sets NATO's common format for the aeromedical information a national Aircraft Accident and Incident Investigation Board records after an aviation accident or in-flight aeromedical incident, including UAV/RPAS occurrences.
AAMedP-1.7 is NATO's Allied Aeromedical Publication on the aeromedical side of aircraft accident and incident investigation: the essential points a national Aircraft Accident and Incident Investigation Board covers when it looks into an aviation accident or an aeromedical incident, so that nations can exchange comparable information about what happened. Edition B, Version 2 was promulgated in April 2025, superseding Version 1.
This is a document for a nation's own aviation safety and medical investigation chain, not for a general equipment manufacturer or software supplier. It names no certification scheme and sets no contract clause for a supplier: the investigation it describes is carried out by a qualified medical officer and a national board, under national regulation, not procured from outside.
The standard asks that a medical officer, ideally with specialist aeromedical qualifications, take part "when possible" in the investigation of every aviation accident and aeromedical incident, either advising the board or sitting as a full member of it. That aeromedical member is responsible for obtaining medical information "in accordance with current national regulations," and works in close cooperation with the rest of the board to establish the sequence of factors that led to, and resulted from, the occurrence. The standard extends beyond crewed aircraft: it "relates to aircraft and UAV/RPAS accidents and incidents," and points to the accident and incident investigation chapter of the NATO RPAS airspace integration guidance, AATMP-51, for the unmanned case.
Where an accident is fatal, the standard expects the legal custodian of the bodies to facilitate the examination the investigation needs, with the aeromedical board member assisting on its aeromedical aspects, and the investigating officer working within "the national and local medico-legal policy" of the country concerned. This page does not describe what that examination covers: it is a matter for the appropriate specialist and the national authority, not a compliance criterion a reader applies. The standard also covers securing the accident scene once life-saving and fire-fighting action is complete (protective equipment where composites are involved, photographs and positional records taken before wreckage is moved, and witness evidence gathered early to avoid collusion), and it asks the aeromedical member to weigh the human factors, including the recent physical and mental health of those involved, that a specialist may need to be brought in to assess.
Annex A sets the minimum aeromedical information a board records after an aircraft accident, in six parts: general information about the aircraft, the flight and the accident itself, and a summary of who was aboard; the escape sequence, whether by ejection or unassisted, and the survival, rescue and recovery that followed; how personal protective and survival equipment performed and whether it came through intact; background on each individual involved, spanning personal, physiological, psychological, organisational, engineering and environmental factors; each occupant's injuries, recorded so investigations stay comparable between nations; and, only where someone has died, a report format used for that case, completed under national medico-legal arrangements. Two appendices sit under Annex A: one covers the record kept when a helmet has been damaged, and the other is a structured post-ejection questionnaire an aeromedical investigator can use, covering the ejection itself, the aircrew and their equipment, and what happened afterwards, for sharing between nations "should national policies permit."
Annex B covers a different case: an aeromedical incident during aircraft operations that falls short of an accident, an in-flight medical event rather than a crash. It sets out what to record in three parts: the aircraft and the sortie, the individual's relevant background, and the circumstances of the in-flight incident itself.
AAMedP-1.7 sits under STANAG 3318, the NATO agreement recording nations' commitment to use it; that is the cover which gives the publication its force. The nations that approved it did so in the Military Committee Air Standardization Board (MCSAB). The document's own record of reservations shows the Czech Republic and North Macedonia unable to meet the test-equipment requirement behind the helmet-damage record in Appendix 1 to Annex A, Italy assigning that same appendix's data collection to a different national authority, and Spain reserving on exchanging personal information it treats as confidential, which is how a NATO Allied Publication like this one is adopted with national exceptions rather than word for word.
AAMedP-1.7 names no certification or accreditation scheme, and no organisation audits a supplier against it: this is not something a company is assessed against at all. What runs instead is a nation's own aviation safety and medical chain: the Aircraft Accident and Incident Investigation Board carries out the work, the aeromedical member obtains medical information "in accordance with current national regulations," and a fatal case proceeds under the country's own medico-legal policy. There is no external body standing over that process.
AAMedP-1.7 is an operational and technical publication, and the work it describes, sitting on or advising an Aircraft Accident and Incident Investigation Board, obtaining medical information, engaging a country's own medico-legal arrangements, is carried out by qualified people inside that chain, not by software, and ComplyTrain does not change that. For a defence organisation that maintains an accident-investigation capability of its own, what a compliance platform can help with sits around that work: holding the current edition of the guide and its appendices as a controlled document instead of a stray PDF, tracking which medical officers currently hold the aeromedical qualifications and training the role expects, and retaining a completed investigation report as a controlled, versioned record once a decision has been made to hold or release it beyond the investigation itself.
What ComplyTrain does not do: it does not conduct an aeromedical investigation, engage a national medico-legal authority on an organisation's behalf, or make any medical judgement about an accident. Those stay the qualified medical officer's, the investigation board's and the national authority's own responsibility. The standards explorer shows the other Allied Publications this document points to, and the tier of investigation capability a given programme expects is set by the customer and the national quality clause, not by us; we are glad to talk through what a specific programme is actually asking an organisation to evidence.
Tell us how you need to work with AAMedP-1.7 and what you need from it. We will come back to you about what ComplyTrain can do.
Thank you. Your list is on its way to your inbox, and we will come back to you on what working with these standards in ComplyTrain involves, usually within one business day.
It binds NATO nations through STANAG 3318, the agreement recording their commitment to use it, and nations recorded reservations against specific paragraphs at promulgation. It does not set a contract clause for a commercial supplier: the investigation it describes is a nation's own responsibility.
Yes. The standard states that it "relates to aircraft and UAV/RPAS accidents and incidents," and points to the accident and incident investigation chapter of AATMP-51, NATO's RPAS airspace integration guidance, for the unmanned case.
STANAG 3318 is the NATO agreement recording nations' commitment to use AAMedP-1.7; it is the cover that gives the publication its force. AAMedP-1.7 is the publication itself, the guide that sets out what a board's aeromedical investigation covers and what minimum information it records.
No. AAMedP-1.7 names no certification or accreditation scheme for any organisation. It is a recording standard for a nation's own aircraft accident and incident investigation, not something a supplier is assessed or certified against.
Edition B, Version 2, promulgated in April 2025. It is effective on receipt and supersedes Edition B, Version 1, which nations were instructed to destroy.
One system for the whole compliance programme. Start with the module you need most.
Collect information the same way every time, and decide in advance what happens next.
Know whether your controls are operating, not just whether a policy says they exist.
Turn the compliance work you already know about into a plan with owners, dependencies and dates.
Know what you can offer, and hold the evidence behind every configuration you offer it in.
Eight built-in reports across every module, scheduled, delivered, and filed where the evidence lives.
The sector news that matters to your organisation - read and rated by AI, and delivered as a scheduled digest in your own language.
AI reads the tender pack and pulls out the requirements, deadlines and rules - then helps you draft the response from your own approved content, with you reviewing every step.
One current register of the suppliers and partners you depend on - each risk-assessed, re-assessing itself on schedule, and wired straight into your risk register.
See every requirement you face - across every standard, plus your own contracts and policies - traced to the documents, evidence and processes that satisfy it.
Identify, score, treat and review your risks in one place - with AI to help anyone run a proper assessment, and a defensible trail behind every decision.
Assign training, prove it was understood, and hold the competence records an auditor asks for.
Draft compliance documents with AI, keep every version under control, and export them beautifully branded - all in one place.
Audits, corrective actions, processes and approvals in one quality system, organised around ISO 9001.
Medical device manufacturers operate under more regulatory pressure than almost any other sector outside pharmaceuticals. The rules govern how you design a device, how you make it, how you track it after it ships, and how you respond when something goes wrong.
Learn how EU dual-use export controls apply to encryption, sensors, and software, how classification works under Annex I, and why sending source code by email can count as an export.
A practical way to turn in-your-head risk management into a register that survives staff turnover and answers the risk questions now showing up in tenders.