The question every design organisation, maintenance organisation and operator asks before it puts its documents into an AI system is the same: can we rely on where the data goes and on what comes back? This page answers that question in seven parts, with the facts as they are on 20 September 2026, and links to the pages where each fact is set out in full. Nothing here is a promise about a future version.
Nowhere outside your perimeter. Every deployment is a dedicated single-tenant instance, on your own hardware with a local model, optionally air-gapped, or in your own cloud account. There is no shared platform and no data pooled across customers. Your documents, questions, drafts and logs stay in that instance, are used for nothing but your own answers and drafts, and are never used to train a model. Updates are delivered as packages that your administrators install.
2. What does it answer from, and who can change that?
From a knowledge base your administrators control. Documents enter it through a privileged ingestion step: the regulation at the revision you use, your exposition or handbook, your certification basis, your procedures. Everyone else has read-only access and receives answers drawn only from that knowledge. A superseded issue leaves the knowledge base when the amendment is ingested, and when the knowledge base does not answer a question, the teammate says so instead of filling the gap.
Every answer names the paragraph of your document, the requirement of the certification basis or the clause of the regulation it was taken from, with a link to open it, so the person reading it can check it in the source in seconds. Every draft is reviewed and approved by your nominated person before it is issued: the teammate proposes, your organisation decides. It holds no approval, releases nothing to service and signs nothing.
The four ways AI fails in compliance work and the four conditions under which its output can be relied on: Can AI be trusted for aviation compliance documentation? Each solution page states the same two rules, citations and human review, in its Specification.
4. How accurate is the model, and how do you know?
We measure it. On RDB-1, our regulated-document benchmark, the local model that runs inside your perimeter scores 74 of 100 on a technical report a domain expert would sign, level with the highest-scoring cloud model in the same test. The benchmark, its data set, its scoring and its limits are published on this site so that the number can be checked rather than believed. The benchmark measures one task; it does not measure your documents, which is why every answer carries its citation.
None from a third party today, and we say so. Security in this deployment model comes from isolation: the system runs inside your environment, under your access controls, your monitoring and your ISMS, and can run with no outbound connection at all. Your ISMS auditor and your competent authority can inspect the running system where your information security rules require it. The seven questions we tell organisations to ask any AI vendor are answered for this product below.
The seven vendor questions, answered for Wingman360 Teammate
Where, physically and organisationally, are the documents, the index, the model, the logs and the backups?
In your instance: on your hardware or in your cloud account, under your administration.
Can the system operate with no internet connection, and for how long?
Yes, with the local model, indefinitely. An air-gapped deployment has no outbound path by design.
What leaves the network during normal operation, and what leaves during an update?
Nothing during normal operation with the local model. Updates arrive as packages your administrators install; nothing is sent back.
Who can change what the assistant knows, and is that separated from everyday use?
Only administrators, through a privileged ingestion step. Everyday users are read-only.
How are software and model updates delivered, signed and verified?
As packages that your administrators install under your own change control. Nothing is pushed into the instance from outside.
Can our ISMS auditor and our competent authority inspect the running system?
Yes. It runs inside your environment, so inspection is under your own access procedures.
If we stop using it, can we export everything, and what is deleted where?
The documents were yours throughout and stay where you put them; the index and the logs are in your instance and are deleted when you delete it. Nothing is held elsewhere.
6. Will our authority accept documents drafted with it?
No authority has approved this product, and none approves drafting tools; authorities accept documents from accountable organisations and named persons. A draft from the teammate is a reviewed input like any other, and the compliance statement, the declaration, the release and the exposition carry the signatures of the people your Part names. Our guides explain, clause by clause, where that line sits under Part 21, Part 145, Part-CAMO and the FAA rules, and the same line is built into the product.
Every guide is written by a named aerospace engineer, quotes rule text verbatim from the current Easy Access Rules, the eCFR and the published EDA and NATO records, and lists its sources with the revision used and the date checked. Rule points are quoted in full on the reference pages, generated from the source copies and tested so they cannot be reworded by hand. Guides are re-read against their sources every six months or when a source is revised. We name no competitor and use no superlative, and tests enforce both. Corrections go to [email protected] and are recorded on the page.
Author. Oguz Hicdurmaz, Founder and Managing Director, Lavionic GmbH. Senior aerospace engineer with more than 20 years in manned and unmanned aircraft certification, airworthiness compliance and safety engineering. EASA Part 21 certification basis development, airworthiness management plans and compliance verification. LinkedIn.
Sources. Every primary document cited on the site, with the revision used, the date checked and the pages that cite it: sources register.
Verbatim text. Six rule points quoted in full with their AMC and GM: rule points.
Definitions. Our own definitions, marked as ours: glossary.
What we do not do. We do not name competitors, we do not claim what has not been measured, and we do not describe an authority as having approved the product. These rules are tests in the build, not policies in a drawer.
Who is behind it
Wingman360 Teammate is a product of Lavionic GmbH, registered at Amtsgericht München, HRB 309394, Leoprechtingstraße 34, 81739 Munich, Germany. Founder: Oguz Hicdurmaz. Company site: lavionic.com. Company page: LinkedIn. Questions about anything on this page: [email protected] or the contact page.