What Obsolete and Hard to Find Aerospace Parts Cost, and Why
An obsolete part costs its purchase price plus the work to prove it is genuine and usable, and when no stock exists, the engineering to replace it. Where you buy and how early you act decide most of the total.
Updated
The short answer
An obsolete part costs its purchase price plus everything needed to prove it is genuine and usable: the search, the source tier, authenticity testing, records checks and, when no stock exists, reverse engineering, emulation or redesign. On scarce parts, the price of the part itself is often the smallest of those lines.
No public price list exists for obsolete aerospace parts, and we will not invent one. This guide explains each cost driver, how to control it, and the one set of published Department of Defense cost figures that helps buyers compare resolution options.
How an obsolete parts quote is built
Every obsolete part quote is the sum of up to five layers. Which layers apply depends on where the part comes from and what your contract requires.
- The part: the seller's price, which rises with scarcity and falls as you move up the source tiers toward the original manufacturer.
- Search and qualification of the source: finding stock, checking the seller's quality system and records, and confirming the lot is what it claims to be on paper.
- Authenticity testing: inspection and lab testing for parts from outside the authorized chain, which can consume parts from the lot.
- Paperwork and reporting: certificates, chain of custody, date and lot code checks, GIDEP screening and the records your contract requires.
- Engineering: if no acceptable stock exists, reverse engineering, emulation, a qualified substitute or a redesign, each with its own approval and qualification cost.
Cost drivers at a glance
| Driver | Why it moves cost | How to control it |
|---|---|---|
| Source tier | Authorized sources cost more per part but need little verification; independent sources may cost less per part but add testing and risk | Exhaust the original manufacturer and authorized channels first, and price testing into any independent quote |
| Authenticity testing level | Higher risk levels add lab methods such as X-ray, decapsulation and electrical testing, some destructive | Have your engineer assign a risk level so the lab does not default or over test |
| GIDEP and records checks | Screening alerts and tracing paperwork take time, and a hit stops the buy | Screen early and give the full manufacturer part number and CAGE code |
| Date code and lot rules | Tight date code limits and single-lot requirements shrink the usable stock | Set limits from your engineering need, not habit, and say whether mixed lots are acceptable with testing |
| Reverse engineering and requalification | New drawings, first article and qualification testing are one-time engineering costs | Find existing drawings and data rights first; buy enough to spread the one-time cost |
| Emulation or redesign | Engineering, qualification and higher assembly changes can dwarf the part price | Decide early, using lifecycle data, whether a buy or a redesign is cheaper over the remaining program |
| Minimum and lifetime buys | Minimum order quantities and last time buys tie up cash and need storage | Size the buy to forecast need and plan controlled storage |
| DMSMS planning | Late discovery forces broker buys and expedites | Monitor parts lists and act on discontinuance notices when they arrive |
Source tier: who you buy from
The source tier sets both the part price and how much verification you must add on top. The cheapest quote per part is often the most expensive part once testing and risk are counted.
| Source tier | What you get | Cost effect |
|---|---|---|
| Original component manufacturer | Manufacturer's certificate and full traceability | Usually the lowest total cost when stock or a last time buy is available |
| Franchised or authorized distributor | Manufacturer-backed stock and paperwork; SAE AS6496 covers counterfeit avoidance for these distributors | Low verification cost; price reflects the authorized chain |
| Authorized aftermarket manufacturer | Parts built or stocked with the original manufacturer's authorization after it exits the product | Higher part price than original production, but traceable and often testable to the original data |
| Independent distributor or broker | Stock nobody else has, with variable records; SAE AS6081A, published April 2023, covers counterfeit avoidance for these sellers | Part price varies widely; add inspection, lab testing and risk |
On DoD work, DFARS 252.246-7008 sets a preference order for electronic parts, starting with the original manufacturer and its authorized suppliers and moving to contractor-approved suppliers and other sources only when parts are not available. Buying lower in that order brings notification, testing and authentication duties that cost money. Our counterfeit parts avoidance guide explains those clauses in detail.
Counterfeit avoidance testing
Testing is usually the largest added cost on parts from independent sources, and the risk level your engineer assigns decides how much of it you pay for.
SAE AS6171 is the test method standard for laboratories that test electronic parts for suspect counterfeits. It was first published in 2016 and revised to AS6171A in 2018, with a general requirements document and method slash sheets AS6171/1 through /11 covering external visual inspection, X-ray fluorescence, delid and decapsulation, radiography, acoustic microscopy, electrical testing, Raman, FTIR, thermogravimetric analysis and design recovery. AS6171 defines test sequences for five risk levels, so a part judged at critical risk gets far more testing than one at low risk.
That choice is not automatic. One accredited lab's AS6171A working document states that when the lab is not given a risk level by a cognizant engineer from the user organization, the minimum testing is the Moderate Risk Level test sequence. In other words, if you do not assign a risk level, you get a default that may be more or less testing than the part deserves.
Three cost effects follow:
- Destructive tests consume parts. Decapsulation and some other methods destroy samples, so you may need to buy more than your build quantity.
- Electrical tests need test programs and fixtures for each part type, which is a one-time cost per part number.
- Sampling scales with lot count. Several small lots from different date codes cost more to test than one lot of the same total quantity.
Mechanical parts and raw material carry their own counterfeit risk. SAE AS6174 covers materiel beyond electronics, and the verification there is usually material certs tied to the heat lot and, when in doubt, independent chemistry and hardness testing.
GIDEP checks and reporting
Screening GIDEP costs little and can save the whole buy. Do it before you commit money, not after the parts arrive.
The Government-Industry Data Exchange Program carries discontinuance notices, nonconforming item reports and suspect counterfeit reports. A U.S. Department of Energy notice from 2025 states that joining and using GIDEP is no cost. Under FAR 52.246-26, contractors covered by the clause must report counterfeit or suspect counterfeit items to GIDEP within 60 days, so a confirmed problem also brings reporting and quarantine work. Give your searcher the full manufacturer part number and the manufacturer's CAGE code so screening is exact.
Date code and lot requirements
Every limit you place on date codes and lots shrinks the stock you can buy, and scarcer stock costs more. Set limits that match the engineering need.
- Date code limits. A requirement that parts be newer than a given age can rule out all remaining stock of a part that ended production years ago. Ask your engineer whether older parts are acceptable with solderability testing or other checks.
- Single lot. Requiring one date code or one manufacturing lot is common for flight hardware. If your quantity does not exist in one lot, the choice is mixed lots with more testing, or a different resolution.
- Storage history. Moisture sensitive devices with no documented dry storage may need baking and added inspection. Elastomers and adhesives carry shelf lives your specifications set.
- Packaging. Original sealed packaging lowers the testing burden. Loose or repackaged parts raise it.
Reverse engineering and requalification
When no acceptable stock exists, building a new source is often the answer for mechanical parts, but the one-time cost of data, first article and qualification can exceed years of part purchases.
- Technical data. A drawing at a known revision is cheapest. Without one, a sample has to be measured, its material identified and a drawing created, then approved by your design authority. Check who owns the data and your rights to give it to a new supplier.
- Superseded specifications. Old drawings may call out material or process specs that no longer exist. Your engineers pick the equivalent, which may require analysis.
- First article. Expect a full AS9102 first article on the first production lot. See our first article inspection guide.
- Qualification testing. Parts in critical functions may need environmental, life or pressure testing before the program accepts the new source. Our environmental test lab cost guide covers what drives that price.
- Source approval. Many programs require design authority approval of a new source before installation.
The one-time costs are fixed, so the quantity you commit to decides the unit cost. Buying for the remaining life of the program often makes a rebuild competitive with scarce broker stock. Machining cost drivers are covered in our machining cost guide.
Emulation, substitutes and redesign
When a part cannot be bought or rebuilt to the original design, the options get more expensive the higher they reach into your assembly. Choose the lowest level that solves the problem.
- Simple substitute: an existing part that meets all requirements with minimal qualification, mostly administrative cost.
- Complex substitute: a part with different specifications that still fits without changing the next higher assembly, which needs research and validation.
- Emulation: a new part built to match the original's form, fit, function and interface. For military microcircuits, the Defense Logistics Agency's Generalized Emulation of Microcircuits program, created in 1987 and run by DLA Land and Maritime with SRI International manufacturing, produces such replacements through reverse engineering.
- Redesign: changing the next higher assembly, or beyond it into software, interfaces and system qualification, which is the most expensive path.
Minimum buys and lifetime buys
A lifetime buy trades a large purchase now for avoiding a much larger engineering cost later. The hidden costs are cash, storage and forecasting error.
When a manufacturer discontinues a part, it usually gives a window to place final orders. Texas Instruments, for example, says its process complies with J-STD-048 and allows 12 months for the last order plus six more months to take final delivery. Richtek states a last time buy 6 months after the end of life notice and a last time ship 12 months after it, based on J-STD-048. Windows vary by manufacturer, so read each notice.
The Defense Standardization Program Office defines a life-of-need buy as buying enough of an approved item to sustain the product until its next technology refresh or the end of the host assembly, and notes that packaging, storage and transportation costs belong in the business case. Buy too few and you are back on the broker market. Buy too many and you have paid for parts you never use. Minimum order quantities on remaining stock create the same tradeoff at smaller scale.
DMSMS planning
Planning for diminishing manufacturing sources and material shortages is the cheapest cost control available, because the expensive resolutions are mostly the late ones.
DoD Instruction 4245.15, issued November 5, 2020, sets DoD policy for DMSMS management, and DoD Manual 4245.15, effective October 26, 2022, directs DoD components to use the Defense Standardization Program Office's SD-22 guidebook for best practices. For buyers, the practical steps are the same at any scale: keep a parts list with manufacturer part numbers, watch for discontinuance notices, check GIDEP, and decide on a resolution while authorized stock and last time buy windows still exist. Our defense contractors page covers how these requirements flow down.
Published resolution cost figures
The one neutral, published set of numbers we found is the Defense Standardization Program Office's DMSMS cost metrics, approved for public release in March 2015 and based on a 2014 Department of Commerce Bureau of Industry and Security survey. They are average reported costs to resolve one DMSMS issue, not the price of a part.
| Resolution | Average cost (DSPO, 2015) |
|---|---|
| Approved parts | $1,028 |
| Life-of-need buy | $5,234 |
| Simple substitute | $12,579 |
| Complex substitute | $25,410 |
| Extension of production or support | $25,472 |
| Repair, refurbishment or reclamation | $65,015 |
| Development of a new item or source | $655,411 |
| Redesign of the next higher assembly | $1,092,856 |
| Redesign, complex or system replacement | $10,287,964 |
The report gives 95 percent confidence ranges around each average, and the ranges are wide for the engineering-heavy options. The figures are about a decade old and reflect DoD programs, so use them for the relative size of each option, not as a quote. The lesson holds: buying an approved part or a life-of-need quantity is orders of magnitude cheaper than redesigning around a part you waited too long to buy.
Ways to lower obsolete parts cost
- Check the original manufacturer and authorized channels first, including last time buy stock and authorized aftermarket makers.
- Screen GIDEP before committing to any source.
- Have your engineer assign a counterfeit risk level so testing matches the part's criticality.
- Set date code and lot limits from engineering need.
- Buy enough for the remaining program when the part is scarce, and plan storage.
- Compare a rebuild or substitute against broker stock on total cost, including testing.
- Act on discontinuance notices while windows are open.
Get an obsolete part search quoted
Send part numbers, quantities, date code limits and required testing through the obsolete parts request form. Those details decide whether a found part is usable, so including them first avoids paying for stock you cannot accept. A person replies within 1 business day, and rush requests are prioritized. We search appropriate channels, line up inspection or testing where your rules require it, or match a rebuild to a qualified shop, and give you one quote and one purchase order across the sources and labs involved. We do not promise that every part can be found. Read more about our obsolete aerospace parts service, and see our confidentiality page before sending drawings or controlled data.
Send the job. A person replies within 1 business day.
Part, quantity and date are enough to start. Drawings and the mutual NDA follow by reply, and controlled programs never send technical data through this site.
We have it.
Reference . A person replies within 1 business day. Watch for our email from [email protected].
Questions
Why are obsolete aerospace parts so expensive?
Scarcity sets the part price, but verification often costs more. Parts from outside the authorized chain may need inspection and lab testing, some of it destructive, plus records checks and GIDEP screening. If no acceptable stock exists, the cost moves to reverse engineering, emulation or redesign. Department of Defense survey data published by the Defense Standardization Program Office shows engineering-based resolutions averaging hundreds to thousands of times the cost of buying an approved part.
How much does counterfeit testing add to an obsolete part?
There is no published price list. The cost depends on the risk level assigned to the part, the test methods that level requires under SAE AS6171, how many lots must be sampled and whether destructive tests consume parts you then have to replace. Electrical testing also needs a test program per part type. Have your engineer assign a risk level, because an unassigned part may be tested to a default sequence.
Is it cheaper to reverse engineer an obsolete part than to buy from a broker?
Sometimes. Reverse engineering carries fixed one-time costs for data, material decisions, first article and possibly qualification testing, so it pays off when you need enough parts to spread those costs, or when broker stock cannot be verified. For a handful of parts with good traceability, a tested broker buy may be cheaper. Compare total cost over the remaining program, not unit price.
What is a lifetime buy and how big should it be?
A lifetime buy, or life-of-need buy, is a purchase sized to sustain your product until its next technology refresh or end of service. Size it from your forecast demand, spares, expected scrap and any parts consumed by testing, and add the cost of controlled storage. Manufacturers usually announce a final order window in their discontinuance notice, so start the sizing as soon as the notice arrives.
Do I need to check GIDEP before buying obsolete parts?
It is strongly recommended, and on many defense contracts screening is part of the required counterfeit avoidance system. GIDEP carries discontinuance notices and reports on suspect counterfeit and nonconforming items, and a 2025 Department of Energy notice states that joining and using it is no cost. Screening before purchase can reveal a successor part or a known bad source before you spend money.
What does an AS6081 certified distributor cost compared with an authorized distributor?
There is no fixed relationship. Authorized distributors sell manufacturer-backed stock with full traceability, so verification cost is low. Independent distributors working to SAE AS6081A may find stock authorized channels no longer carry, often at a scarcity price, and the buyer usually adds lab testing. Compare quotes on total delivered cost, including testing, paperwork and the risk your contract assigns to you.
Related
Sources
- Defense Standardization Program Office, DMSMS Cost Metrics report (approved for public release March 24, 2015), hosted by the Bureau of Industry and Security
- Acquisition.gov, DFARS 252.246-7008 Sources of Electronic Parts
- Acquisition.gov, FAR 52.246-26 Reporting Nonconforming Items
- U.S. Department of Energy, OPEX Awareness: GIDEP Tools (2025)
- PJ Labs, LF-56 AS6171A Working Document (December 2023)
- ERAI, Counterfeit avoidance standards listing (AS6081A, AS6171A dates)
- SAE International, AS6174 Counterfeit Materiel
- DVIDS, Program solves the microcircuit obsolescence puzzle (DLA Land and Maritime, December 23, 2024)
- Texas Instruments, Product change notification and discontinuance policy
- Richtek, End of Life Management policy
- DoD Instruction 4245.15, Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages Management (November 5, 2020)
- DoD Manual 4245.15, Management of Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages
Ready to
source it?
A person replies within 1 business day. NDA first.
Request a quote