Abstract: With the deepening of civil-military integration and the development of dual-use aero-engine platform families, rationally crediting the military endurance test results of dual-use engines is of great significance for shortening the civil airworthiness verification cycle and reducing certification costs. Taking aircraft turboshaft/turboprop en gines as the object of study, this paper reviews the evolution of endurance test provisions in the military standards and civil airworthiness regulations of the United States, Europe and China. It then compares the General Specification for Aircraft Turboprop and Turboshaft Engines (GJB 242A-2018) and the Airworthiness Regulations for Aero-engines (CCAR-33R2) in terms of their main and additional endurance test requirements, so as to identify their similarities and differences. The physical connotation of these differences is analyzed from the two dimensions of damage mechanism and severity assessment criterion. The results show that military and civil endurance tests are consistent in their assessment objectives of structural integrity, durability and reliability. Both are evolv ing toward equivalent endurance tests based on safety outcomes. However, the test spectra specified in military standards are closer to variable mission profiles. In contrast, civil airworthiness regulations place greater emphasis on representative mission cycles and the "three red lines" assessment. On this basis, drawing on the concepts and practices of equivalent endurance tests in Europe and the United States, this paper proposes an endurance test severity assessment path oriented to military-to-civil airworthiness crediting. This path provides methodological reference and technical support for the military-to-civil airworthiness crediting of dual-use aero-engines

Key words: aircraft turboshaft/turboprop engines, military standards, civil airworthiness regulations, endurance test, severity assessment, military-to-civil airworthiness crediting