This paper presents a novel framework, based on traditional system safety modelling approaches, for the representation and comparison of airworthiness aviation frameworks. A disparate array of military airworthiness frameworks have emerged due to a lack of standardisation and the absence of a recognised organisation needed for the harmonisation of military regulatory frameworks.. The complexity and subsequent cost in inter-agency recognition of existing certification programs has led to the establishment of a European forum of military airworthiness authorities. The forum is working towards establishing a common regulatory framework across its European member states. The common framework provides the systematic basis for a certification of military aircraft that can be readily recognised by all of the member states. This will have many cost and efficiency benefits for the EU. The framework and recognition process have recently been accepted as a method for establishing recognition outside of Europe, with some identified shortfalls. This paper establishes a method for overcoming these shortfalls for nations outside of europe. The Product-Behaviour-Process (PBP) Bow-Tie, which is a novel application of the traditional bowtie risk modelling tool, derives test points that capture the airworthiness attestations for the high-level engineering lifecycle processes of design, production and maintenance. The proposed framework is used to provide a comparison between the Australian Defence Force and United States Army regulatory frameworks. The comparative case-study clearly demonstrates the benefit of the PBP Bow-Tie model in its ability to systematically represent the disparate regulatory frameworks. A novel representation of the output is also described, which facilitates a visual comparison of the results. The application of the PBP Bow-Tie framework to the case-study of regulatory frameworks reveals significant differences that need to be addressed in order for inter-agency recognition.