UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

--------------------

FORM 10-K
--------------------

X ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
--- SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2000

TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the transition period from ____ to ____

Commission File No. 2-91762

POLARIS AIRCRAFT INCOME FUND I
------------------------------
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

California 94-2938977
------------------------------- -----------------------
(State or other jurisdiction of (IRS Employer I.D. No.)
incorporation or organization)

201 High Ridge Road, Stamford, Connecticut 06927
------------------------------------------ -----
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)

Registrant's telephone number, including area code: (203) 357-3776

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: None

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
Units of Limited Partnership Interest

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports
required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the
registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such
filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes X No
--- ---

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405
of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the
best of registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements
incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. X
---

No formal market exists for the units of Limited Partnership interest and
therefore there exists no aggregate market value at December 31, 2000.

Documents incorporated by reference: None

This document consists of 38 pages.

PART I

Item 1. Business

Polaris Aircraft Income Fund I (PAIF-I or the Partnership) was formed primarily
to purchase and lease used commercial jet aircraft in order to provide
distributions of cash from operations, to maximize the residual values of
aircraft upon sale and to protect Partnership capital through experienced
management and diversification. PAIF-I was organized as a California Limited
Partnership on June 27, 1984 and will terminate no later than December 2010. As
of December 31, 2000, the only assets remaining were cash, three aircraft
engines and spare parts in inventory (as discussed in Note 8), which includes
one engine.

PAIF-I has many competitors in the aircraft leasing market, including airlines,
aircraft leasing companies, other Limited Partnerships, banks and several other
types of financial institutions. This market is highly competitive and there is
no single competitor who has a significant influence on the industry. In
addition to other competitors, the General Partner, Polaris Investment
Management Corporation (PIMC), and its affiliates, including GE Capital Aviation
Services, Inc. (GECAS), Polaris Aircraft Leasing Corporation (PALC), Polaris
Holding Company (PHC) and General Electric Capital Corporation (GE Capital),
acquire, lease, finance, sell and remarket aircraft for their own accounts and
for existing aircraft and aircraft leasing programs managed by them. Further,
GECAS provides a significant range of aircraft management services to third
parties, including without limitation AerFi Group plc (formerly GPA Group plc),
a public limited company organized in Ireland, together with its consolidated
subsidiaries (AerFi), and Airplanes Group, together with its subsidiaries (APG),
each of which two groups leases and sells aircraft. Accordingly, in seeking to
re-lease and sell its engines, the Partnership may be in competition with the
General Partner, its affiliates, AerFi, APG, and other third parties to whom
GECAS provides aircraft management services from time to time.

The Partnership leased three JT8D-9A engines to CanAir Cargo Ltd. (CanAir) for
three years beginning in May 1994. In 1997, the lease with CanAir was extended
for seven months. In August 1997, the engine lease was transferred to Royal
Aviation Inc. and Royal Cargo, Inc. (Royal Aviation) pursuant to an Aircraft
Lease Purchase Agreement. Under this agreement, the leases were extended to
August 2000 at the same rental rate. The engines were returned on September 7,
2000 upon the expiration of the lease. The Partnership has made these engines
available for sale along with the remaining inventory of spare parts such that
the Partnership plans to liquidate all its assets and make a final distribution
thereafter.

Item 2. Properties

At December 31, 2000, the Partnership owned three JT8D-9A engines and certain
inventoried parts (as discussed in Note 8), which includes one engine, out of
its original portfolio of eleven aircraft. None of the engines are Stage 3
compliant (see Item 7 "Industry Update - Aircraft Noise"). The three JT8D-9A
engines previously leased to Royal Aviation were redelivered to the Partnership
on September 7, 2000 upon the expiration of the lease. In addition, the
Partnership transferred four aircraft to aircraft inventory during 1992 and
1993. These aircraft were disassembled for sale of their component parts. The
Partnership sold its remaining inventory of aircraft parts from the four
disassembled aircraft, to Soundair, Inc., in 1998. Additionally, one of two
engines held in inventory was sold to Quantum Aviation Limited during 1998. Two
engines formerly leased to Viscount, were returned to the Partnership in 1996
and were sold in March 1997. One additional engine was sold to Viscount during
1995. The Partnership has sold six aircraft and one airframe from its original
aircraft portfolio: a Boeing 737-200 Convertible Freighter in 1990, a McDonnell
Douglas DC-9-10 in 1992, a Boeing 737-200 in 1993, the airframe from a Boeing
737-200 aircraft in 1995 and three Boeing 737-200 aircraft in 1997.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings

Markair, Inc. (Markair) Bankruptcy - As previously reported in the Partnership's
1999 Form 10-K, Markair commenced reorganization proceedings under Chapter 11 of
the United States Bankruptcy Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the
Third District of Alaska. On June 11, 1992, the Partnership filed a proof of
claim in the case to recover damages for past due rent and for Markair's failure
to meet return conditions with respect to the Partnership's aircraft that were
leased by Markair. In August 1993, the Bankruptcy Court approved a plan of
reorganization for Markair and a stipulation allowing the Partnership to retain
the security deposits and maintenance reserves previously posted by Markair, and
an unsecured claim against Markair for $445,000. The unsecured claim was
converted to subordinated debentures during 1994, and Markair defaulted on its
payment obligations on such debentures. On April 14, 1995, Markair commenced new
reorganization proceedings under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code
in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Third District of Alaska. On
October 25, 1995, Markair converted its Chapter 11 reorganization proceeding
into a proceeding under Chapter 7 of the United States Bankruptcy Code in the
same court. The trustee, Key Bank of Washington, took steps to protect the
interests of the debenture holders, including the Partnership, by filing proofs
of claim in this proceeding. The Partnership has not received any distribution
from the bankrupt estate on the proofs of claim. There have been no material
developments with respect to this proceeding during the period covered by this
report.

Braniff, Inc. (Braniff) Bankruptcy - In September 1989, Braniff filed a petition
under Chapter 11 of the Federal Bankruptcy Code in the United States Bankruptcy
Court for the Middle District of Florida, Orlando Division. The Partnership
filed a proof of claim to recover unpaid rent and other damages, and a proof of
administrative claim to recover damages for detention of aircraft,
non-compliance with court orders, post-petition use of engines and liquidated
damages. On July 27, 1992, the Partnership, Braniff and the Braniff creditor
committees entered into a settlement which allowed the Partnership an
administrative claim of approximately $2,076,923. The Bankruptcy Court made a
final disposition of the Partnership's claim by permitting the Partnership to
exchange a portion of its unsecured claim for Braniff's right (commonly referred
to as a "Stage 2 Base Level right") under the FAA noise regulations to operate
one Stage 2 aircraft and by allowing the Partnership a net remaining unsecured
claim of $769,231 in the proceedings.

In May, 1998, Braniff's bankrupt estate made a $200,000 payment in respect of
the unsecured claims of the Partnership and other affiliates of Polaris
Investment Management Corporation, of which $138,462 was allocated to the
Partnership based on its pro rata share of the total claims. On January 20,
1999, Braniff's bankrupt estate made an additional $84,000 payment in respect of
the unsecured claims of the Partnership and other affiliates of Polaris
Investment Management Corporation, of which $58,154 was allocated to the
Partnership based on its pro rata share of the total claims. On January 16,
2001, Braniff's bankrupt estate made a $110,890 payment in respect of the
unsecured claims of the Partnership and other affiliates of Polaris Management
Corporation, of which $76,770 was allocated to the Partnership based on its pro
rata share of the total claims.

Kepford, et al. v. Prudential Securities, et al. - On April 13, 1994, this
action was filed in the District Court of Harris County, Texas against Polaris
Investment Management Corporation, Polaris Securities Corporation, Polaris
Holding Company, Polaris Aircraft Leasing Corporation, the Partnership, Polaris
Aircraft Income Fund II, Polaris Aircraft Income Fund III, Polaris Aircraft
Income Fund IV, Polaris Aircraft Income Fund V, Polaris Aircraft Income Fund VI,
General Electric Capital Corporation, Prudential Securities, Inc., Prudential
Insurance Company of America and James J. Darr. The complaint alleges violations
of the Texas Securities Act, the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, sections
11 and 12 of the Securities Act of 1933, common law fraud, fraud in the

inducement, negligent misrepresentation, negligence, breach of fiduciary duty
and civil conspiracy arising from the defendants' alleged misrepresentation and
failure to disclose material facts in connection with the sale of limited
partnership units in the Partnership and the other Polaris Aircraft Income
Funds. Plaintiffs seek, among other things, an award of compensatory damages in
an unspecified amount plus interest, and double and treble damages under the
Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act. The trial date for this action was set and
rescheduled by the trial court several times, and on September 2, 1999, the
court granted a stay of this action pending the submission of the remaining
plaintiffs' claims to arbitration. Subsequently, several of the plaintiffs filed
a motion with the Court to dismiss their claims, which the court granted.

CanAir Cargo Ltd. (CanAir) Order under the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act
of Canada - On July 28, 1997, CanAir obtained an order under the Companies'
Creditors Arrangement Act of Canada (the CCAA Order) from the Ontario Court of
Justice, General Division. The CCAA Order restrained CanAir's creditors,
including lessors, from exercising any rights arising from CanAir's default or
non-performance of its obligations until October 28, 1997 or further order of
the court. CanAir leased three engines from the Partnership, and a total of five
aircraft from Polaris Holding Company (Polaris) and General Electric Capital
Leasing Canada, Inc. (GECL Canada). CanAir had defaulted on its July and August
1997 engine rent and maintenance reserve payment obligations to the Partnership.
On August 22, 1997, GE Capital Aviation Services, Inc. (GECAS), as agent for
Polaris, GECL Canada and the Partnership (collectively, the GECAS Parties),
entered into an Aircraft Lease Purchase Agreement with Royal Aviation Inc. and
Royal Cargo Inc. for the transfer of CanAir's future lease obligations to Royal
Aviation Inc.

At December 31, 1999, CanAir owed the GECAS Parties a total of approximately
$1.5 million. Of this amount, approximately $30,365 was owed to the Partnership
under the engine lease, exclusive of accrued interest and maintenance reserve
payment obligations.

The receiver appointed by the Ontario Court of Justice on behalf of CanAir's
creditors sold the remaining five Convair 280 aircraft owned by CanAir, as well
as all of CanAir's other assets, including spare parts and accounts receivable.
The proceeds of the sale are being distributed to CanAir's creditors, including
the GECAS Parties. The receiver has distributed to the GECAS Parties a total of
1,076,116 Canadian Dollars (approximately $741,700 U.S. Dollars) in respect of
the GECAS Parties' claims against CanAir. Of this amount, 91,469 Canadian
Dollars (approximately $61,513 U.S. Dollars) have been allocated to the
Partnership based on its pro rata share of the total claims. Of the sale
proceeds, approximately 600,000 Canadian Dollars (approximately $384,608 U.S.
Dollars converted as of March 27, 2001) remain to be distributed to CanAir's
creditors by the receiver, subject to a final court order as to the priorities
of CanAir's creditors under the receivership order and Canada's Personal
Property Security Act (Ontario).

On February 15, 2000, the Partnership received the settlement of $61,513 in
connection with the CanAir Bankruptcy Settlement, which is comprised of amounts
received for rents, maintenance reserve obligations and accrued interest. A
portion of the proceeds was treated as a recovery of previously reserved rents
receivable. The allowance for credit losses of $30,365 was reversed and is
included in "Lessee Settlement" in the statement of operations.

Prior to the end of the third quarter of 2001 or shortly thereafter, CanAir is
expected to pay the approximate amount of 600,000 Canadian Dollars
(approximately $384,608 U.S. Dollars converted as of March 27, 2001) to those
creditors entitled to relief, and an amount to be determined will be paid to the
Partnership.

Other Proceedings - Part III, Item 10 discusses certain other actions which have
been filed against the general partner in connection with certain public
offerings, including that of the Partnership. The Partnership is not a party to
these actions.

Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders

None.

PART II

Item 5. Market for the Registrant's Common Equity and Related Stockholder
Matters

a) Polaris Aircraft Income Fund I's (PAIF-I or the Partnership) Limited
Partnership interests (Units) are not publicly traded. Currently there
is no formal market for PAIF-I's Units and it is unlikely that any
market will develop.

b) Number of Security Holders:

Number of Record Holders
Title of Class as of December 31, 2000
------------------ -----------------------------

Limited Partnership Interest: 6,102

General Partnership Interest: 1

c) Dividends:

Distributions of cash from operations commenced in 1987. The
Partnership made cash distributions to Limited Partners of $843,645 and
$2,488,753, or $5.00 and $14.75 per Limited Partnership unit during
2000 and 1999, respectively.

Item 6. Selected Financial Data

For the years ended December 31,
--------------------------------

2000 1999 1998 1997 1996
---- ---- ---- ---- ----

Revenues $ 475,931 $ 764,665 $ 1,464,953 $ 3,643,495 $ 2,781,212

Net Income (Loss) 272,372 600,019 1,304,160 3,188,131 (591,415)

Net Income (Loss)
allocated to Limited
Partners 264,054 594,019 1,053,059 1,341,903 (838,569)

Net Income (Loss) per
Limited Partnership Unit 1.57 3.52 6.24 7.95 (4.97)

Cash Distributions per
Limited Partnership
Unit 5.00 14.75 8.00 44.25 15.00

Amount of Cash
Distributions Included
Above Representing
a Return of Capital on
a Generally Accepted
Accounting Principle
Basis per Limited
Partnership Unit 5.00 14.75 8.00 44.25 15.00

Total Assets 3,334,081 5,090,421 7,361,736 7,366,511 14,254,000

Partners' Capital 2,289,790 2,954,801 5,120,063 5,315,716 10,423,428

Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations

At December 31, 2000, Polaris Aircraft Income Fund I (the Partnership) owned
three JT8D-9A engines and certain inventoried aircraft parts, which includes one
engine, out of its original portfolio of eleven aircraft. None of the engines
are Stage 3 compliant (see Item 7 "Industry Update - Aircraft Noise"). The three
JT8D-9A engines were leased to Royal Aviation and were redelivered to the
Partnership on September 7, 2000. In addition, the Partnership transferred four
aircraft to aircraft inventory during 1992 and 1993. These aircraft were
disassembled for sale of their component parts. The Partnership sold its
remaining inventory of aircraft parts from the four disassembled aircraft, to
Soundair, Inc., in 1998. Additionally, one of two engines held in inventory was
sold to Quantum Aviation Limited during 1998. Two engines formerly leased to
Viscount, were returned to the Partnership in 1996 and were sold in March 1997.
One additional engine was sold to Viscount during 1995. The Partnership has sold
six aircraft and one airframe from its original aircraft portfolio: a Boeing
737-200 Convertible Freighter in 1990, a McDonnell Douglas DC-9-10 in 1992, a
Boeing 737-200 in 1993, the airframe from a Boeing 737-200 aircraft in 1995 and
three Boeing 737-200 aircraft in 1997.

Remarketing Update

Polaris Investment Management Corporation (the General Partner or PIMC)
evaluates, from time to time, whether the investment objectives of the
Partnership are better served by continuing to hold the Partnership's remaining
portfolio of engines or marketing such engines for sale. This evaluation takes
into account the current and potential earnings of the engines, the conditions
in the markets for lease and sale and future outlook for such markets, and the
tax consequences of selling rather than continuing to lease the engines. The
Partnership has made the engines along with the remaining inventory of spare
parts available for sale, such that all the assets of the Partnership will be
liquidated and a final distribution made thereafter.

Partnership Operations

The Partnership reported net income of $272,372, $600,019, and $1,304,160 or
$1.57, $3.52, and $6.24 per Limited Partnership unit for the years ended
December 31, 2000, 1999, and 1998, respectively. Operating results decreased in
2000 as compared to 1999 primarily due to a decrease in rent and interest
revenues, an increase in administration and operating expenses, as well as a
gain on the sale of aircraft inventory recognized in 1999, partially offset by
decreased management fees, decreased depreciation expense and a lessee
settlement received in 2000. The decrease in operating results in 1999, as
compared to 1998, was primarily due to a decrease in interest, sales of aircraft
inventory and lessee settlement and other income, related to the JetFleet and
Braniff Bankruptcies.

Rent from operating leases decreased in 2000 as compared to 1999 due to the
expiration of the engine leases to Royal Aviation in August 2000.

Interest income further decreased in 2000 as compared to 1999 due to a decrease
in the cash reserves due to distributions as well as lower rental income in
connection with the expiration of the engine leases to Royal Aviation. Interest
income decreased in 1999 as compared to 1998 primarily due to a decrease in the
cash reserves due to distributions over the same period.

Gain on sale of aircraft inventory decreased in 2000 as compared to 1999 as a
result of a $206,099 gain on the sale of aircraft inventory in 1999. There were
no such sales in 2000.

Lessee settlements increased in 2000 as compared to 1999 due to a settlement in
the CanAir bankruptcy proceedings in February 2000, of which the Partnership
received $61,513.

Operating expenses increased in 2000 as compared to 1999 as a result of shipping
and inspection fees paid in connection with the return of the three JT8D-9A
engines to the Partnership.

Administration expenses increased in 2000 as compared to 1999 primarily due to
an increase in printing and postage costs and consulting fees.

Liquidity and Cash Distributions

Liquidity - The Partnership received maintenance reserve payments from its
lessee that may be reimbursed to the lessee or applied against certain costs
incurred by the Partnership for maintenance work performed on the Partnership's
engines, as specified in the leases. Maintenance reserve balances remaining at
the termination of the lease, if any, may be used by the Partnership to offset
required maintenance expenses or recognized as revenue. The net maintenance
reserves balances aggregate $631,316 as of December 31, 2000. Two engines
underwent a maintenance event which resulted in a reimbursements to the lessee
totaling $1,341,702 during 2000. Additionally, as a result of the expiration of
the engine lease to Royal Aviation, the Partnership returned a $45,000 security
deposit during 2000.

The Partnership received payments of $206,099 and $162,454 respectively in 1999
and 1998 from the sale of parts from the four disassembled aircraft. There was
no such sale in 2000. This includes the sale of remaining inventory of aircraft
parts from the four disassembled aircraft to Soundair in 1998 for $100,000.

PIMC has determined that the Partnership maintain cash reserves as a prudent
measure to insure that the Partnership has available funds for the remarketing
of the engines returned from Royal Aviation and for other contingencies,
including expenses of the Partnership. The Partnership's cash reserves will be
monitored and may be revised from time to time as further information becomes
available in the future.

Cash Distributions - Cash distributions to Limited Partners during 2000, 1999
and 1998 were $843,645, $2,488,753 and $1,349,832, respectively. Cash
distributions per Limited Partnership unit were $5.00, $14.75 and $8.00 during
2000, 1999 and 1998, respectively. The timing and amount of the final cash
distribution to partners is not yet known and will depend upon the Partnership's
future cash requirements, including proceeds from the sale of the engines and
inventory of spare parts.

Sale of Inventory

In November 1998, the Partnership sold one of two engines held in inventory for
net proceeds of $290,000 to Quantum Aviation Limited (Quantum). It was
anticipated that the second engine would be sold to Quantum. However, that sale
did not occur, and the Partnership continues to re-market the remaining engine
along with the other inventory of spare parts, and the three engines returned
from Royal Aviation.

Viscount Restructuring Agreement and Default

Stipulation), which was subsequently approved by the Bankruptcy Court. Among
other things, the Compromise and Stipulation provided that in the event that
Viscount failed to promptly and timely perform its monetary obligations under
the Leases and the Compromise and Stipulation, without further order of the
Bankruptcy Court, GECAS would be entitled to immediate possession of the
aircraft for which Viscount failed to perform and Viscount would deliver such
aircraft and all records related thereto to GECAS.

Viscount defaulted on and was unable to cure its September 1996 rent
obligations. However, Viscount took the position that it was entitled to certain
offsets and asserted defenses to the September rent obligations. On September
18, 1996, GECAS (on behalf of the Partnership and other entities) and Viscount
entered into a Stipulation and Agreement by which Viscount agreed to voluntarily
return all of the Partnership's aircraft and engines, turn over possession of
the majority of its aircraft parts inventory, and cooperate with GECAS in the
transition of aircraft equipment and maintenance, in exchange for which, upon
Bankruptcy Court approval of the Stipulation and Agreement, the Partnership
would waive its right to pre- and post-petition claims against Viscount for
amounts due and unpaid.

The Stipulation and Agreement provided that upon the return and surrender of
possession of the Partnership's three airframes and eight engines (two of which
were spare engines), Viscount's rights and interests therein would terminate. As
of October 1, 1996, Viscount had returned (or surrendered possession of) all of
the Partnership's airframes and engines. One of the returned airframes (together
with one installed engine) was in the possession of and being operated by
Nations Air. Six of the seven returned engines were in the possession of certain
maintenance facilities and required maintenance work in order to be made
operable. Viscount returned the Partnership's remaining airframe and one
installed engine on October 1, 1996. Nations Air returned this airframe and one
installed engine to the Partnership in February 1997. These three airframes and
six of the engines were sold in 1997. One of the engines was sold to Quantum in
November 1998.

A consignment agreement has been entered into with a sales agent for the
disposal of the spare parts inventory recovered from Viscount. Given that many
of the parts require repair/overhaul, the cost of which is not accurately
determinable in advance, and the inherent uncertainty of sales prices for used
spare parts, there remains uncertainty as to whether the Partnership will derive
further proceeds from the sale of this inventory. The Partnership received
$206,099 in 1999 for the sale of consignment inventory.

The Stipulation and Agreement also provided that the Polaris Entities, GECAS and
FSB would release any and all claims against Viscount, Viscount's bankruptcy
estate, and the property of Viscount's bankruptcy estate, effective upon entry
of a final non-appealable court order approving the Stipulation and Agreement.
The Bankruptcy Court entered such an order approving the Stipulation and
Agreement on October 23, 1996.

As discussed in Note 8, in October 1996, Viscount's affiliates, Rock-It Cargo
USA, Inc. and Riverhorse Investments, Inc., assumed Viscount's engine finance
sale note to the Partnership as provided under the Compromise and Stipulation.

The Partnership considers all receivables from Viscount to be uncollectible and
had written-off, all notes, rents and interest receivable balances from
Viscount. Payments received by the Partnership from the sale of the spare
aircraft parts (as discussed above), if any, will be recorded as revenue when
received.

substantial maintenance costs. Based on its evaluation, the Partnership
concluded that a sale of the remaining aircraft and spare engines on an "as is,
where is" basis would maximize the economic return on this equipment to the
Partnership. These aircraft were subsequently sold in 1997.

Claims Related to Lessee Defaults

Jet Fleet's bankruptcy proceeding was closed on August 6, 1997, and the
bankruptcy proceeding of Jet Fleet International Airlines, Inc. was closed on
February 10, 1998. Distributions from the bankrupt estate have not been made to
the unsecured creditors, and the Partnership is not likely to receive any
distributions on its Proof of Claim.

The Partnership had been holding deposits and maintenance reserves pending the
outcome of the Jet Fleet bankruptcy proceedings. Consequently, the Partnership
recognized, during the first quarter of 1998, revenue of $92,610 that had been
held as deposits and maintenance reserves, which is included in lessee
settlement and other income.

Justice, General Division. The CCAA Order restrained CanAir's creditors,
including lessors, from exercising any rights arising from CanAir's default or
non-performance of its obligations until October 28, 1997 or further order of
the court. CanAir leased three engines from the Partnership, and a total of five
aircraft from Polaris Holding Company (Polaris) and General Electric Capital
Leasing Canada, Inc. (GECL Canada). CanAir had defaulted on its July and August
1997 engine rent and maintenance reserve payment obligations to the Partnership.
On August 22, 1997, GE Capital Aviation Services, Inc. (GECAS), as agent for
Polaris, GECL Canada and the Partnership (collectively, the GECAS Parties),
entered into an Aircraft Lease Purchase Agreement with Royal Aviation Inc. and
Royal Cargo Inc. for the transfer of CanAir's future lease obligations to Royal
Aviation Inc.

The receiver appointed by the Ontario Court of Justice on behalf of CanAir's
creditors sold the remaining five Convair 280 aircraft owned by CanAir, as well
as all of CanAir's other assets, including spare parts and accounts receivable.
The proceeds of the sale are being distributed to CanAir's creditors, including
the GECAS Parties. The receiver has distributed to the GECAS Parties a total of
1,076,116.04 Canadian Dollars (approximately $741,700 U.S. Dollars) in respect
of the GECAS Parties' claims against CanAir. Of this amount, 91,469 Canadian
Dollars ($61,513 U.S. Dollars) have been allocated to the Partnership based on
its pro rata share of the total claims. Of the sale proceeds, approximately
600,000 Canadian Dollars (approximately $384,608 U.S. Dollars converted as of
March 27, 2001) remain to be distributed to CanAir's creditors by the receiver,
subject to a final court order as to the priorities of CanAir's creditors under
the receivership order and Canada's Personal Property Security Act (Ontario).

October 25, 1995, Markair converted its Chapter 11 reorganization proceeding
into a proceeding under Chapter 7 of the United States Bankruptcy Code in the
same court. The trustee, Key Bank of Washington, took steps to protect the
interests of the debenture holders, including the Partnership, by filing proofs
of claim in this proceeding. The Partnership has not received any distribution
from the bankrupt estate on the proofs of claim. There have been no material
developments with respect to this proceeding during the period covered by this
report.

Industry Update

Maintenance of Aging Aircraft - The process of aircraft maintenance, including
engines, begins at the aircraft design stage. For aircraft operating under
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations, a review board consisting of
representatives of the manufacturer, FAA representatives and operating airline
representatives is responsible for specifying the aircraft's initial maintenance
program. The General Partner understands that this program is constantly
reviewed and modified throughout the aircraft's operational life.

The Partnership's three JT8D-9A engines have been returned from lease to a
Canadian operator. Pursuant to the lease, the lessee was required to maintain
such engines during the lease term in accordance with a maintenance program that
satisfied the requirements of the Canadian airworthiness authority.

Aircraft Noise - Another issue which has affected the airline industry is that
of aircraft noise levels. The FAA has categorized aircraft according to their
noise levels. Stage 1 aircraft, which have the highest noise level, are no
longer allowed to operate from civil airports in the United States. Stage 2
aircraft no longer meet FAA operational requirements, having been phased-out
under the rules discussed below. Stage 3 aircraft are the most quiet and is the
standard for all new aircraft.

On September 24, 1991, the FAA issued final rules on the phase-out of Stage 2
aircraft by the end of this decade. The key features of the rule include:

- Compliance can be accomplished through a gradual process of
phase-in or phase-out (see below) on each of three interim
compliance dates: December 31, 1994, 1996 and 1998. All Stage 2
aircraft must be phased out of operations in the contiguous United
States by December 31, 1999, with waivers available in certain
specific cases to December 31, 2003.

- All operators have the option of achieving compliance through a
gradual phase-out of Stage 2 aircraft (i.e., eliminate 25% of its
Stage 2 fleet on each of the compliance dates noted above), or a
gradual phase-in of Stage 3 aircraft (i.e., 55%, 65% and 75% of an
operator's fleet must consist of Stage 3 aircraft by the
respective interim compliance dates noted above).

The federal rule does not prohibit local airports from issuing more stringent
phase-out rules. In fact, several local airports have adopted more stringent
noise requirements which restrict the operation of Stage 2 and certain Stage 3
aircraft.

Other countries have also adopted noise policies. The European Union (EU)
adopted a non-addition rule in 1989, which directed each member country to pass
the necessary legislation to prohibit airlines from adding Stage 2 aircraft to
their fleets after November 1, 1990, with all Stage 2 aircraft phased-out by the
year 2002. The International Civil Aviation Organization has also endorsed the
phase-out of Stage 2 aircraft on a world-wide basis by the year 2002.

At December 31, 2000, the Partnership's portfolio consisted of three Stage 2
engines. Hushkit modifications, which allow Stage 2 engines to meet Stage 3
requirements, are available for the Partnership's aircraft engines. However,
while technically feasible, hushkits may not be cost effective due to the age
and maintenance condition of the engines and the time required to fully amortize
the additional investment.

Legislation has been drafted and has been under review by the EU for sometime to
adopt anti-hushkitting regulations within member states. The legislation seeks
to ban hushkitted aircraft from being added to member states registers and
preclude all operation of hushkitted aircraft within the EU after certain
specific dates. Due to criticism by the US Government, the enactment of this
legislation has been deferred twice and it is now uncertain if it will ever be
enacted at this point. However, the effect of this proposal has been to reduce
the demand for hushkitted aircraft within the EU and its neighboring states,
including the former Eastern Block states.

Demand for Aircraft - At year end 2000, there were approximately 14,678 jet
aircraft in the world fleet. Air travel continued to be strong in 2000 with
traffic growth in North America of 7.65%, and Globally 10.66%. In 2001 traffic
is projected to drop to an estimated growth rate of 1-3% depending on the
magnitude of an observed slowdown in the US economy. Surging fuel prices in 1999
hit the Gulf War levels and continued throughout 2000. Airlines added fuel
surcharge to their tickets, but unhedged carriers had lowered margins despite
the surcharges. Alliances continued to evolve in 2000 as in 1999 as airlines
aligned themselves with code sharing, joint pricing, schedule integration and
corporate agreements. Additionally, a wave of consolidation began in the US
market during 2000. Regulatory hurdles remain before these transactions are
completed. Manufacturers continue to produce at high levels compared to what
demand will require in the future years. A down cycle appears imminent, but a
rebound in traffic growth or a wave of retirements could stabilize the supply
demand situation. Order data for 2000 appears below.

Number of Orders Percentage of Total Percentage of total orders
between Boeing/Airbus

Airbus 476 26% 45%
Boeing 587 32% 55%
RJs 756 42%
----- ----- -----
Total 1,819 100% 100%

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

POLARIS AIRCRAFT INCOME FUND I

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2000 AND 1999

AND FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2000, 1999 AND 1998

TOGETHER WITH THE

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

To the Partners of
Polaris Aircraft Income Fund I:

We have audited the accompanying balance sheets of Polaris Aircraft Income Fund
I (a California limited partnership) as of December 31, 2000 and 1999, and the
related statements of operations, changes in partners' capital and cash flows
for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2000. These
financial statements are the responsibility of the General Partner. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on
our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted
in the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit
to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free
of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence
supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit
also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates
made by the General Partner, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis
for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in
all material respects, the financial position of Polaris Aircraft Income Fund I
as of December 31, 2000 and 1999, and the results of its operations and its cash
flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2000 in
conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.

ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

San Francisco, California,
January 26, 2001

POLARIS AIRCRAFT INCOME FUND I

BALANCE SHEETS

DECEMBER 31, 2000 AND 1999

2000 1999
---- ----
ASSETS:

CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS $2,469,034 $4,190,421

RENT AND OTHER RECEIVABLES, net of
allowance for credit losses of $-0- in 2000
and $30,365 in 1999 -- 30,000

OTHER ASSETS 6,297 --

AIRCRAFT ENGINES, net of accumulated
depreciation of $101,250 in 2000 and
$90,000 in 1999 858,750 870,000
---------- ----------

Total Assets $3,334,081 $5,090,421
========== ==========

LIABILITIES AND PARTNERS' CAPITAL :

PAYABLE TO AFFILIATES $ 48,904 $ 11,216

ACCOUNTS PAYABLE AND ACCRUED
LIABILITIES 364,071 374,689

SECURITY DEPOSITS -- 45,000

MAINTENANCE RESERVES 631,316 1,704,715
---------- ----------

Total Liabilities 1,044,291 2,135,620
---------- ----------

PARTNERS' CAPITAL :

General Partner 137,474 222,894
Limited Partners, 168,729 units
issued and outstanding 2,152,316 2,731,907
---------- ----------

Total Partners' Capital 2,289,790 2,954,801
---------- ----------
Total Liabilities and Partners' Capital $3,334,081 $5,090,421
========== ==========

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.

POLARIS AIRCRAFT INCOME FUND I

STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2000, 1999 AND 1998

2000 1999 1998
---- ---- ----
REVENUES:
Rent from operating leases $ 240,000 $ 360,000 $ 360,000
Interest 174,418 198,566 303,203
Gain on sale of aircraft inventory -- 206,099 452,454
Lessee settlement and other 61,513 -- 349,296
---------- ---------- ----------

Total Revenues 475,931 764,665 1,464,953
---------- ---------- ----------

EXPENSES:
Depreciation 11,250 15,000 15,000
Management fees to General Partner 12,000 18,000 18,000
Operating 36,238 -- 3,960
Administration and other 144,071 131,646 123,833
---------- ---------- ----------

Total Expenses 203,559 164,646 160,793
---------- ---------- ----------

NET INCOME $ 272,372 $ 600,019 $1,304,160
========== ========== ==========

NET INCOME ALLOCATED
TO THE GENERAL PARTNER $ 8,318 $ 6,000 $ 251,101
========== ========== ==========

NET INCOME ALLOCATED
TO THE LIMITED PARTNERS $ 264,054 $ 594,019 $1,053,059
========== ========== ==========

NET INCOME PER
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP UNIT $ 1.57 $ 3.52 $ 6.24
========== ========== ==========

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.

POLARIS AIRCRAFT INCOME FUND I

STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' CAPITAL

FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2000, 1999 AND 1998

General Limited
Partner Partner Total
------- ------- -----

Balance, December 31, 1997 $ 392,302 $ 4,923,414 $ 5,315,716

Net income 251,101 1,053,059 1,304,160

Cash distributions to partners (149,981) (1,349,832) (1,499,813)
----------- ----------- -----------

Balance, December 31, 1998 493,422 4,626,641 5,120,063

Net income 6,000 594,019 600,019

Cash distributions to partners (276,528) (2,488,753) (2,765,281)
----------- ----------- -----------

Balance, December 31, 1999 222,894 2,731,907 2,954,801

Net income 8,318 264,054 272,372

Cash distributions to partners (93,738) (843,645) (937,383)
----------- ----------- -----------

Balance, December 31, 2000 $ 137,474 $ 2,152,316 $ 2,289,790
=========== =========== ===========

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.

POLARIS AIRCRAFT INCOME FUND I

STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2000, 1999 AND 1998

2000 1999 1998
---- ---- ----

OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
Net income $ 272,372 $ 600,019 $ 1,304,160
Adjustments to reconcile net income to
net cash provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization 11,250 15,000 15,000
Gain on sale of aircraft inventory -- (206,099) (452,454)
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Decrease (increase) in rent and other receivables 30,000 28,154 (58,154)
Increase in other assets (6,297) -- --
Increase (decrease) in payable to affiliates 37,688 678 (31,748)
Increase (decrease) in accounts payable and
accrued liabilities (10,618) 2,947 (75,080)
Decrease in security deposits (45,000) -- (50,000)
Increase (decrease) in maintenance reserves (1,073,399) (109,678) 347,706
----------- ----------- -----------

Net cash provided by (used in)
operating activities (784,004) 331,021 999,430
----------- ----------- -----------

INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
Net proceeds from sale of aircraft inventory -- 206,099 452,454
----------- ----------- -----------

Net cash provided by investing activities -- 206,099 452,454
----------- ----------- -----------

FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
Cash distributions to partners (937,383) (2,765,281) (1,499,813)
----------- ----------- -----------

Net cash used in financing activities (937,383) (2,765,281) (1,499,813)
----------- ----------- -----------

CHANGES IN CASH AND CASH
EQUIVALENTS (1,721,387) (2,228,161) (47,929)

CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS AT
BEGINNING OF YEAR 4,190,421 6,418,582 6,466,511
----------- ----------- -----------

CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS AT
END OF YEAR $ 2,469,034 $ 4,190,421 $ 6,418,582
=========== =========== ===========

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.

POLARIS AIRCRAFT INCOME FUND I

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2000

1. Accounting Principles and Policies

Accounting Method - Polaris Aircraft Income Fund I (PAIF-I or the Partnership),
a California limited partnership, maintains its accounting records, and prepares
its financial statements on the accrual basis of accounting. The preparation of
financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted
in the United States (GAAP) requires management to make estimates and
assumptions that affect reported amounts and related disclosures. Actual results
could differ from those estimates. The most significant estimates with regard to
these financial statements are related to the projected cash flows analysis in
determining the fair value of assets.

Cash and Cash Equivalents - This includes deposits at banks and investments in
money market funds. Cash and Cash Equivalents are stated at cost, which
approximates fair value.

Aircraft and Depreciation - Prior to disposition, aircraft were recorded at
cost, which included acquisition costs. Depreciation to an estimated residual
value was computed using the straight-line method over the estimated economic
life of the aircraft which was originally estimated to be 12 years. Depreciation
in the year of acquisition was calculated based upon the number of days that the
aircraft were in service. The remaining aircraft engines are being depreciated
to an estimated residual value using the straight line method over their
estimated economic life.

The Partnership periodically reviews the estimated realizability of the residual
values at the projected end of each asset's economic life. For any downward
adjustment in estimated residual value or decrease in the projected remaining
economic life, the depreciation expense over the projected remaining economic
life of the asset will be increased.

If the projected net cash flow for each aircraft or engine (projected rental
revenue, net of management fees, less projected maintenance costs, if any, plus
the estimated residual value) is less than the carrying value of the aircraft or
engine, an impairment loss is recognized.

The Partnership has made these engines available for sale along with the
remaining inventory of spare parts. The Partnership is currently reporting these
assets at the lower of carrying amount or fair value less cost to sell.

Capitalized Costs - Modification and maintenance costs which are determined to
increase the value or extend the useful life of the remaining assets are
capitalized and amortized using the straight-line method over the estimated
useful life of the improvement. These costs are also subject to periodic
evaluation for impairment as discussed above.

Aircraft Inventory - Proceeds from sales had been applied against inventory
until the book value was fully recovered. The remaining book value of the
inventory was recovered in 1995. Proceeds in excess of the inventory net book
value are recorded as revenue when received.

Operating Leases - The remaining leases were accounted for as operating leases.
Operating lease revenues were recognized in equal installments over the terms of
the leases.

Maintenance Reserves - The Partnership received maintenance reserve payments
from certain of its lessees that may be reimbursed to the lessee or applied
against certain costs incurred by the Partnership or lessee for maintenance work
performed on the Partnership's aircraft or engines, as specified in the leases.

Maintenance reserve payments are recognized when received and balances remaining
at the termination of the lease, if any, may be used by the Partnership to
offset required maintenance expenses or recognized as revenue.

Operating Expenses - Operating expenses include costs incurred to maintain,
insure, lease and sell the Partnership's aircraft, including costs related to
lessee defaults and costs of disassembling aircraft inventory.

Net Income Per Limited Partnership Unit - Net income per Limited Partnership
unit is based on the Limited Partners' share of net income, allocated in
accordance with the Partnership Agreement, and the number of units outstanding
for the years ended December 31, 2000, 1999 and 1998.

Income Taxes - The Partnership files federal and state information income tax
returns only. Taxable income or loss is reportable by the individual partners.

Receivables - The Partnership had previously recorded an allowance for credit
losses for certain impaired note and rents receivable as a result of
uncertainties regarding their collection as discussed in Note 6 and Note 7. On
February 15, 2000, the Partnership received an initial settlement of $61,513 in
connection with the CanAir Bankruptcy Settlement, which is comprised of amounts
received for rents, maintenance reserve obligations and accrued interest. A
portion of the proceeds was treated as a recovery of previously reserved rents
receivable. The allowance for credit losses of $30,365 was reversed and is
included in "Lessee Settlement" in the statement of operations.

2000 1999
---- ----
Allowance for credit losses,
beginning of year $(30,365) $(30,365)

Recovery of credit losses 30,365 --

Allowance for credit losses, -------- --------
end of year $ -- $(30,365)
======== ========

New Accounting Pronouncements - In June 1998, the Financial Accounting Standards
Board ("FASB") issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 133 ("SFAS
133"), "Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities." This
Statement establishes accounting and reporting standards for derivative
instruments and for hedging activities. It requires that derivatives be
recognized in the balance sheet at fair value and specifies the accounting for
changes in fair value. In June 1999, the FASB issued SFAS No. 137, "Accounting
for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities-Deferral of the Effective Date
of FASB Statement No. 133," to defer the effective date of SFAS 133 until fiscal
years beginning after June 15, 2000. In June 2000, the FASB issued Statement of
Financial Accounting Standard No. 138 ("SFAS 138"), "Accounting for Certain
Derivative Instruments and Certain Hedging Activities - an Amendment of FASB
Statement No. 133." SFAS 138 amends the accounting and reporting standards of
SFAS 133 for certain derivative instruments and certain hedging activities. Due
to the fact that the Partnership does not utilize any derivative instruments,
these pronouncements are not expected to have an impact on the Partnership's
balance sheet or statement of operations.

2. Organization and the Partnership

The Partnership was formed on June 27, 1984 for the purpose of acquiring and
leasing aircraft. It will terminate no later than December 2010. Upon
organization, both the General Partner and the initial Limited Partner

contributed $500. The offering of Limited Partnership units terminated on
December 31, 1985, at which time the Partnership had sold 168,729 units of $500,
representing $84,364,500. All unit holders were admitted to the Partnership on
or before January 1, 1986.

Polaris Investment Management Corporation (PIMC), the sole General Partner of
the Partnership, supervises the day-to-day operations of the Partnership. PIMC
is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Polaris Aircraft Leasing Corporation (PALC).
Polaris Holding Company (PHC) is the parent company of PALC. General Electric
Capital Corporation (GE Capital), an affiliate of General Electric Company, owns
100% of PHC's outstanding common stock. PIMC has entered into a services
agreement dated as of July 1, 1994 with GE Capital Aviation Services, Inc.
(GECAS). Allocations to related parties are described in Notes 9 & 10.

3. Aircraft and Aircraft Engines

At December 31, 2000, the Partnership owned three JT8D-9A engines and certain
inventoried aircraft parts (as discussed in Note 8), which includes one engine,
out of its original portfolio of eleven used commercial jet aircraft. The
remaining leases were net operating leases, requiring the lessees to pay all
operating expenses associated with the engines during the lease term. In
addition, the leases required the lessees to comply with Airworthiness
Directives issued by the Federal Aviation Administration and required compliance
during the lease term. In addition to basic rent, the lessees were generally
required to pay supplemental amounts based on flight hours or cycles into a
maintenance reserve account, to be used for heavy maintenance of the engines.
The leases generally state a minimum acceptable return condition for which the
lessee is liable under the terms of the lease agreement.

Three Aircraft Engines - The Partnership leased two engines from an airframe
previously sold and one engine previously leased to Viscount, to CanAir Cargo
Ltd. (CanAir) beginning in May 1994 for 36 months. The rental rate was variable
based on usage through August 1994. Beginning in September 1994 through the end
of the lease term in May 1997, the rental rate was fixed at $10,000 per engine
per month. In April 1997, the engine lease with CanAir was extended for seven
months at the same lease rate. CanAir defaulted on its lease obligations to the
Partnership in July 1997. In August 1997 the lease was transferred to Royal
Aviation Inc. and Royal Air Cargo, Inc. (Royal Air) and the lease term was
extended to August 2000 at the current lease rate (see Note 6). On August 31,
2000, the lease for the three JT8D-9A engines to Royal Aviation, Inc. and Royal
Cargo, Inc. (Royal Aviation) expired. The engines were returned on September 7,
2000 and security deposit of $45,000 was refunded to Royal Aviation on November
21, 2000. The Partnership has made these engines available for sale along with
the remaining inventory of spare parts such that all the assets of the
Partnership will be liquidated and a final distribution made thereafter. The
Partnership has ceased depreciating these assets and is currently reporting
these assets at the lower of carrying amount or fair value less cost to sell.

The Partnership periodically reviews the estimated realizability of the residual
values at the projected end of each engine's economic life based on estimated
residual values obtained from independent parties.

The Partnership's future earnings are impacted by the net effect of the
adjustments to the carrying value of the engines (which has the effect of
decreasing future depreciation expense), and the downward adjustments to the
estimated residual values (which has the effect of increasing future
depreciation expense).

4. Sale of Aircraft and Engines

Sale of Aircraft Inventory - The Partnership sold its remaining inventory of
aircraft parts from the four disassembled aircraft, to Soundair, Inc, in 1998.
The total proceeds received from Soundair during 1998, including the proceeds

for the sale of the remaining inventory, was $162,454 included in gain on sale
of inventory. During 1999, the Partnership received $206,099 for the sale of
consignment inventory, as discussed in Note 8.

Sale of Engine in Inventory - In November, 1998, the Partnership sold one of two
engines held in inventory for net proceeds of $290,000 to Quantum Aviation
Limited (Quantum). The Partnership continues to remarket the remaining engine
along with the other inventory of spare parts and the three engines returned
from Royal Aviation.

5. Disassembly of Aircraft

In an attempt to maximize the economic return from its off-lease aircraft, the
Partnership entered into an agreement with Soundair, Inc. (Soundair) on October
31, 1992, for the disassembly of certain of the Partnership's aircraft and the
sale of their component parts.

The Partnership incurred the cost of disassembly and received the proceeds from
the sale of such parts, net of overhaul expenses, and commissions paid to
Soundair.

The Partnership sold its remaining inventory of aircraft parts from the four
disassembled aircraft, to Soundair, Inc., in 1998. The remaining inventory, with
a net carrying value of $-0-, was sold effective February 1, 1998 for $100,000,
less amounts previously received for sales as of that date. The net purchase
price of $98,145 was paid in September 1998 and included in the gain on sale of
inventory in the statement of operations.

The Partnership received net proceeds from the sale of aircraft inventory of
$-0-, $206,099, and $452,454, during 2000, 1999, and 1998, respectively. The net
book value of the aircraft inventory was recovered during 1995. As a result, the
excess proceeds from the sale of aircraft inventory have been recorded as gain
on sale of aircraft inventory in the corresponding years' statement of
operations.

6. CanAir Default and Transfer of Engine Lease to Royal Aviation

In April 1997, the Partnership and CanAir agreed to extend the existing engine
leases for seven months beyond the original lease expiration date of May 1997.

On July 28, 1997, CanAir obtained an order under the Companies' Creditors
Arrangement Act of Canada (the CCAA Order) from the Ontario Court of Justice,
General Division, in order to obtain protection from its creditors while it
attempted to develop a plan of reorganization and compromise with its creditors.
The CCAA Order restrained CanAir's creditors, including lessors, from exercising
any rights arising from CanAir's default or non-performance of its obligations
until October 28, 1997 or further order of the court. CanAir leased three
engines from the Partnership, and a total of five aircraft from Polaris Holding
Company (PHC) and General Electric Capital Leasing Canada, Inc. (GECL Canada).
CanAir had defaulted on its July and August 1997 engine rent and maintenance
reserve payment obligations to the Partnership. On August 22, 1997, GE Capital
Aviation Services, Inc. (GECAS) as agent for PHC, GECL Canada and the
Partnership (together, the GECAS Parties), entered into an Aircraft Lease
Purchase Agreement with Royal Aviation Inc. and Royal Cargo Inc. for the
transfer of CanAir's future lease obligations to Royal Aviation Inc. (Royal
Aviation). Pursuant to this agreement, the leases were extended to August, 2000
at the same lease rate and the Partnership received a security deposit of
$45,000 from Royal Aviation. On August 31, 2000, the lease for the three JT8D-9A
engines to Royal Aviation expired. The engines were redelivered on September 7,
2000 and security deposit of $45,000 was refunded to Royal Aviation on November
21, 2000. The Partnership has made these engines available for sale along with
the remaining inventory of spare parts such that all the assets of the
Partnership will be liquidated and a final distribution made thereafter. The
Partnership is currently reporting these assets at the lower of carrying amount
or fair value less cost to sell.

7. Claims Related to Lessee Defaults

Jet Fleet Bankruptcy - In September 1992, Jet Fleet, former lessee of one of the
Partnership's aircraft, defaulted on its obligations under the lease for the
Partnership's aircraft by failing to pay reserve payments and to maintain
required insurance. The Partnership repossessed its Aircraft on September 28,
1992. Thereafter, Jet Fleet filed for bankruptcy protection in the United States
Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. On April
13, 1993, the Partnership filed a proof of claim in the Jet Fleet bankruptcy to
recover its damages. The bankrupt estate was subsequently determined to be
insolvent. The bankruptcy proceeding of Jet Fleet Corporation was closed on
August 6, 1997, and the bankruptcy proceeding of Jet Fleet International
Airlines, Inc. was closed on February 10, 1998. Distributions from the bankrupt
estate have not been made to the unsecured creditors, and the Partnership is not
likely to receive any distributions on its Proof of Claim.

Braniff, Inc. (Braniff) Bankruptcy - - In September 1989, Braniff filed a
petition under Chapter 11 of the Federal Bankruptcy Code in the United States
Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Florida, Orlando Division. The
Partnership filed a proof of claim to recover unpaid rent and other damages, and
a proof of administrative claim to recover damages for detention of aircraft,
non-compliance with court orders, post-petition use of engines and liquidated
damages. On July 27, 1992, the Partnership, Braniff and the Braniff creditor
committees entered into a settlement which allowed the Partnership an
administrative claim of approximately $2,076,923. The Bankruptcy Court made a
final disposition of the Partnership's claim by permitting the Partnership to
exchange a portion of its unsecured claim for Braniff's right (commonly referred
to as a "Stage 2 Base Level right") under the FAA noise regulations to operate
one Stage 2 aircraft and by allowing the Partnership a net remaining unsecured
claim of $769,231 in the proceedings.

bankrupt estate made an additional $84,000 payment in respect of the unsecured
claims of the Partnership and other affiliates of Polaris Investment Management
Corporation, of which $58,154 was allocated to the Partnership based on its pro
rata share of the total claims. This amount is included in Lessee settlement and
other income. On January 16, 2001, Braniff's bankrupt estate made a $110,890
payment in respect of the unsecured claims of the Partnership and other
affiliates of Polaris Management Corporation, of which $76,770 was allocated to
the Partnership based on its pro rata share of the total claims.

The receiver appointed by the Ontario Court of Justice on behalf of CanAir's
creditors sold the remaining five Convair 280 aircraft owned by CanAir, as well
as all of CanAir's other assets, including spare parts and accounts receivable.
The proceeds of the sale are being distributed to CanAir's creditors, including
the GECAS Parties. The receiver has distributed to the GECAS Parties a total of
1,076,116.04 Canadian Dollars (approximately $741,700 U.S. Dollars) in respect
of the GECAS Parties' claims against CanAir. Of this amount, 91,469 Canadian
Dollars ($61,513 U.S. Dollars) have been allocated to the Partnership based on
its pro rata share of the total claims. Of the sale proceeds, approximately
600,000 Canadian Dollars (approximately $384,068 U.S. Dollars converted as of
March 27, 2001) remain to be distributed to CanAir's creditors by the receiver,
subject to a final court order as to the priorities of CanAir's creditors under
the receivership order and Canada's Personal Property Security Act (Ontario).

8. Viscount Restructuring Agreement and Default

On January 24, 1996, Viscount filed a petition for protection under Chapter 11
of the United States Bankruptcy Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court in
Tucson, Arizona. In April 1996, GECAS, on behalf of the Partnership, First
Security Bank, National Association (formerly known as First Security Bank of
Utah, National Association) (FSB), the owner/trustee under the Partnership's
leases with Viscount (the Leases), Viscount, certain guarantors of Viscount's
indebtedness and others executed in April 1996 a Compromise of Claims and
Stipulation under Section 1110 of the Bankruptcy Code (the Compromise and
Stipulation), which was subsequently approved by the Bankruptcy Court. The
Compromise and Stipulation provided that in the event that Viscount failed to
promptly and timely perform its monetary obligations under the Leases and the
Compromise and Stipulation, without further order of the Bankruptcy Court, GECAS
would be entitled to immediate possession of the aircraft for which Viscount
failed to perform and Viscount would deliver such aircraft and all records
related thereto to GECAS.

The Stipulation and Agreement provided that upon the return and surrender of
possession of the Partnership's three airframes and eight engines (two of which
were spare engines), Viscount's rights and interests therein would terminate. As
of October 1, 1996, Viscount had returned (or surrendered possession of) all of
the Partnership's airframes and engines. One of the returned airframes (together
with one installed engine) was in the possession of and operated by Nations Air.
Six of the seven returned engines were in the possession of certain maintenance
facilities and required maintenance work in order to be made operable. Viscount
returned the Partnership's remaining airframe and one installed engine on
October 1, 1996. Nations Air returned this airframe and one installed engine to
the Partnership in February 1997. These three airframes and six of the engines
were sold in 1997. One of the engines was sold to Quantum in November 1998.

The Stipulation and Agreement also provides that the Polaris Entities, GECAS and
FSB shall release any and all claims against Viscount, Viscount's bankruptcy
estate, and the property of Viscount's bankruptcy estate, effective upon entry
of a final non-appealable court order approving the Stipulation and Agreement.
The Bankruptcy Court entered such an order approving the Stipulation and
Agreement on October 23, 1996.

In October 1996, Viscount's affiliates, Rock-It Cargo USA, Inc. and Riverhorse
Investments, Inc., assumed Viscount's engine finance sale note to the
Partnership as provided under the Compromise and Stipulation.

The Partnership evaluated the condition of the returned equipment and estimated
that very substantial maintenance and refurbishment costs aggregating
approximately $3.2 million would be required if the Partnership decided to
re-lease the returned aircraft and spare engines. Alternatively, if the
Partnership decided to sell the returned aircraft and spare engines, such sale
could be made on an "as is, where is" basis, without the Partnership incurring
substantial maintenance costs. Based on its evaluation, the Partnership
concluded that a sale of the remaining aircraft and spare engines on an "as is,
where is" basis would maximize the economic return on this equipment to the
Partnership. These aircraft were subsequently sold in 1997.

9. Related Parties

Under the Limited Partnership Agreement (Partnership Agreement), the Partnership
paid or agreed to pay the following amounts to PIMC and/or its affiliates in
connection with services rendered:

a. An aircraft management fee equal to 5% of gross rental revenues with
respect to operating leases of the Partnership, payable upon receipt of
the rent. In 2000, 1999 and 1998, the Partnership paid management fees
to PIMC of $15,018, $18,000, and $16,935, respectively. Management fees
payable to PIMC at December 31, 2000 and 1999 were $-0- and $3,018.

b. Reimbursement of certain out-of-pocket expenses incurred in connection
with the management of the Partnership and its assets. In 2000, 1999
and 1998, $158,083, $155,970, and $171,930 were reimbursed by the
Partnership to PIMC for administrative expenses. Administrative
reimbursements of $12,667 and $8,198 were payable to PIMC at December
31, 2000 and 1999, respectively. Partnership reimbursements to PIMC for
maintenance and remarketing costs of $1,341,702, $200, and $3,590 were
paid in 2000, 1999, and 1998, respectively. Maintenance and remarketing
reimbursements of $36,237 and $-0- were payable to PIMC at December 31,
2000 and 1999, respectively.

c. A 10% interest to PIMC in all cash distributions and sales proceeds,
gross income in an amount equal to 9.09% of distributed cash available
from operations and 1% of net income or loss and taxable income or
loss, as such terms are defined in the Partnership Agreement. After the
Partnership has sold or disposed of aircraft representing 50% of the
total aircraft cost, gains from the sale or other disposition of
aircraft are generally allocated first to the General Partner until
such time that the General Partner's capital account is equal to the
amount to be distributed to the General Partner from the proceeds of
such sale or disposition.

d. A subordinated sales commission to PIMC of 3% of the gross sales price
of each aircraft for services performed upon disposition and
reimbursement of out-of-pocket and other disposition expenses.
Subordinated sales commissions will be paid only after Limited Partners
have received distributions in an aggregate amount equal to their
capital contributions plus a cumulative non-compounded 8% per annum
return on their adjusted capital contributions, as defined in the
Partnership Agreement. The Partnership did not pay or accrue a sales
commission on any aircraft sales to date as the above subordination
threshold has not been met.

e. In the event that, immediately prior to the dissolution and termination
of the Partnership, the General Partner shall have a deficit balance in
its tax basis capital account, then the General Partner shall
contribute in cash to the capital of the Partnership an amount which is
equal to such deficit (see Note 10).

10. Partners' Capital

The Partnership Agreement (the Agreement) stipulates different methods by which
revenue, income and loss from operations and gain or loss on the sale of
aircraft are to be allocated to the General Partner and the Limited Partners
(see Note 9). Such allocations are made using income or loss calculated under
GAAP for book purposes, which, as more fully described in Note 12, varies from
income or loss calculated for tax purposes.

Cash available for distributions, including the proceeds from the sale of
aircraft, are distributed 10% to the General Partner and 90% to the Limited
Partners.

The different methods of allocating items of income, loss and cash available for
distribution combined with the calculation of items of income and loss for book
and tax purposes result in book basis capital accounts that may vary
significantly from tax basis capital accounts. The ultimate liquidation and
distribution of remaining cash will be based on the tax basis capital accounts
following liquidation, in accordance with the Agreement.

Had all the assets of the Partnership been liquidated at December 31, 2000 at
the current carrying value, the tax basis capital (deficit) accounts of the
General Partner and the Limited Partners is estimated to be $(1,318,712) and
$16,855,063, respectively.

11. Income Taxes

Federal and state income tax regulations provide that taxes on the income or
loss of the Partnership are reportable by the partners in their individual
income tax returns. Accordingly, no provision for such taxes has been made in
the accompanying financial statements.

The net differences between the tax basis and the reported amounts of the
Partnership's assets and liabilities at December 31, 2000 and 1999 are as
follows:

Reported Amounts Tax Basis Net Difference
---------------- --------- --------------

2000: Assets $ 3,334,081 $ 15,949,326 $(12,615,245)
Liabilities 1,044,291 412,975 631,316

1999: Assets $ 5,090,421 $ 16,463,103 $(11,372,682)
Liabilities 2,135,620 2,126,476 9,144

12. Reconciliation of Book Net Income to Taxable Net Income (Loss)

The following is a reconciliation between net income (loss) per Limited
Partnership unit reflected in the financial statements and the information
provided to Limited Partners for federal income tax purposes:

For the years ended December 31,
--------------------------------

2000 1999 1998
---- ---- ----

Book net income per Limited Partnership unit $ 1.57 $ 3.52 $ 6.24
Adjustments for tax purposes represent
differences between book and tax revenue
and expenses:
Rental and maintenance reserve revenue
recognition 1.74 1.95 2.04
Depreciation (0.58) (0.11) -
Gain or loss on sale of aircraft or
inventory (0.47) (1.48) (0.29)
Other revenue and expense items (0.17) - -
------- ------ ------

Taxable net income per Limited Partnership unit $ 2.09 $ 3.88 $ 7.99
======= ======= =======

The differences between net income and loss for book purposes and net income and
loss for tax purposes result from the temporary differences of certain revenue
and deductions.

For book purposes, rental revenue is generally recorded as it is earned. For tax
purposes, certain temporary differences exist in the recognition of revenue.
Increases in the Partnership's book maintenance reserve liability were
recognized as rental revenue for tax purposes. Disbursements from the
Partnership's book maintenance reserves are capitalized or expensed for tax
purposes, as appropriate.

The Partnership computes depreciation using the straight-line method for
financial reporting purposes and generally an accelerated method for tax
purposes. These differences in depreciation methods result in book to tax
differences on the sale of aircraft. In addition, certain costs were capitalized
for tax purposes and expensed for book purposes.

13. Subsequent Events

Cash Distributions - The Partnership made a cash distribution of $843,645 or
$5.00 per Limited Partnership unit, to Limited Partners, and $93,738 to the
General Partner on January 14, 2001.

Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and
Financial Disclosure

None.

PART III

Item 10. Directors and Executive Officers of the Registrant

Polaris Aircraft Income Fund I (PAIF-I or the Partnership) has no directors or
officers. Polaris Holding Company (PHC) and its subsidiaries, including Polaris
Aircraft Leasing Corporation (PALC) and Polaris Investment Management
Corporation (PIMC), the General Partner of the Partnership (collectively
Polaris), restructured their operations and businesses (the Polaris
Restructuring) in 1994. In connection therewith, PIMC entered into a services
agreement dated as of July 1, 1994 (the Services Agreement) with GE Capital
Aviation Services, Inc. (GECAS), a Delaware corporation which is a wholly owned
subsidiary of General Electric Capital Corporation, a New York corporation (GE
Capital). GE Capital has been PHC's parent company since 1986. As subsidiaries
of GE Capital, GECAS and PIMC are affiliates.

The officers and directors of PIMC are:

Name PIMC Title
--------------------------- ------------------------------------

Edwin Forti President; Director
Keith Helming Chief Financial Officer
Melissa Hodes Vice President; Director
Norman C. T. Liu Vice President; Director
Ray Warman Secretary
Robert W. Dillon Assistant Secretary

Substantially all of these management personnel will devote only such portion of
their time to the business and affairs of PIMC as deemed necessary or
appropriate.

Mr. Forti, 50, assumed the position of President and Director of PIMC effective
May 19, 2000. Mr. Forti holds the position of Senior Vice President and Acting
Chief Risk Manager of GECAS, having previously held the position of Senior Vice
President and Manager - Structured Finance Risk. Prior to joining GECAS, Mr
Forti was the Senior Risk Manager with GE Capital Global Risk Management. Prior
to that, Mr. Forti held various positions with Chemical Bank.

Mr. Helming, 42, assumed the position of Chief Financial Officer of PIMC
effective October 1, 2000. Mr. Helming presently holds the positions of
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of GECAS. Mr. Helming has
been with General Electric Company (GE) and its subsidiaries since 1981. Prior
to joining GECAS, Mr. Helming served as the Senior Vice President of Finance at
GE Capital Fleet Services for three years. Prior to that, Mr. Helming was Chief
Financial Officer for GE Capital Global Consumer Finance U.K.

Ms. Hodes, 35, assumed the position of Director of PIMC effective May 19, 2000.
Ms. Hodes presently holds the position of Senior Vice President, Financial
Planning and Analysis for GECAS. Ms. Hodes has been with the General Electric
Company (GE) and its subsidiaries since 1987. Prior to joining GECAS, Ms. Hodes
held various financial management positions with GE Capital Card Services, GE
Audit Staff and GE Power Systems.

Mr. Liu, 43, assumed the position of Vice President of PIMC effective May 1,
1995 and Director of PIMC effective July 31, 1995. Mr. Liu presently holds the
position of Executive Vice President - Marketing and Structured Finance of
GECAS, having previously held the position of Executive Vice President - Capital
Funding and Portfolio Management of GECAS. Prior to joining GECAS, Mr. Liu was
with General Electric Capital Corporation for nine years. He has held management

positions in corporate Business Development and in Syndications and Leasing for
TIFC. Mr. Liu previously held the position of managing director of Kidder,
Peabody & Co., Incorporated.

Mr. Warman, 52, assumed the position of Secretary of PIMC effective March 23,
1998. Mr. Warman has served as a GECAS Senior Vice President and Associate
General Counsel since March 1996, and for 13 years theretofore was a partner,
with an air-finance and corporate practice of the national law firm of Morgan,
Lewis & Bockius LLP.

Mr. Dillon, 59, held the position of Vice President - Aviation Legal and
Insurance Affairs, from April 1989 to October 1997. Previously, he served as
General Counsel of PIMC and PALC effective January 1986. Effective July 1, 1994,
Mr. Dillon assumed the position of Assistant Secretary of PIMC. Mr. Dillon
presently holds the position of Senior Vice President and Associate General
Counsel of GECAS.

Certain Legal Proceedings:

On or around September 27, 1995, a complaint entitled Martha J. Harrison v.
General Electric Company, et. al. was filed in the Civil District Court for the
Parish of Orleans, State of Louisiana. The complaint names as defendants General
Electric Company and Prudential Securities Incorporated. The Partnership is not
named as a defendant in this action. Plaintiff alleges claims of tort, breach of
fiduciary duty in tort, contract and quasi-contract, violation of sections of
the Louisiana Blue Sky Law and violation of the Louisiana Civil Code concerning
the inducement and solicitation of purchases arising out of the public offering
of Polaris Aircraft Income Fund IV. Plaintiff seeks compensatory damages,
attorney's fees, interest, costs and general relief.

On or around December 8, 1995, a complaint entitled Overby, et al. v. General
Electric Company, et al. was filed in the Civil District Court for the Parish of
Orleans, State of Louisiana. The complaint names as defendants General Electric
Company and General Electric Capital Corporation. The Partnership is not named
as a defendant in this action. Plaintiffs allege claims of tort, breach of
fiduciary duty, in tort, contract and quasi-contract, violation of sections of
the Louisiana Blue Sky Law and violation of the Louisiana Civil Code in
connection with the public offering of Polaris Aircraft Income Funds III and IV.
Plaintiffs seek compensatory damages, attorneys' fees, interest, costs and
general relief.

In or around November 1994, a complaint entitled Lucy R. Neeb, et al. v.
Prudential Securities Incorporated, et al. was filed in the Civil District Court
for the Parish of Orleans, State of Louisiana. The complaint named as defendants
Prudential Securities, Incorporated and Stephen Derby Gisclair. On or about
December 20, 1995, plaintiffs filed a First Supplemental and Amending Petition
adding as additional defendants General Electric Company, General Electric
Capital Corporation and Smith Barney, Inc. The Partnership is not named as a
defendant in this action. Plaintiffs allege claims of tort, breach of fiduciary
duty, in tort, contract and quasi-contract, violation of sections of the
Louisiana Blue Sky Law and violation of the Louisiana Civil Code in connection
with the public offering of Polaris Aircraft Income Funds III and IV. Plaintiffs
seek compensatory damages, attorneys' fees, interest, costs and general relief.

In or about January of 1995, a complaint entitled Albert B. Murphy, Jr. v.
Prudential Securities. Incorporated, et al. was filed in the Civil District
Court for the Parish of Orleans, State of Louisiana. The complaint named as
defendants Prudential Securities Incorporated and Stephen Derby Gisclair. On or
about January 18, 1996, plaintiff filed a First Supplemental and Amending
Petition adding defendants General Electric Company and General Electric Capital
Corporation. The Partnership is not named as a defendant in this action.
Plaintiff alleges claims of tort, breach of fiduciary duty in tort, contract and

quasi-contract, violation of sections of the Louisiana Blue Sky Law and
violation of the Louisiana Civil Code in connection with the public offering of
Polaris Aircraft Income Funds III and IV. Plaintiffs seek compensatory damages,
attorneys' fees, interest, costs and general relief.

On or about January 22, 1996, a complaint entitled Mrs. Rita Chambers, et al. v.
General Electric Co., et al. was filed in the Civil District Court for the
Parish of Orleans, State of Louisiana. The complaint names as defendants General
Electric Company and General Electric Capital Corporation. The Partnership is
not named as a defendant in this action. Plaintiffs allege claims of tort,
breach of fiduciary duty in tort, contract and quasi-contract, violation of
sections of the Louisiana Blue Sky Law and violation of the Louisiana Civil Code
in connection with the public offering of Polaris Aircraft Income Fund IV.
Plaintiffs seek compensatory damages, attorneys' fees, interest, costs and
general relief.

In or around December 1994, a complaint entitled John J. Jones, Jr. v.
Prudential Securities Incorporated, et al. was filed in the Civil District Court
for the Parish of Orleans, State of Louisiana. The complaint named as defendants
Prudential Securities, Incorporated and Stephen Derby Gisclair. On or about
March 29, 1996, plaintiffs filed a First Supplemental and Amending Petition
adding as additional defendants General Electric Company and General Electric
Capital Corporation. The Partnership is not named as a defendant in this action.
Plaintiff alleges claims of tort, breach of fiduciary duty in tort, contract and
quasi-contract, violation of section of the Louisiana Blue Sky Law and violation
of the Louisiana Civil Code concerning the inducement and solicitation of
purchases arising out of the public offering of Polaris Aircraft Income Fund
III. Plaintiff seeks compensatory damages, attorneys' fees, interest, costs and
general relief.

On or around February 16, 1996, a complaint entitled Henry Arwe, et al. v.
General Electric Company, et al. was filed in the Civil District Court for the
Parish of Orleans, State of Louisiana. The complaint named as defendants General
Electric Company and General Electric Capital Corporation. The Partnership is
not named as a defendant in this action. Plaintiffs allege claims of tort,
breach of fiduciary duty in tort, contract and quasi-contract, violation of
sections of the Louisiana Blue Sky Law and violation of the Louisiana Civil Code
concerning the inducement and solicitation of purchases arising out of the
public offering of Polaris Aircraft Income Funds III and IV. Plaintiffs seek
compensatory damages, attorneys' fees, interest, costs and general relief.

On or about May 7, 1996, a petition entitled Charles Rich. et al. v. General
Electric Company and General Electric Capital Corporation was filed in the Civil
District Court for the Parish of Orleans, State of Louisiana. The complaint
names as defendants General Electric Company and General Electric Capital
Corporation. The Partnership is not named as a defendant in this action.
Plaintiffs allege claims of tort concerning the inducement and solicitation of
purchases arising out of the public offering of Polaris Aircraft Income Funds
III and IV. Plaintiffs seek compensatory damages, attorneys' fees, interest,
costs and general relief.

On or about March 4, 1996, a petition entitled Richard J. McGiven v. General
Electric Company and General Electric Capital Corporation was filed in the Civil
District Court for the Parish of Orleans, State of Louisiana. The complaint
names as defendants General Electric Company and General Electric Capital
Corporation. The Partnership is not named as a defendant in this action.
Plaintiff alleges claims of tort concerning the inducement and solicitation of

purchases arising out of the public offering of Polaris Aircraft Income Fund V.
Plaintiff seeks compensatory damages, attorneys' fees, interest, costs and
general relief.

On or about March 4, 1996, a petition entitled Alex M. Wade v. General Electric
Company and General Electric Capital Corporation was filed in the Civil District
Court for the Parish of Orleans, State of Louisiana. The complaint names as
defendants General Electric Company and General Electric Capital Corporation.
The Partnership is not named as a defendant in this action. Plaintiff alleges
claims of tort concerning the inducement and solicitation of purchases arising
out of the public offering of Polaris Aircraft Income Fund V. Plaintiff seeks
compensatory damages, attorneys' fees, interest, costs and general relief.

Other Proceedings - Part I, Item 3 discusses certain other actions arising out
of certain public offerings, including that of the Partnership, to which both
the Partnership and its general partner are parties.

Item 11. Executive Compensation

PAIF-I has no directors or officers. PAIF-I is managed by PIMC, the General
Partner. In connection with management services provided, management and
advisory fees of $15,018 were paid to PIMC in 2000 in addition to a 10% interest
in all cash distributions as described in Note 9 to the financial statements
(Item 8).

Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management

a) No person owns of record, or is known by PAIF-I to own beneficially,
more than five percent of any class of voting securities of PAIF-I.

b) The General Partner of PAIF-I owns the equity securities of PAIF-I as
set forth in the following table:

Title Name of Amount and Nature of Percent
of Class Beneficial Owner Beneficial Ownership of Class
- -------- ---------------- -------------------- --------

General Polaris Investment Represents a 10.0% interest of all cash 100%
Partner Management distributions, gross income in an
Interest Corporation amount equal to 9.09% of distributed
cash available from operations, and a
1% interest in net income or loss

c) There are no arrangements known to PAIF-I, including any pledge by any
person of securities of PAIF-I, the operation of which may at a
subsequent date result in a change in control of PAIF-I.

Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions

None.

PART IV

Item 14. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules, and Reports on Form 8-K

1. Financial Statements.

The following are included in Part II of this report:
Page No.
--------

Report of Independent Public Accountants 17
Balance Sheets 18
Statements of Operations 19
Statements of Changes in Partners' Capital 20
Statements of Cash Flows 21
Notes to Financial Statements 22

2. Reports on Form 8-K.

No reports on Form 8-K were filed during the quarter ended December 31,
2000.

3. Exhibits required to be filed by Item 601 of Regulation S-K.

27. Financial Data Schedule (in electronic format only).

4. Financial Statement Schedules.

All financial statement schedules are omitted because they are not
applicable, not required or because the required information is
included in the financial statements or notes thereto.

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its
behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

POLARIS AIRCRAFT INCOME FUND I
(REGISTRANT)
By: Polaris Investment
Management Corporation
General Partner

March 30, 2001 By: /S/ Edwin Forti
- ------------------------------- -------------------------
Date Edwin Forti, President

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report
has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and
in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

Signature Title Date

/S/Edwin Forti President and Director of Polaris March 30, 2001
- -------------- Investment Management Corporation, --------------
(Ed Forti) General Partner of the Registrant

/S/Keith Helming Chief Financial Officer of Polaris March 30, 2001
- ---------------- Investment Management Corporation, --------------
(Keith Helming) General Partner of the Registrant

/S/Melissa Hodes Vice President and Director of Polaris March 30, 2001
- ---------------- Investment Management Corporation, --------------
(Melissa Hodes) General Partner of the Registrant

/S/Norman C. T. Liu Vice President and Director of Polaris March 30, 2001
- ------------------- Investment Management Corporation, --------------
(Norman C. T. Liu) General Partner of the Registrant